Vol. 84 Wednesday, No. 30 February 13, 2019

Pages 3669–3966

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:25 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\13FEWS.LOC 13FEWS amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with FRONT MATTER WS II Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 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 20:25 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\13FEWS.LOC 13FEWS amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with FRONT MATTER WS III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 30

Wednesday, February 13, 2019

Agriculture Department Education Department See Rural Utilities Service NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Submissions, and Approvals, 3747 Gainful Employment Disclosure Template, 3767 Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection Education Discretionary Grant Programs, 3768–3770 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Employee Benefits Security Administration Submissions, and Approvals, 3765 NOTICES Proposed Exemption: Census Bureau UBS Assets Management (Americas), Inc.; UBS Realty NOTICES Investors, LLC; UBS Hedge Fund Solutions, LLC; Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, UBS O’Connor, LLC; and Certain Future Affiliates in Submissions, and Approvals, 3748–3757 UBS’s Asset Management and Global Wealth Management U.S. Divisions, 3818–3828 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Energy Department Meetings: See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control PROPOSED RULES Special Emphasis Panel, 3784–3785 Energy Conservation Program for Appliance Standards: Proposed Procedures for Use in New or Revised Energy Conservation Standards and Test Procedures for Civil Rights Commission Consumer Products and Commercial/Industrial NOTICES Equipment, 3910–3953 Meetings: NOTICES Nebraska Advisory Committee, 3747–3748 Meetings: Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical Advisory Committee, Commerce Department 3770–3771 See Census Bureau Secretary of Energy Advisory Board, 3771 See Economic Development Administration See Foreign-Trade Zones Board Engineers Corps See International Trade Administration PROPOSED RULES See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Atlantic Ocean South of Entrance to Chesapeake Bay; Firing Range, 3739–3740 Copyright Office, Library of Congress NOTICES RULES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Freedom of Information Act Regulations, 3699–3701 New York New Jersey Harbor and Tributaries Coastal Group Registration of Newspapers, 3698–3699 Storm Risk Management Feasibility Study; Group Registration of Unpublished Works, 3693–3698 Withdrawal, 3765–3766

Defense Department Environmental Protection Agency See Engineers Corps RULES See Navy Department Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and RULES Promulgations: Exceptional Family Member Program, 3681–3693 Indiana; Negative Declarations for Commercial and NOTICES Industrial Solid Waste Incineration and Sewage Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Sludge Incineration Units for Designated Facilities Submissions, and Approvals: and Pollutants, 3712–3714 Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 23 Requirements, Indiana; Reasonable Further Progress Plan and Other Plan 3781–3783 Elements for the Chicago Nonattainment Area for the North Carolina Sales Tax Certification, 3784 2008 Ozone Standard, 3711–3712 Missouri; Emissions Inventory for the Missouri Jackson Economic Development Administration County and Jefferson County 2010 Sulfur Dioxide NOTICES National Ambient Air Quality Standard Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Nonattainment Areas, 3703–3705 Submissions, and Approvals: South Carolina: Revisions to Prevention of Significant Petition by a Firm for Certification of Eligibility to Apply Deterioration Rules, 3705–3707 for Trade Adjustment Assistance, and Adjustment Texas; Reasonable Further Progress Plan for the Houston- Proposals; Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Galveston-Brazoria Ozone Nonattainment Area, Program, 3757–3758 3708–3711

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:56 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\13FECN.SGM 13FECN amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with FRONT MATTER CN IV Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Contents

Wisconsin; Reasonable Further Progress Plan and other Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Plan Elements for the Moderate Nonattainment Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Chicago Area for the 2008 Ozone Standards, 3701– LMBE Project Co., LLC, 3774 3703 License Application: PROPOSED RULES Allete, Inc., 3774–3775 Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service Idaho; Kraft Pulp Mill Rule Revisions, 3744–3746 NOTICES Indiana; Proposed Approval of a Revision to the Sulfur Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Dioxide State Implementation Plan for United States Submissions, and Approvals, 3779–3780 Steel-Gary Works, 3740–3742 Pennsylvania; Allegheny County Reasonable Available Federal Reserve System Control Technology for the 2008 Ozone National NOTICES Ambient Air Quality Standard, 3742–3744 Change in Bank Control: Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Federal Aviation Administration Company, 3780 RULES Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace, and Holding Companies, 3780 Establishment of Class E Airspace: Honolulu, HI, 3673–3674 Fish and Wildlife Service Amendment of Class E Airspace: NOTICES Oscoda, MI, 3674–3676 Endangered and Threatened Species: Toksook Bay, AK; Unalakleet, AK; Wainwright, AK; and Availability of Two Habitat Conservation Plans for Sand Yakutat, AK, 3677–3678 Skink and Blue-Tailed Mole Skink, Osceola and Polk Establishment of Class E Airspace and Amendment of Class Counties, FL, 3810–3811 E Airspace: Recovery Permit Applications, 3805–3810 Ephrata, WA, 3676–3677 Renewal of Incidental Take Permit: Establishment of Class E Airspace, Amendment of Class D Habitat Conservation Plan for Incidental Take of Airspace, and Revocation of Class E Airspace: Hawaiian Stilts; Cyanotech Aquaculture Facility, Tacoma, WA, 3679–3681 Hawaii, 3804–3805 External Marking Requirement for Small Unmanned Sand Skink and Blue-Tailed Mole Skink, Osceola County, Aircraft, 3669–3673 FL, 3811–3812 PROPOSED RULES Amendment of VOR Federal Airways: Food and Drug Administration V–8, V–92, V–214, and V–438 in the Vicinity of NOTICES Grantsville, MD, 3730–3732 Authorization of Emergency Use of an In Vitro Diagnostic Operation of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems over Device for Detection of Ebola virus, 3785–3795 People, 3856–3907 Determinations that Products Were Not Withdrawn from Safe and Secure Operations of Small Unmanned Aircraft Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness: Systems, 3732–3739 LOTRIMIN (Clotrimazole) Topical Solution, 1%, 3796– NOTICES 3797 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Withdrawal of Approval of a New Drug Application: Submissions, and Approvals: Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc.; OMONTYS Certification Procedures for Products and Parts, 3850 (peginesatide) Injection, 3795–3796 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Proposed Production Activities: Submissions, and Approvals, 3775–3778 The Woodbridge Group, Foreign-Trade Zone 68, El Paso, Requests for Information: TX, 3758–3759 Deposit Insurance Application Process; Extension of Comment Period, 3778–3779 General Services Administration RULES Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Acquisition Regulation: NOTICES Construction Contract Administration, 3714–3723 Combined Filings, 3771–3772 NOTICES Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Cheyenne Connector, LLC, Rockies Express Pipeline, Submissions, and Approvals: LLC, 3773 Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 23 Requirements, Corpus Christi Liquefaction Stage III, LLC, Corpus Christi 3781–3783 Liquefaction, LLC, and Cheniere Corpus Christi North Carolina Sales Tax Certification, 3784 Pipeline, LP, 3773 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Otay Mesa Port of Entry, San Diego, CA, 3780–3781 Annova LNG Common Infrastructure, LLC, Annova LNG Federal Travel Regulation: Brownsville A, LLC, Annova LNG Brownsville B, Reimbursement of Fees for Nonconventional Lodging, LLC, Annova LNG Brownsville C, LLC, 3773 3783 Eagle LNG Partners Jacksonville, LLC, 3771 Gulf LNG Liquefaction Co., LLC, Gulf LNG Energy, LLC, Health and Human Services Department Gulf LNG Pipeline, LLC, 3773 See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:56 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\13FECN.SGM 13FECN amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with FRONT MATTER CN Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Contents V

See Food and Drug Administration Requests for Nominations: See Health Resources and Services Administration National Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board, 3815– See National Institutes of Health 3816

Health Resources and Services Administration Library of Congress NOTICES See Copyright Office, Library of Congress Meetings: Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns National Aeronautics and Space Administration and Children, 3797–3798 NOTICES National Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Human Services, 3797 Submissions, and Approvals: Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 23 Requirements, Indian Affairs Bureau 3781–3783 NOTICES North Carolina Sales Tax Certification, 3784 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: National Institutes of Health Tribal Self-Governance Program, 3812–3813 NOTICES Land Acquisitions: Meetings: Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming, Board of Scientific Counselors, 3800 3813 Center for Scientific Review, 3800–3802 Proclaiming Certain Lands as Reservations: National Cancer Institute, 3798, 3803–3804 Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community of Minnesota, National Institute of Mental Health, 3798–3800, 3802– 3813–3814 3803 Scientific and Technical Review Board on Biomedical Interior Department and Behavioral Research Facilities, 3798 See Fish and Wildlife Service See Indian Affairs Bureau National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration See Land Management Bureau RULES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Atlantic Highly Migratory Species: Submissions, and Approvals: Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Fisheries; General Category Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act, Statement of Federal Fishery, 3724–3726 Lands Payments, 3814–3815 Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Region: Internal Revenue Service 2018–2019 Commercial Run-Around Gillnet Closure for NOTICES King Mackerel, 3723–3724 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Submissions, and Approvals, 3851–3853 Pacific Cod by Catcher Vessels Less Than 60 feet (18.3 meters) Length Overall Using Jig or Hook-and-Line International Trade Administration Gear in the Bogoslof Pacific Cod Exemption Area in NOTICES the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, Area, 3727 or Reviews: Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska: 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1,1-Diphoshonic Acid from the Pollock in Statistical Area 620 in the Gulf of Alaska, 3726 People’s Republic of China, 3759 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Pollock in Statistical Area 630 in the Gulf of Alaska, International Trade Commission 3727–3728 NOTICES NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, Meetings: etc.: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 3759–3760 Certain Industrial Automation Systems and Components Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Addendum, Thereof Including Control Systems, Controllers, 3763 Visualization Hardware, Motion and Motor Control Pacific Fishery Management Council, 3763–3765 Systems, Networking Equipment, Safety Devices, and Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 3760–3763 Power Supplies, 3816–3817 National Science Foundation Justice Department NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 3829–3830 Submissions, and Approvals, 3817–3818 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Labor Department Grantee Reporting Requirements for the Graduate See Employee Benefits Security Administration Research Fellowship Program, 3828–3829

Land Management Bureau Navy Department NOTICES NOTICES Records of Decisions: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Bruneau-Owyhee Sage-grouse Habitat Project, Idaho, 3815 Submissions, and Approvals, 3766–3767

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:56 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\13FECN.SGM 13FECN amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with FRONT MATTER CN VI Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Contents

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Culturally Significant Object Imported for Exhibition: NOTICES Charlotte Posenenske: Work in Progress, 3847 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Surface Transportation Board Application for Materials License, 3834–3836 NOTICES Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Change in Operators Exemption: Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions, 3830– Central Railroad Company of Indianapolis; Kokomo Rail, 3831 LLC, 3847–3848 Physical Protection of Category 1 and Category 2 Toledo, Peoria and Western Railway Corp.; Winamac Quantities of Radioactive Material, 3833–3834 Southern Railway Co., 3848 Pre-Application Communication and Scheduling for Accident Tolerant Fuel Submittals, 3831–3832 Susquehanna River Basin Commission Draft Regulatory Guides: NOTICES Human-System Interface Design Review Guidelines, Grandfathering Registration, 3849–3850 3832–3833 Meetings: Commission, 3849 Personnel Management Office Projects Approved for Consumptive Uses of Water, 3849 PROPOSED RULES Prevailing Rate Systems; Special Appropriated Fund Wage Transportation Department Schedules for U.S. Insular Areas, 3729–3730 See Federal Aviation Administration NOTICES Presidential Documents V2X Communications, 3850–3851 PROCLAMATIONS Special Observances: Treasury Department Death of John David Dingell, Jr. (Proc. 9843), 3965 See Internal Revenue Service ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS NOTICES FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018; Delegation of Functions Meetings: and Authorities (Memorandum of December 21, 2018), Financial Research Advisory Committee, 3853 3955–3957 Hizballah International Financing Prevention Act of 2015 Veterans Affairs Department and Hizballah International Financing Prevention NOTICES Amendments Act of 2018; Delegation of Functions and Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Authorities (Memorandum of January 15, 2019)), 3963– Submissions, and Approvals: 3964 Authorization and Certification of Entrance or Reentrance National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019; into Rehabilitation and Certification of Status, 3854 Delegation of Functions and Authorities (Memorandum Meetings: of December 21, 2018), 3959 Advisory Committee on Cemeteries and Memorials, 3854 U.S. Consulate General in Jerusalem; Decision Regarding (Memorandum of January 8, 2019), 3961 Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board Separate Parts In This Issue NOTICES Public Forum, 3836 Part II Transportation Department, Federal Aviation Rural Utilities Service Administration, 3856–3907 RULES Special Evaluation Assistance for Rural Communities and Part III Households Program, 3669 Energy Department, 3910–3953

Securities and Exchange Commission Part IV NOTICES Presidential Documents, 3955–3957, 3959, 3961, 3963–3965 Application: Victory Capital Management Inc., et al., 3836–3838 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Reader Aids Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., 3842–3843 Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for ICE Clear Europe, Ltd., 3838–3842 phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice New York Stock Exchange, LLC, 3843–3846 of recently enacted public laws. State Department To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents NOTICES electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/ Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail Submissions, and Approvals: address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or Statement of Registration, 3846–3847 manage your subscription.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:56 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\13FECN.SGM 13FECN amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with FRONT MATTER CN Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 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.

3 CFR Proclamations: 9843...... 3965 Administrative Orders: Memorandums: Memorandum of December 21, 2018 ...... 3957 Memorandum of December 21, 2018 ...... 3959 Memorandum of January 8, 2019 ...... 3961 Memorandum of January 15, 2019 ...... 3963 5 CFR Proposed Rules: 532...... 3729 7 CFR 1774...... 3669 10 CFR Proposed Rules: 430...... 3910 431...... 3910 14 CFR 48...... 3669 71 (5 documents) ...3673, 3674, 3676, 3677, 3679 Proposed Rules: 71...... 3730 107 (2 documents) ...... 3732, 3856 32 CFR 75...... 3681 33 CFR Proposed Rules: 334...... 3739 37 CFR 201...... 3693 202 (2 documents) ...... 3693, 3698 203...... 3699 40 CFR 52 (5 documents) ...3701, 3703, 3705, 3708, 3711 62...... 3712 Proposed Rules: 52 (3 documents) ...3740, 3742, 3744 48 CFR 501...... 3714 511...... 3714 517...... 3714 532...... 3714 536...... 3714 543...... 3714 546...... 3714 552...... 3714 50 CFR 622...... 3723 635...... 3724 679 (3 documents) ...... 3726, 3727

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:56 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\13FELS.LOC 13FELS amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with FRONT MATTER LS 3669

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 30

Wednesday, February 13, 2019

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER statute. This document corrects the final assigned by the FAA upon completion contains regulatory documents having general regulation. of the registration process (registration applicability and legal effect, most of which number) on an external surface of the List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1774 are keyed to and codified in the Code of aircraft. Small unmanned aircraft Federal Regulations, which is published under Community development, Grant owners are no longer permitted to 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. programs, Reporting and recordkeeping enclose the FAA-issued registration The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by requirement, Rural areas, Waste number in a compartment. the Superintendent of Documents. treatment and disposal, Water supply. DATES: This rule is effective February Accordingly, 7 CFR part 1774 is 25, 2019. amended by making the following Comments must be received on or DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE correcting amendment: before March 15, 2019. Rural Utilities Service ADDRESSES: Send comments identified PART 1774—SPECIAL EVALUATION by docket number FAA–2018–1084 ASSISTANCE FOR RURAL 7 CFR Part 1774 using any of the following methods: COMMUNITIES AND HOUSEHOLDS • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to PROGRAM (SEARCH) Special Evaluation Assistance for http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your Rural Communities and Households ■ 1. The authority citation for part 1774 Program (SEARCH) comments electronically. continues to read as follows: • Mail: Send comments to Docket AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(2)(C). Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of ACTION: Correcting amendment. ■ 2. Amend § 1774.2 by revising the Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12–140, West SUMMARY: On June 24, 2010, the Rural definition of ‘‘Rural area’’ to read as follows: Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC Utilities Service (RUS) issued a final 20590–0001. rule to establish the regulation for the § 1774.2 Definitions. • Hand Delivery or Courier: Take Special Evaluation Assistance for Rural * * * * * comments to Docket Operations in Communities and Households Program Rural area. For the purposes of this Room W12–140 of the West Building (SEARCH) as authorized by Section SEARCH program, any communities in Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 306(a) of the Consolidated Farm and a city, town, or unincorporated area Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 Rural Development Act (CONACT). with populations of 2,500 or fewer a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Following final implementation of this inhabitants, according to the most Friday, except Federal holidays. final rule, RUS found that the wording recent decennial Census of the United • Fax: Fax comments to Docket for the definition of a rural area is States (decennial Census). Operations at 202–493–2251. inconsistent with the statute. This * * * * * Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. document corrects the final regulation. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the DATES: Effective February 13, 2019. Dated: December 20, 2018. public to better inform its rulemaking FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bette B. Brand, process. DOT posts these comments, LaVonda Pernell, Acting Branch Chief, Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. without edit, including any personal Portfolio Management Branch, Water [FR Doc. 2019–02106 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] information the commenter provides, to and Environmental Programs, Rural BILLING CODE P http://www.regulations.gov, as Utilities Service, U.S. Department of described in the system of records Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave. notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can SW, Washington, DC 20250. Telephone: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION be reviewed at http://www.dot.gov/ (202) 202–720–9635; email: privacy. [email protected]. Federal Aviation Administration Docket: Background documents or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: comments received may be read at 14 CFR Part 48 http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Need for Correction Follow the online instructions for [Docket No. FAA–2018–1084, Amdt. No. 48– On June 24, 2010 (75 FR 35963), the 2] accessing the docket or go to the Docket Rural Utilities Service (RUS) issued a Operations in Room W12–140 of the final rule to establish the regulation for RIN 2120–AL32 West Building Ground Floor at 1200 the Special Evaluation Assistance for New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, External Marking Requirement for Rural Communities and Households DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday Small Unmanned Aircraft Program (SEARCH) (7 CFR part 1774) as through Friday, except Federal holidays. authorized by Section 306(a) of the AGENCY: Federal Aviation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Consolidated Farm and Rural Administration (FAA), Department of Natalie Wilkowske, Aircraft Registration Development Act (CONACT) 7 U.S.C. Transportation (DOT). Branch, Civil Aviation Registry, Flight 1926(a)(2)). Inadvertently, the wording ACTION: Interim final rule. Standards Service, Registry Bldg., Room for the definition of rural area, as it 118, 6425 S Denning Ave., Oklahoma applies to the SEARCH program, was SUMMARY: This interim final rule City, OK 73169–6937; telephone 1–844– incorrectly recorded in the final requires small unmanned aircraft FLY–MYUA; email UAS- regulation and is inconsistent with the owners to display the unique identifier [email protected].

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3670 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: to identify the owner or operator.1 One additional risk during the notice and way to do that is to obtain the comment period as a result of the I. Executive Summary registration number of the unmanned attention drawn to the vulnerability. In the interim final rule titled aircraft. Requiring first responders to Given that the vulnerability would ‘‘Registration and Marking physically handle a small unmanned remain unmitigated while the proposed Requirements for Small Unmanned aircraft to obtain the registration number rule is being finalized, the agency has Aircraft’’ (Registration IFR), the FAA poses an unnecessary safety and determined there is good cause to issue provided a web-based aircraft security risk to those individuals, as the rule without seeking prior notice registration process for the registration well as to others in the immediate and comment. of small unmanned aircraft to facilitate proximity to the aircraft, because of the Additionally, the APA requires compliance with the statutory potential for the unmanned aircraft to agencies to delay the effective date of requirement that all aircraft register conceal an explosive device in an regulations for 30 days after publication, prior to operation. See 80 FR 78593 enclosed compartment (such as the unless the agency finds good cause to (December 16, 2015). The Registration battery compartment), designed to make the regulations effective sooner. IFR also required that the FAA-issued detonate upon opening. Requiring small See 5 U.S.C. 553(d). Good cause exists number assigned during the registration unmanned aircraft owners to place the for making this regulation effective 10 process be affixed or marked on the registration number on an external days from the date of publication based small unmanned aircraft. To grant surface of the aircraft helps to mitigate on the same rationale in the previous flexibility to the diverse types of small this risk because a first responder can discussion regarding forgoing notice and unmanned aircraft commercially view the number without handling the comment in accordance with 5 U.S.C. available, the FAA required that the aircraft, or by using other technologies 553(b)(3)(B). registration number marking be readily that allow for remote viewing of the III. Comments Invited accessible and maintained in a aircraft’s external surface. condition that is readable and legible The FAA had intended to make this Consistent with the Regulatory upon close visual inspection. The IFR change shortly after various members of Policies and Procedures of the further explained that markings in an the law enforcement and security Department of Transportation (DOT) (44 enclosed compartment, such as a battery communities communicated their FR 11034; February 26, 1979), which compartment, will be considered readily concerns in late 2016 and early 2017. provide that to the maximum extent accessible if they can be accessed The FAA was not able to act possible, operating administrations for without the use of tools. See id at immediately, however, due to litigation the DOT should provide an opportunity 78627–28. challenging the applicability of the for public comment on regulations This interim final rule revises the Registration IFR to model aircraft as issued without prior notice, the defined in section 336 of Public Law Department requests comment on this small unmanned aircraft marking 2 requirement by requiring the 112–95. The FAA was reluctant to act interim final rule. The Department registration number to be marked on the during the pendency of the litigation encourages persons to participate in this exterior of the aircraft. The FAA is because model aircraft comprise the rulemaking by submitting comments taking this action to address concerns largest segment of registered unmanned containing relevant information, data, or aircraft that would be subject to the views. The Department will consider expressed by the law enforcement 3 community and the FAA’s interagency revised marking requirement. The comments received on or before the National Defense Authorization Act for security partners regarding the risk a closing date for comments. The Fiscal Year 2018 (NDAA) 4 resolved the concealed explosive device poses to first Department will consider late filed uncertainty when it was signed into law responders who must open a comments to the extent practicable. This on December 12, 2017 by restoring the compartment to find the small interim final rule may be amended applicability of the Registration IFR to unmanned aircraft’s registration based on comments received. model aircraft. Having resolved the number. applicability issue, the FAA finds that IV. Authority for This Rulemaking II. Good Cause for Immediate Adoption notice and comment would be contrary The FAA’s authority to issue rules on to the public interest. After highlighting aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the this vulnerability in a proposed rule, United States Code. Subtitle I, Section Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 first responders could be exposed to 106 describes the authority of the FAA U.S.C.) authorizes agencies to dispense Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation with notice and comment procedures 1 During an interagency meeting on December 2, Programs, describes in more detail the for rules when the agency, for ‘‘good 2016, regarding unmanned aircraft systems policy, scope of the agency’s authority. cause,’’ finds that those procedures are several elements of the law enforcement community This rulemaking is promulgated ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary and the FAA’s interagency security partners raised concerns regarding the part 48 provision that allows under the authority described in 49 to the public interest.’’ Under this the small unmanned aircraft registration number to U.S.C. 106(f), which establishes the section, an agency, upon finding good be placed in an enclosed compartment, such as a authority of the Administrator to cause, may issue a final rule without battery compartment. Additionally, the National promulgate regulations and rules; and seeking comment prior to the Protection and Programs Directorate of the Federal Protective Service sent a letter to the FAA 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), which requires rulemaking. Administrator on May 5, 2017, to highlight its the Administrator to promote safe flight Members of the law enforcement and specific concerns about this provision and to of civil aircraft in air commerce by security communities have expressed request that the FAA amend it. prescribing regulations and setting concern that the current rule, which 2 Taylor v. Huerta, Case No. 15–1495, (D.C. Cir. May 19, 2017). minimum standards for other practices, allows registration numbers to be 3 As of May 31, 2018, 936,957 model aircraft methods, and procedures necessary for marked in an enclosed compartment, owners completed the registration process and safety in air commerce and national presents an imminent risk of harm to 218,033 non-model aircraft were registered. Model security. first responders. When responding to a aircraft owners may apply a single registration number to multiple small unmanned aircraft. See This rule is also promulgated security incident involving an 14 CFR 48.115 and 48.200. pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 44101–44106 and unmanned aircraft, first responders seek 4 Public Law 115–91. 44110–44113, which require aircraft to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3671

be registered as a condition of operation rule is effective February 25, 2019. unmanned aircraft, first responders or and establish the requirements for Owners must ensure each aircraft meets other persons seeking to identify the registration and registration processes. this requirement for any operation that small unmanned aircraft owner must occurs after February 25, 2019. open such enclosed compartments to V. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule view the unique identifier. Requiring VI. Regulatory Notices and Analyses The Registration IFR established a first responders to physically handle a web-based aircraft registration process Changes to Federal regulations must small unmanned aircraft to obtain a for the registration of small unmanned undergo several economic analyses. registration number adds an aircraft to facilitate compliance with the First, Executive Order 12866 and unnecessary safety and security risk to statutory requirement that all aircraft Executive Order 13563 direct that each those individuals, as well as to others in register prior to operation. See 80 FR Federal agency shall propose or adopt a the immediate proximity to the aircraft. 78593 (December 16, 2015). The regulation only upon a reasoned This rule helps to mitigate those risks. Registration IFR required that the FAA- determination that the benefits of the The Office of Information and issued registration number be affixed or intended regulation justify its costs. Regulatory Affairs has determined that marked on the small unmanned aircraft. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act this interim final rule is a significant To grant flexibility to the diverse types of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354), as codified in regulatory action pursuant to Executive of small unmanned aircraft 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., requires agencies to Order 12866. It requires that owners of commercially available, the FAA analyze the economic impact of small unmanned aircraft mark the required that the registration number regulatory changes on small entities. registration number on an external marking be readily accessible and Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. surface of the aircraft, which poses a maintained in a condition that is L. 96–39, as amended, 19 U.S.C. chapter minimal burden and inconvenience if readable and legible upon close visual 13) prohibits agencies from setting an owner must re-mark the aircraft to inspection. 14 CFR 48.205(c). The IFR standards that create unnecessary comply with this rule. further explained that markings in an obstacles to the foreign commerce of the enclosed compartment, such as a battery United States. In developing U.S. B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination compartment, will be considered readily standards, the Trade Agreements Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act, in 5 accessible if they can be accessed requires agencies to consider U.S.C. 603, requires an agency to without the use of tools. See 80 FR at international standards and, where prepare an initial regulatory flexibility 78628. The FAA included this provision appropriate, that they be the basis of analysis describing impacts on small in the Registration IFR to accommodate U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded entities whenever an agency is required the television and motion picture Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. by 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other law, to industry, which did not want markings 104–4) requires agencies to prepare a publish a general notice of proposed to show in theatrical and television written assessment of the costs, benefits, rulemaking for any proposed rule. productions, and hobbyists who wanted and other effects of proposed or final Similarly, 5 U.S.C. 604 requires an to preserve the authenticity of model rules that include a Federal mandate agency to prepare a final regulatory aircraft that replicate other aircraft. The likely to result in the expenditure by flexibility analysis when an agency FAA also included this provision to State, local, or tribal governments, in the issues a final rule under 5 U.S.C. 553, allow future consideration of the use of aggregate, or by the private sector, of after being required by that section or a serial number as a unique identifier $100 million or more annually (adjusted any other law to publish a general for purposes of registration. See 80 FR for inflation with base year of 1995). notice of proposed rulemaking. The at 78628. This portion of the preamble FAA found good cause to forgo notice As discussed previously, after the summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the and comment and any delay in the Registration IFR became effective, the economic impacts of this interim final effective date for this rule. As notice and law enforcement community and FAA’s rule. comment under 5 U.S.C. 553 are not interagency security partners required in this situation, the regulatory highlighted the risk to first responders A. Regulatory Evaluation flexibility analyses described in 5 U.S.C. when registration numbers are This rule revises the requirements 603 and 604 are not required. permitted to be concealed. To address regarding the placement of the this safety and security risk, the FAA is registration number assigned to a small C. International Trade Impact amending 14 CFR 48.205(c) to require unmanned aircraft. Under the Assessment the registration number be displayed Registration IFR, the FAA allowed the The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 and visible on an external surface of the registration number to be placed in an (Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the small unmanned aircraft. The FAA has enclosed compartment (e.g., the battery Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. determined that the importance of compartment) on the small unmanned L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies mitigating the risk to first responders aircraft, but the FAA now requires the from establishing standards or engaging outweighs the previously discussed number to be placed on the exterior of in related activities that create aesthetic interests and justifies the the aircraft. While this rule changes one unnecessary obstacles to the foreign minimal burden and inconvenience this possible location where the registration commerce of the United States. change could impose on small number may be displayed, the cost to Pursuant to these Acts, the unmanned aircraft owners. operators/owners is minimal as they establishment of standards is not This interim final rule does not will continue to use the same methods considered an unnecessary obstacle to change the acceptable methods of to mark the aircraft. The FAA the foreign commerce of the United external marking provided in § 48.205(a) acknowledges that there may be some States, so long as the standard has a and (b). Additionally, the FAA does not minimal costs associated with reduced legitimate domestic objective, such as specify a particular external surface aesthetic freedom for UAS designed to the protection of safety, and does not upon which the registration number look a particular way. operate in a manner that excludes must be placed. The requirement is that As previously discussed, if the imports that meet this objective. The it can be seen upon visual inspection of registration number is not readily statute also requires consideration of the aircraft’s exterior. This interim final visible on the exterior of the small international standards and, where

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3672 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

appropriate, that they be the basis for rulemaking action qualifies for the Order 13609, and has determined that U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed categorical exclusion identified in this action would have no effect on the potential effect of this interim final paragraph 5–6.6f of this order and international regulatory cooperation. rule and determined that it has a involves no extraordinary D. Executive Order 13771, Reducing legitimate domestic objective—the circumstances. Regulation and Controlling Regulatory protection of safety—and does not The FAA has reviewed the Costs operate in a manner that excludes implementation of the rule and imports that meet this objective. determined it is categorically excluded This rule is not subject to the requirements of Executive Order 13771 D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment from further environmental review according to FAA Order 1050.1F, (82 FR 9339, Feb. 3, 2017) because the Title II of the Unfunded Mandates ‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and costs associated with the rule are Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) Procedures,’’ paragraph 5–6.6f. The considered de minimis. requires each Federal agency to prepare FAA has examined possible VIII. How To Obtain Additional a written statement assessing the effects extraordinary circumstances and Information of any Federal mandate in a proposed or determined that no such circumstances final agency rule that may result in an exist. After careful and thorough A. Rulemaking Documents expenditure of $100 million or more (in consideration of the action, the FAA An electronic copy of a rulemaking 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, finds that this Federal action does not document may be obtained by using the local, and tribal governments, in the require preparation of an Environmental internet— aggregate, or by the private sector; such Assessment or Environmental Impact • Search the Federal Document a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant Statement in accordance with the Management System (FDMS) Portal regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently requirements of NEPA, Council on (http://www.regulations.gov); uses an inflation-adjusted value of $155 Environmental Quality (CEQ) • Visit the FAA’s Regulations and million in lieu of $100 million. regulations, and FAA Order 1050.1F. Policies web page at http:// This interim final rule does not www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or contain such a mandate; therefore, the VII. Executive Order Determinations • Access the Government Publishing requirements of Title II of the Act do not A. Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ Office’s web page at: http:// apply. www.gpo.gov/fdsys/. The FAA has analyzed this interim E. Paperwork Reduction Act Copies may also be obtained by final rule under the principles and sending a request (identified by The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 criteria of Executive Order 13132, amendment or docket number of this (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the ‘‘Federalism.’’ The agency has rulemaking) to the Federal Aviation FAA consider the impact of paperwork determined that this action will not Administration, Office of Rulemaking, and other information collection have a substantial direct effect on the ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue SW, burdens imposed on the public. The States, or the relationship between the Washington, DC 20591, or by calling FAA has determined that there is no Federal Government and the States, or (202) 267–9677. new requirement for information on the distribution of power and All documents the FAA considered in collection associated with this interim responsibilities among the various developing this rule, including final rule. levels of government, and, therefore, economic analyses and technical F. International Compatibility and does not have Federalism implications. reports, may be accessed from the Cooperation B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced above. In keeping with U.S. obligations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, under the Convention on International Distribution, or Use B. Comments Submitted to the Docket Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to The FAA analyzed this interim final Comments received may be viewed by conform to International Civil Aviation rule under Executive Order 13211, going to http://www.regulations.gov and Organization (ICAO) Standards and ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations that following the online instructions to Recommended Practices to the Significantly Affect Energy Supply, search the docket number for this maximum extent practicable. As stated Distribution, or Use’’ (May 18, 2001). action. Anyone is able to search the in the Registration IFR, the registration The agency has determined that it is not electronic form of all comments and marking requirements for small a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under the received into any of the FAA’s dockets unmanned aircraft apply only to executive order, and it is not likely to by the name of the individual operations within the United States and have a significant adverse effect on the submitting the comment (or signing the there are no ICAO standards for marking supply, distribution, or use of energy. comment, if submitted on behalf of an small unmanned aircraft.5 C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting association, business, labor union, etc.). G. Environmental Analysis International Regulatory Cooperation C. Small Business Regulatory FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA Executive Order 13609, Promoting Enforcement Fairness Act actions that are categorically excluded International Regulatory Cooperation The Small Business Regulatory from preparation of an environmental (77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012) promotes Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 assessment or environmental impact international regulatory cooperation to (SBREFA) (Pub. L. 104–121) (set forth as statement under the National meet shared challenges involving a note to 5 U.S.C. 601), as amended, Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the health, safety, labor, security, requires FAA to comply with small absence of extraordinary circumstances. environmental, and other issues and to entity requests for information or advice The FAA has determined this reduce, eliminate, or prevent about compliance with statutes and unnecessary differences in regulatory regulations within its jurisdiction. A 5 Standard Practice for UAS Registration and Marking (Excluding Small Unmanned Aircraft requirements. The FAA has analyzed small entity with questions regarding Systems), ASTM F2851–10 (2018), available at this action under the policies and this document may contact its local https://www.astm.org/Standards/F2851.htm. agency responsibilities of Executive FAA official, or the person listed under

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3673

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT updates the airport name and History section at the beginning of the preamble. geographic coordinates in the associated The FAA published a notice of You can find out more about SBREFA Class D and E airspace areas to match proposed rulemaking in the Federal on the internet at: http://www.faa.gov/ the FAA’s aeronautical database, and _ _ Register (83 FR 34956; July 24, 2018) for regulations policies/rulemaking/sbre replaces outdated language in the Docket No. FAA–2014–0878 to modify act/. airspace description, and makes an Class D airspace, and Class E airspace editorial change to the airspace List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 48 extending upward from 700 feet above designations. the surface, and establish Class E Aircraft, Reporting and recordkeeping surface area airspace at Wheeler Army requirements, Signs and symbols, Small DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, April 25, Airfield (AAF), Honolulu, HI. Interested unmanned aircraft, Unmanned aircraft. 2019. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by parties were invited to participate in The Amendment reference action under Title 1 Code of this rulemaking effort by submitting In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Regulations part 51, subject to written comments on the proposal to the Federal Aviation Administration the annual revision of FAA Order FAA. One comment was received amends chapter I of title 14, Code of 7400.11 and publication of conforming expressing concerns about impacts to Federal Regulations, as follows: amendments. the ‘‘south practice area,’’ potential ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11C, impacts to Wheeler AAF Air Traffic PART 48—REGISTRATION AND Airspace Designations and Reporting Control Tower (ATCT), and the MARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR Points, and subsequent amendments can potential for increased airspace SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/ incursions by student pilots. air_traffic/publications/. For further The FAA determined that the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 48 information, you can contact the concerns identified, concerning south continues to read as follows: Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation practice and Wheeler ATCT were Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101, Administration, 800 Independence identified and mitigated through the 40103, 40113–40114, 41703, 44101–44103, Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Safety Risk Management Panel held 44105–44106, 44110–44113, 45302, 45305, telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is April 17 and 18, 2018, with 46104, 46301, 46306. also available for inspection at the representatives from the general ■ 2. In § 48.205, revise paragraph (c) to National Archives and Records aviation and air traffic control read as follows: Administration (NARA). communities. The FAA will develop For information on the availability of and conduct airspace briefings for VFR § 48.205 Display and location of unique pilots, review and update the Chart identifier. this material at NARA, call (202) 741– 6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/ Supplement graphic for transiting * * * * * federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. Wheeler AAF airspace, and review and (c) The unique identifier must be update flight procedures for VFR FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace legibly displayed on an external surface arrivals to Honolulu International Designations and Reporting Points, is of the small unmanned aircraft. Airport. published yearly and effective on The commenter also noted that Issued under the authority provided by 49 September 15. U.S.C. 106(f), 41703, 44101–44103, in specific charting notation, denoting the Washington, DC, on December 21, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: floor/shelf of the Wheeler AAF Class D Daniel K. Elwell, Richard Roberts, Federal Aviation airspace, on both paper and electronic Administration, Operations Support Acting Administrator. map formats. The FAA VFR sectional Group, Western Service Center, 2200 S [FR Doc. 2019–00765 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] will clearly outline the lateral 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; boundaries and altitudes associated BILLING CODE 4910–13–P telephone (206) 231–2245. with the modifications. The FAA agrees SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: that electronic data is increasingly used by pilots as their source of aviation DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Authority for This Rulemaking information. The FAA recommends all Federal Aviation Administration The FAA’s authority to issue rules pilots ensure that the programs they use regarding aviation safety is found in to acquire aviation information use only 14 CFR Part 71 Title 49 of the United States Code. FAA-certified data sources for the basis Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the of their products and that they are [Docket No. FAA–2014–0878; Airspace Docket No. 14–AWP–10] authority of the FAA Administrator. maintained and up to date. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, Lastly, the commenter requested a RIN 2120–AA66 describes in more detail the scope of the modification to the Class D airspace that agency’s authority. This rulemaking is did not ‘‘encroach so heavily into the Amendment of Class D and Class E promulgated under the authority busy south practice area’’, that may Airspace, and Establishment of Class described in Subtitle VII, Part A, require increased communication with E Airspace; Honolulu, HI Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that Wheeler ATCT. The FAA worked with AGENCY: Federal Aviation section, the FAA is charged with representatives from the general Administration (FAA), DOT. prescribing regulations to assign the use aviation, commercial/tour industry and ACTION: Final rule. of airspace necessary to ensure the military users, and Wheeler ATCT and safety of aircraft and the efficient use of Honolulu Control Facility air traffic SUMMARY: This action amends Class D airspace. This regulation is within the personnel, over the course of nearly 4 airspace, and Class E airspace extending scope of that authority as it amends years to develop this airspace. The FAA upward from 700 feet above the surface, Class D and Class E airspace and appreciates the potential for increased and establishes Class E surface area establishes Class E surface area airspace radio contact between the ATCT and airspace at Wheeler Army Airfield at Wheeler AAF, Honolulu, HI., to transiting traffic however, the boundary (AAF), Honolulu, HI. This action also support IFR operations at the airport. changes are necessary to ensure aircraft

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3674 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

operating under instrument flight rules impact is so minimal. Since this is a the point of beginning, excluding that have adequate protection. routine matter that only affects air traffic airspace below 1,800 feet MSL beyond 3.3 Class D and Class E airspace miles from the airport from the 89° bearing procedures and air navigation, it is ° designations are published in paragraph certified that this rule, when clockwise to the 218 bearing from the 5000, 6002, and 6005, respectively of airport. This Class D airspace area is effective promulgated, will not have a significant during the specific dates and times FAA Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, economic impact on a substantial established in advance by a Notice to 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, number of small entities under the Airmen. The effective date and time will which is incorporated by reference in 14 criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. thereafter be continuously published in the CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace Pacific Chart Supplement. designation listed in this document will Environmental Review Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace be published subsequently in the Order. The FAA has determined that this Designated as Surface Areas. action qualifies for categorical exclusion Availability and Summary of under the National Environmental * * * * * Documents for Incorporation by Policy Act in accordance with FAA AWP HI E2 Honolulu, HI [New] Reference Order 1050.1F, ‘‘Environmental Wheeler AAF, HI This document amends FAA Order Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ (Lat. 21°28′53″ N, long. 158°02′16″ W) 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and paragraph 5–6.5a. This airspace action That airspace extending upward from the Reporting Points, dated August 13, is not expected to cause any potentially surface bounded by a line from lat. 21°31′03″ 2018, and effective September 15, 2018. significant environmental impacts, and N, long. 158°04′30″ W; to lat. 21°31′24″ N, FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly no extraordinary circumstances exist long. 158°03′00″ W, thence clockwise along available as listed in the ADDRESSES that warrant preparation of an a 2.6-mile radius of Wheeler AAF to lat. ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ section of this document. FAA Order environmental assessment. 21 30 33 N, long. 158 00 07 W; to lat. 7400.11C lists Class A, B, C, D, and E 21°28′41″ N, long. 157°58′19″ W, thence Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 clockwise along a 3.7-mile radius of the airspace areas, air traffic service routes, ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ and reporting points. airport to lat. 21 25 46 N, long. 158 04 24 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, W; to lat. 21°26′52″ N, long. 158°04′31″ W; Navigation (air). The Rule to lat. 21°27′17″ N, long. 158°05′45″ W; to lat. ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Adoption of the Amendment 21 29 14 N, long. 158 04 50 W; to lat. The FAA is amending Title 14 Code 21°30′18″ N, long. 158°03′59″ W; thence to of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 In consideration of the foregoing, the the point of beginning; excluding that by modifying Class D airspace, Class E Federal Aviation Administration airspace below 1,800 feet MSL beyond 3.3 airspace extending upward from 700 amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: miles from the airport from the 89° bearing feet above the surface, and establishing clockwise to the 218° bearing from the Class E surface area airspace at Wheeler PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, airport. AAF, Honolulu, HI. B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Class D airspace extending upward TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More from the surface to and including 3,300 REPORTING POINTS Above the Surface of the Earth. feet MSL is modified to within a 2.6- * * * * * mile radius of Wheeler AAF, then ■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 extend to a 3.7-mile radius from the continues to read as follows: AWP HI E5 Honolulu, HI [Amended] southeast to the southwest, adjoining Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, Wheeler AAF, HI the boundary of Restricted Area R–3109 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, (Lat. 21°28′53″ N, long. 158°02′16″ W) to the west, excluding that airspace 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. That airspace extending upward from 700 below 1,800 feet MSL beyond 3.3 miles feet above the surface within a 4.2-mile § 71.1 [Amended] from the airport from the 89° bearing radius of Wheeler AAF, excluding that clockwise to the 218° bearing from the ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in portion within Restricted Area R–3109, when active. airport. 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, Class E surface area airspace is Airspace Designations and Reporting Issued in Seattle, Washington, on January established to be coincident with the Points, dated August 13, 2018, and 30, 2019. lateral dimensions of the Class D effective September 15, 2018, is Shawn Kozica, airspace, and is effective continuously amended as follows: Group Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center. to provide protection to instrument Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. procedures. [FR Doc. 2019–02069 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] * * * * * BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Regulatory Notices and Analyses AWP HI D Honolulu, HI [Amended] The FAA has determined that this Wheeler AAF, HI regulation only involves an established (Lat. 21°28′53″ N, long. 158°02′16″ W) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION body of technical regulations for which That airspace extending upward from the frequent and routine amendments are surface to and including 3,300 feet MSL Federal Aviation Administration necessary to keep them operationally bounded by a line from lat. 21°31′03″ N, long. current, is non-controversial and 158°04′30″ W; to lat. 21°31′24″ N, long. 14 CFR Part 71 158°03′00″ W, thence clockwise along a 2.6- unlikely to result in adverse or negative [Docket No. FAA–2018–0879; Airspace mile radius of Wheeler AAF to lat. 21°30′33″ comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a Docket No. 18–AGL–24] N, long. 158°00′07″ W; to lat. 21°28′41″ N, ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under ° ′ ″ Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a long. 157 58 19 W, thence clockwise along RIN 2120–AA66 a 3.7-mile radius of the airport to lat. ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 21°25′46″ N, long. 158°04′24″ W; to lat. Amendment of Class E Airspace; Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 21°26′52″ N, long. 158°04′31″ W; to lat. Oscoda, MI FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) 21°27′17″ N, long. 158°05′45″ W; to lat. does not warrant preparation of a 21°29′14″ N, long. 158°04′50″ W; to lat. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated 21°30′18″ N, long. 158°03′59″ W; thence to Administration (FAA), DOT.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3675

ACTION: Final rule. section, the FAA is charged with Regulatory Notices and Analyses prescribing regulations to assign the use The FAA has determined that this SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E of airspace necessary to ensure the airspace at Oscoda-Wurtsmith Airport, regulation only involves an established safety of aircraft and the efficient use of body of technical regulations for which Oscoda, MI. This action is required due airspace. This regulation is within the to the decommissioning of the Au Sable frequent and routine amendments are scope of that authority as it amends necessary to keep them operationally VHF omnidirectional range (VOR) Class E surface airspace and Class E navigation aid, which provided current, is non-controversial and airspace areas extending upward from unlikely to result in adverse or negative navigation guidance for the instrument 700 feet or more above the surface at procedures at the airport, as part of the comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a Oscoda-Wurtsmith Airport, Oscoda, MI, ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under VOR Minimum Operational Network to support IFR operations at the airport. Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a (MON) Program. Also, the geographic ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT coordinates for the airport in the History Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 associated airspace are updated to The FAA published a notice of FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) coincide with the FAA’ s aeronautical proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the does not warrant preparation of a database. Airspace redesign is necessary Federal Register (83 FR 51901; October regulatory evaluation as the anticipated for the safety and management of 15, 2018) for Docket No. FAA–2018– impact is so minimal. Since this is a instrument flight rules (IFR) operations 0879 to modify Class E airspace at routine matter that only affects air traffic at this airport. Oscoda-Wurtsmith Airport, Oscoda, MI. procedures and air navigation, it is DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, April 25, Interested parties were invited to certified that this rule, when 2019. The Director of the Federal participate in this rulemaking effort by promulgated, does not have a significant Register approves this incorporation by submitting written comments on the economic impact on a substantial reference action under Title 1 Code of proposal to the FAA. No comments number of small entities under the Federal Regulations part 51, subject to were received. criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming Class E airspace designations are Environmental Review amendments. published in paragraph 6002 and 6005 The FAA has determined that this of FAA Order 7400.11C, dated August ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11C, action qualifies for categorical exclusion 13, 2018, and effective September 15, Airspace Designations and Reporting under the National Environmental 2018, which is incorporated by Points, and subsequent amendments can Policy Act in accordance with FAA reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/ Order 1050.1F, ‘‘Environmental airspace designations listed in this air_traffic/publications/. For further Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ document will be published information, you can contact the paragraph 5–6.5.a. This airspace action subsequently in the Order. Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation is not expected to cause any potentially Administration, 800 Independence Availability and Summary of significant environmental impacts, and Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Documents for Incorporation by no extraordinary circumstances exist telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is Reference that warrant preparation of an also available for inspection at the environmental assessment. This document amends FAA Order National Archives and Records Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Administration (NARA). For 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and information on the availability of FAA Reporting Points, dated August 13, Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202) 2018, and effective September 15, 2018. Navigation (air). 741–6030, or go to https:// FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly Adoption of the Amendment available as listed in the ADDRESSES www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ In consideration of the foregoing, the ibr-locations.html. FAA Order 7400.11, section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists Class A, B, C, D, and E Federal Aviation Administration Airspace Designations and Reporting amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: Points, is published yearly and effective airspace areas, air traffic service routes, on September 15. and reporting points. PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Rule B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR John Witucki, Federal Aviation TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND Administration, Operations Support This amendment to Title 14 Code of REPORTING POINTS Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 ■ Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX modifies Class E surface airspace within 1. The authority citation for part 71 76177; telephone (817) 222–5900. a 4.5-mile radius of Oscoda-Wurtsmith continues to read as follows: Airport, Oscoda, MI by removing the Au SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, Sable VOR/DME and the associated 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, Authority for This Rulemaking extension to the southwest of the 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. airport, due to the decommissioning of The FAA’s authority to issue rules § 71.1 [Amended] the Au Sable VOR, which provided regarding aviation safety is found in ■ Title 49 of the United States Code. navigation guidance to the instrument 2. The incorporation by reference in Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the procedures at the airport, as part of the 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting authority of the FAA Administrator. VOR MON Program. Points, dated August 13, 2018, and Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, Also, the geographic coordinates of effective September 15, 2018, is describes in more detail the scope of the the airport in this airspace, and in Class amended as follows: agency’s authority. This rulemaking is E airspace extending upward from 700 promulgated under the authority feet above the surface, are adjusted to Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas described in Subtitle VII, Part A, coincide with the FAA’s aeronautical Designated as Surface Areas. Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that database. * * * * *

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3676 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

AGL MI E2 Oscoda, MI [Amended] ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11C, Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, Oscoda-Wurtsmith Airport, MI Airspace Designations and Reporting and effective September 15, 2018, which (Lat. 44°27′06″ N, long. 83°23′39″ W) Points, and subsequent amendments can is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Within a 4.5-mile radius of Oscoda- be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/ 71.1. The Class E airspace designation Wurtsmith Airport. air_traffic/publications/. For further listed in this document will be information, you can contact the Paragraph 6005 Airspace Areas Extending published subsequently in the Order. Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Availability and Summary of Surface of the Earth. Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Documents for Incorporation by AGL MI E5 Oscoda, MI [Amended] telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is Reference Oscoda-Wurtsmith Airport, MI also available for inspection at the ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ This document amends FAA Order (Lat. 44 27 06 N, long. 83 23 39 W) National Archives and Records 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and That airspace extending upward from 700 Administration (NARA). Reporting Points, dated August 13, feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius For information on the availability of 2018, and effective September 15, 2018. of Oscoda-Wurtsmith Airport. this material at NARA, call (202) 741– FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on February 6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/ available as listed in the ADDRESSES 4, 2019 federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. section of this document. FAA Order FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace John Witucki, 7400.11C lists Class A, B, C, D, and E Designations and Reporting Points, is Manager (A), Operations Support Group, ATO airspace areas, air traffic service routes, published yearly and effective on Central Service Center. and reporting points. [FR Doc. 2019–02056 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] September 15. The Rule BILLING CODE 4910–13–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bonnie Malgarini, Federal Aviation The FAA is amending Title 14 Code Administration, Operations Support of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 Group, Western Service Center, 2200 S DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION by establishing Class E airspace 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; extending upward from 700 feet above Federal Aviation Administration telephone (206) 231–2329. the surface and modifying Class E SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 14 CFR Part 71 surface area airspace at Ephrata Authority for This Rulemaking Municipal Airport, Ephrata, WA. [Docket No. FAA–2017–1031; Airspace Class E surface area airspace is Docket No. 17–ANM–21] The FAA’s authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in modified to within 4.2-mile radius of RIN 2120–AA66 Title 49 of the United States Code. the airport (from a 4.4-mile radius) and Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the within 2.7 miles each side of the Establishment of Class E Airspace and authority of the FAA Administrator. Ephrata VORTAC 043° and 233° radials Amendment of Class E Airspace; Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 7 Ephrata, WA describes in more detail the scope of the miles northeast of the VORTAC. The AGENCY: Federal Aviation agency’s authority. This rulemaking is exclusionary language noting Moses Administration (FAA), DOT. promulgated under the authority Lake, WA, Class D airspace is removed described in Subtitle VII, Part A, as it is not needed to define the ACTION: Final rule. Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that boundary. SUMMARY: This action establishes Class section, the FAA is charged with Class E airspace extending upward E airspace extending upward from 700 prescribing regulations to assign the use from 700 feet is established within 4.2 feet above the surface, and modifies of airspace necessary to ensure the miles northwest and 6.6 miles southeast Class E surface area airspace at Ephrata safety of aircraft and the efficient use of of the 043° and 223° bearings from the Municipal Airport, Ephrata, WA. This airspace. This regulation is within the airport extending from the airport to action also updates the geographic scope of that authority as it establishes 11.1 miles northeast and 6.3 miles coordinates of the airport in the and amends Class E airspace at Ephrata southwest of the airport, respectively. Municipal Airport, Ephrata, WA, to associated Class E airspace areas to Additionally, this action updates the support standard instrument approach match the FAA’s aeronautical database. geographic coordinates (from lat. procedures for IFR operations at the These changes are necessary to 47°18′17″ N, long. 119°30′49″ W to lat. airport. accommodate airspace redesign for the 47°18′29″ N, long. 119°31′01″ W) for the safety and management of instrument History associated Class E airspace areas to flight rules (IFR) operations within the The FAA published a notice of match the FAA’s aeronautical database. National Airspace System. Also, an proposed rulemaking in the Federal Also, an editorial change is made to the editorial change would be made to the Register (83 FR 26889; June 11, 2018) Class E airspace legal descriptions Class E surface airspace legal for Docket No. FAA–2017–1031 to replacing Airport/Facility Directory description replacing ‘‘Airport/Facility establish Class E airspace extending with Chart Supplement. Directory’’ with the term ‘‘Chart upward from 700 feet above the surface Class E airspace designations are Supplement’’. and modify Class E surface area airspace published in paragraph 6002 and 6005, DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, April 25, at Ephrata Municipal Airport, Ephrata, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11C, 2019. The Director of the Federal WA. Interested parties were invited to dated August 13, 2018, and effective Register approves this incorporation by participate in this rulemaking effort by September 15, 2018, which is reference action under Title 1 Code of submitting written comments on the incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Federal Regulations part 51, subject to proposal to the FAA. No comments 71.1. The Class D and E airspace the annual revision of FAA Order were received. designations listed in this document 7400.11 and publication of conforming Class E airspace designations are will be published subsequently in the amendments. published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3677

Regulatory Notices and Analyses ANM WA E2 Ephrata, WA [Amended] 7400.11 and publication of conforming The FAA has determined that this Ephrata Municipal Airport, WA amendments. ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ regulation only involves an established (Lat. 47 18 29 N, long. 119 31 01 W) ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11C, body of technical regulations for which That airspace extending upward from the Airspace Designations and Reporting frequent and routine amendments are surface within a 4.2-mile radius of Ephrata Points, and subsequent amendments can necessary to keep them operationally Municipal Airport. This Class E airspace area be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/ current, is non-controversial and is effective during specific dates and times air_traffic/publications/. For further established in advance by a Notice to information, you can contact the unlikely to result in adverse or negative Airmen. The effective date and time will comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a thereafter be continuously published in the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Chart Supplement. Administration, 800 Independence Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a * * * * * Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 ANM WA E5 Ephrata, WA [New] also available for inspection at the FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) Ephrata Municipal Airport, WA National Archives and Records does not warrant preparation of a (Lat. 47°18′29″ N, long. 119°31′01″ W) Administration (NARA). For regulatory evaluation as the anticipated That airspace extending upward from 700 information on the availability of this impact is so minimal. Since this is a feet above the surface within 4.2 miles material at NARA, call (202) 741–6030, routine matter that only affects air traffic northwest and 6.6 miles southeast of the 043° or go to https://www.archives.gov/ procedures and air navigation, it is and 223° bearings from Ephrata Municipal federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. certified that this rule, when Airport extending from the airport reference FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace promulgated, will not have a significant point to 11.1 miles northeast and 6.3 miles Designations and Reporting Points, is southwest of the airport. economic impact on a substantial published yearly and effective on number of small entities under the Issued in Seattle, Washington, on January September 15. 31, 2019. criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shawn M. Kozica, Environmental Review Bonnie Malgarini, Federal Aviation Group Manager, Operations Support Group, Administration, Operations Support The FAA has determined that this Western Service Center. Group, Western Service Center, 2200 S action qualifies for categorical exclusion [FR Doc. 2019–02084 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198–6547; under the National Environmental BILLING CODE 4910–13–P telephone (206) 231–2329. Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ‘‘Environmental SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Authority for This Rulemaking paragraph 5–6.5a. This airspace action The FAA’s authority to issue rules is not expected to cause any potentially Federal Aviation Administration regarding aviation safety is found in significant environmental impacts, and Title 49 of the United States Code. no extraordinary circumstances exist 14 CFR Part 71 Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the that warrant preparation of an [Docket No. FAA–2017–0350; Airspace authority of the FAA Administrator. environmental assessment. Docket No. 17–AAL–6] Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 RIN 2120–AA66 describes in more detail the scope of the Airspace, Incorporation by reference, agency’s authority. This rulemaking is Navigation (air). Amendment of Class E Airspace for promulgated under the authority the Following Alaska Towns; Toksook described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Adoption of the Amendment Bay, AK; Unalakleet, AK; Wainwright, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that In consideration of the foregoing, the AK; and Yakutat, AK section, the FAA is charged with Federal Aviation Administration prescribing regulations to assign the use amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: AGENCY: Federal Aviation of airspace necessary to ensure the Administration (FAA), DOT. safety of aircraft and the efficient use of PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, ACTION: Final rule. airspace. This regulation is within the B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR scope of that authority as it amends TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E Class E airspace extending upward from REPORTING POINTS airspace extending upward from 1,200 1,200 feet above the surface at Toksook feet above the surface at Toksook Bay Bay Airport, AK; Unalakleet Airport, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 Airport, Toksook Bay, AK; Unalakleet AK; Wainwright Airport, AK; and continues to read as follows: Airport, Unalakleet, AK; Wainwright Yakutat Airport, AK, to support IFR Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, Airport, Wainwright, AK; and Yakutat operations in standard instrument 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, Airport, Yakutat, AK. This action adds approach and departure procedures at 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. exclusionary language to the legal these airports and to limit Class E § 71.1 [Amended] descriptions of these airports for Class E airspace to within 12 miles of the airspace extending beyond 12 miles shoreline. ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in from the shoreline, and ensures the 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, safety and management of aircraft History Airspace Designations and Reporting within the National Airspace System. The FAA published a notice of Points, dated August 13, 2018, and DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, April 25, proposed rulemaking in the Federal effective September 15, 2018, is 2019. The Director of the Federal Register (83 FR 37778; August 2, 2018) amended as follows: Register approves this incorporation by for Docket No. FAA–2017–0350 to Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace reference action under Title 1 Code of modify Class E airspace for Toksook Bay Designated as Surface Areas. Federal Regulations part 51, subject to Airport, AK; Unalakleet Airport, AK; * * * * * the annual revision of FAA Order Wainwright Airport, AK; and Yakutat

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3678 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

Airport, AK. Interested parties were regulatory evaluation as the anticipated AAL AK E5 Unalakleet, AK [Amended] invited to participate in this rulemaking impact is so minimal. Since this is a Unalakleet Airport, AK effort by submitting written comments routine matter that will only affect air (Lat. 63°53′19″ N, long. 160°47′57″ W) on the proposal to the FAA. No traffic procedures and air navigation, it That airspace extending upward from 700 comments were received. is certified that this rule, when feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius A legal description of Wales, AK, was promulgated, will not have a significant of Unalakleet Airport beginning at the 360° accidently included in the NPRM. It economic impact on a substantial bearing of the airport clockwise to the 260° does not belong with this amendment number of small entities under the bearing of the airport, and within a 13.5-mile and has been removed. criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. radius of the airport beginning at the 260° Class E airspace designations are ° Environmental Review bearing of the airport clockwise to the 360 published in paragraph 6005 of FAA bearing of the airport, and within 6 miles Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, The FAA has determined that this each side of the Unalakleet Airport 185° and effective September 15, 2018, which action qualifies for categorical exclusion bearing of the airport extending from the 7- is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR under the National Environmental mile radius to 10 miles south of the airport; 71.1. The Class E airspace designation Policy Act in accordance with FAA and that airspace extending upward from listed in this document will be Order 1050.1F, ‘‘Environmental 1,200 feet above the surface within a 74-mile published subsequently in the Order. Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ radius of Unalakleet Airport, excluding that Availability and Summary of paragraph 5–6.5a. This airspace action airspace that extends beyond 12 miles of the Documents for Incorporation by is not expected to cause any potentially shoreline. Reference significant environmental impacts, and * * * * * no extraordinary circumstances exist This document amends FAA Order that warrant preparation of an AAL AK E5 Wainwright, AK [Amended] 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and environmental assessment. Wainwright Airport, AK Reporting Points, dated August 13, (Lat. 70°38′17″ N, long. 159°59′41″ W) List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 2018, and effective September 15, 2018. That airspace extending upward from 700 FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly Airspace, Incorporation by reference, feet above the surface within an 8.5-mile available as listed in the ADDRESSES Navigation (air). radius of Wainwright Airport; and that section of this document. FAA Order Adoption of the Amendment airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet 7400.11C lists Class A, B, C, D, and E above the surface within a 73-mile radius of airspace areas, air traffic service routes, In consideration of the foregoing, the the Wainwright Airport, AK, excluding that and reporting points. Federal Aviation Administration portion extending outside the Anchorage The Rule amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: Arctic CTA/FIR (PAZA) boundary, and excluding that airspace that extends beyond The FAA is amending Title 14 Code PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 12 miles of the shoreline. of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR * * * * * by modifying Class E airspace extending TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND upward from 1,200 feet above the REPORTING POINTS AAL AK E5 Yakutat, AK [Amended] surface at Toksook Bay Airport, Yakutat Airport, AK Toksook, AK; Unalakleet Airport, ■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR (Lat. 59°30′12″ N, long. 139°39′37″ W) Unalakleet, AK; Wainwright Airport, part 71 continues to read as follows: Yakutat VOR/DME ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Wainwright, AK; and Yakutat Airport, Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, (Lat. 59 30 39 N, long. 139 38 53 W) Yakutat, AK. This action adds language 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, That airspace extending upward from 700 to the legal descriptions of these airports 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. feet above the surface within the area that reads ‘‘excluding that airspace bounded by lat. 59°47′42″ N, 139° 58′48″ W, § 71.1 [Amended] extending beyond 12 miles of the to lat. 59°37′33″ N, long. 139°40′54″ W, then shoreline’’, and supports IFR operations ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in along the 7 mile radius of the Yakutat VOR/ in standard instrument approach and 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, DME clockwise to lat. 59°28′54″ N, long. departure procedures at these airports. Airspace Designations and Reporting 139°25′36″ W, to lat. 59°20′16″ N, long. A legal description was accidently Points, dated August 13, 2018, and 139°10′20″ W, to lat. 59°02′49″ N long. included in the NPRM for Wales, AK, effective September 15, 2018, is 139°47′45″ W, to lat. 59°30′15″ N long. and it has been removed from this amended as follows: 140°36′43″ W, to the point of beginning, amendment. excluding that area beyond 12 miles from the Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas shoreline within Gulf of Alaska Low Control Regulatory Notices and Analyses Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Area; and that airspace extending upward Above the Surface of the Earth. The FAA has determined that this from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 75- regulation only involves an established * * * * * mile radius of the Yakutat VOR/DME, body of technical regulations for which AAL AK E5 Toksook Bay, AK [Amended] excluding that area extending over Canada, and that airspace that extends beyond 12 frequent and routine amendments are Toksook Bay Airport, AK necessary to keep them operationally (Lat. 60°32′29″ N, long. 165°05′14″ W) miles of the shoreline within Control 1487L. current, and is non-controversial and That airspace extending upward from 700 * * * * * unlikely to result in adverse or negative feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a Issued in Seattle, Washington, on January radius of Toksook Bay Airport; and that 31, 2019. ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a above the surface within a 73-mile radius of Shawn M. Kozica, ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT the Toksook Bay Airport, excluding that Group Manager, Operations Support Group, Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 airspace that extends beyond 12 miles of the Western Service Center. FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) shoreline. [FR Doc. 2019–02054 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] does not warrant preparation of a * * * * * BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3679

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Administration, Operations Support Airspace Matters, because a graphic was Group, Western Service Center, 2200 S not included in the docket. Federal Aviation Administration 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198– Additionally, AOPA encouraged the 6547; telephone (206) 231–2329. FAA to follow their guidance in the 14 CFR Part 71 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Order by making the action effective date coincidental to the sectional chart [Docket No. FAA–2017–1032; Airspace Authority for This Rulemaking Docket No. 17–ANM–4] publication date. The FAA’s authority to issue rules The FAA has determined AOPA’s RIN 2120–AA66 regarding aviation safety is found in comments raised no substantive issues Title 49 of the United States Code. with respect to the proposed changes to Establishment of Class E Airspace, Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the the airspace addressed in the NPRM. To Amendment of Class D Airspace, and authority of the FAA Administrator. the extent the FAA failed to follow its Revocation of Class E Airspace; Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, policy guidance reference publishing Tacoma, WA describes in more detail the scope of the graphics in the docket and establishing AGENCY: Federal Aviation agency’s authority. This rulemaking is the Class D airspace effective date to Administration (FAA), DOT. promulgated under the authority match the sectional chart date, we note ACTION: Final rule. described in Subtitle VII, Part A, the following. Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that With respect to AOPA’s comment SUMMARY: This action establishes Class section, the FAA is charged with addressing graphics, FAA Order E surface area airspace, and Class E prescribing regulations to assign the use 74002.L, para 2–3–3.c. requires the airspace extending upward from 700 of airspace necessary to ensure the official docket to include available feet above the surface at Tacoma safety of aircraft and the efficient use of graphics. For this airspace action, a Narrows Airport, Tacoma, WA. This airspace. This regulation is within the graphic was produced and placed in the action removes Class E airspace scope of that authority as it establishes docket on February 15, 2018. designated as an extension at Tacoma Class E airspace, amends Class D Specific to AOPA’s comment Narrows Airport. Additionally, this airspace, and removes Class E airspace regarding the FAA already creating a action updates the geographic at Tacoma Narrows Airport, Tacoma, graphical depiction of new or modified coordinates of the airport and replaces WA to support IFR operations at the airspace overlaid on a Sectional Chart the outdated term Airport/Facility airport. for quality assurance purposes, this is not correct nor required in all cases. Directory with the term Chart History Supplement in the Class D airspace During the airspace reviews, airspace description. These changes are The FAA published a notice of graphics may be created, if deemed necessary to accommodate airspace proposed rulemaking in the Federal necessary, to determine if there are any redesign for the safety and management Register (83 FR 4863; February 2, 2018) terrain issues, or if cases are considered of instrument flight rules (IFR) for Docket No. FAA–2017–1032 to complex. However, in many cases when operations within the National Airspace establish Class E surface area airspace, developing an airspace amendment System. and Class E airspace extending upward proposal, a graphic is not needed. It was from 700 feet above the surface at unclear if the graphic AOPA argued was DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, April 25, Tacoma Narrows Airport, Tacoma, WA, already created with a sectional chart 2019. The Director of the Federal and remove Class E airspace designated background was actually the airspace Register approves this incorporation by as an extension at the airport. After graphic created by the Aeronautical reference action under Title 1 Code of publication, an error was noted in the Informational Services office in Federal Regulations part 51, subject to airspace description of the north preparation of publishing the sectional the annual revision of FAA Order extension and in the description of the charts. However, that graphic is 7400.11 and publication of conforming south extension in the section of the normally created after the rulemaking amendments. preamble entitled, The Rule. The determination is published. ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11C, description of the north extension With respect to AOPA’s comment Airspace Designations and Reporting should be applied to the south addressing effective dates, FAA Order Points, and subsequent amendments can extension and the description of the 7400.2L, para 2–3–7.a.4. states that, to be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/ south extension should be applied to the extent practicable, Class D airspace air_traffic/publications/. For further the north extension. Correcting the area and restricted area rules should information, you can contact the errors produced no changes in the legal become effective on a sectional chart Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation description of the boundaries as the date and that consideration should be Administration, 800 Independence extensions are removed by this action. given to selecting a sectional chart date Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Additionally, there was an error in the that matches a 56-day en route chart telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is latitude coordinates for Tacoma cycle date. The FAA does consider also available for inspection at the Narrows airport. It was listed as lat. publishing Class D airspace amendment National Archives and Records 44°16′05″ N, while the correct effective dates to coincide with the Administration (NARA). coordinates are lat. 47°16′05″ N. publication of sectional charts, to the For information on the availability of Interested parties were invited to extent practicable; however, this this material at NARA, call (202) 741– participate in this rulemaking effort by consideration is accomplished after the 6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/ submitting written comments on the NPRM comment period ends. federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. proposal to the FAA. Two comments Substantive comments received to FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace were received, supporting the proposal. NPRMs, flight safety concerns, Designations and Reporting Points, is While the Aircraft Owners and Pilots management of IFR operations at published yearly and effective on Association (AOPA) supported this affected airports, and immediacy of September 15. proposal, they stated that the NPRM did requiring proposed airspace FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: not comply with FAA guidance in Order amendments are some of the factors that Bonnie Malgarini, Federal Aviation 7400.2, Procedures for Handling must be taken into consideration when

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3680 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

selecting the appropriate effective date. protects no arrival aircraft within 1,000 PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, After considering all factors, the FAA feet of the surface beyond 5.3 miles B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR may determine that selecting an south of the airport. By eliminating the TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND effective date that conforms to a 56-day unnecessary airspace, the remaining REPORTING POINTS en route chart cycle date that is not extension to the south is less than 2 coincidental to sectional chart dates is nautical miles in length, and must be ■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 better for the NAS and users than Class D. continues to read as follows: awaiting the next sectional chart date. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, Class D and E airspace designations Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet is established at Tacoma 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, are published in paragraph 5000, 6002, 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. Narrows Airport within 4 miles each 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA ° ° Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, side of the 007 and 187 bearings, § 71.1 [Amended] and effective September 15, 2018, which respectively, from the airport extending ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR to 8 miles north and 7 miles south of the 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, 71.1. The Class D and E airspace airport. This new airspace duplicates Airspace Designations and Reporting designation listed in this document will the larger Seattle Class E airspace area, Points, dated August 13, 2018, and be published subsequently in the Order. and ensures sufficient airspace is effective September 15, 2018, is designated for Tacoma Narrows Airport amended as follows: Availability and Summary of in case of any future modification. Documents for Incorporation by Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. Reference Regulatory Notices and Analyses * * * * * This document amends FAA Order The FAA has determined that this ANM WA D Tacoma, WA [Amended] 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and regulation only involves an established Tacoma Narrows Airport, WA Reporting Points, dated August 13, body of technical regulations for which (Lat. 47°16′05″ N, long. 122°34′41″ W) 2018, and effective September 15, 2018. frequent and routine amendments are That airspace extending upward from the FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly necessary to keep them operationally surface to and including 2,800 feet MSL available as listed in the ADDRESSES current, is non-controversial and within a 4-mile radius of Tacoma Narrows section of this document. FAA Order unlikely to result in adverse or negative Airport, and within 1.7 miles each side of the ° 7400.11C lists Class A, B, C, D, and E comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a 189 bearing from the airport extending from airspace areas, air traffic service routes, ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under the 4-mile radius to 5.3 miles south of the and reporting points. airport, excluding that airspace within the Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a Tacoma, McChord AFB, WA, Class D The Rule ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT airspace area. This Class D airspace area is This amendment to Title 14 Code of Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 effective during the specific dates and times Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) established in advance by a Notice to modifies Class D airspace, establishes does not warrant preparation of a Airmen. The effective date and time will Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated thereafter be continuously published in the Class E surface area airspace, removes Chart Supplement. Class E airspace designated as an impact is so minimal. Since this is a extension to a Class D or Class E surface routine matter that only affects air traffic Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace area, and establishes Class E airspace procedures and air navigation, it is Designated as Surface Areas. extending upward from 700 feet above certified that this rule, when * * * * * promulgated, will not have a significant the surface at Tacoma Narrows Airport, ANM WA E2 Tacoma, WA [New] Tacoma, WA. economic impact on a substantial Class D airspace is modified to add a number of small entities under the Tacoma Narrows Airport, WA (Lat. 47°16′05″ N, long. 122°34′41″ W) small extension south of the airport criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. within 1.7 miles each side of a 189° That airspace extending upward from the Environmental Review surface within a 4-mile radius of the Tacoma bearing from the airport extending from Narrows Airport, and within 1.7 miles each the 4-mile radius to 5.3 miles south of The FAA has determined that this side of the 189° bearing from the airport the airport. action qualifies for categorical exclusion extending from the 4-mile radius to 5.3 miles Class E surface area airspace is under the National Environmental south of the airport, excluding that airspace established coincident with the Policy Act in accordance with FAA within the Tacoma, McChord AFB, WA, dimensions of the Class D airspace and Order 1050.1F, ‘‘Environmental Class D airspace area. This Class E airspace effective during the hours when the Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ area is effective during the specific dates and Class D is not in effect to protect IFR times established in advance by a Notice to paragraph 5–6.5a. This airspace action Airmen. The effective date and time will operations continuously. is not expected to cause any potentially Class E airspace designated as an thereafter be continuously published in the significant environmental impacts, and Chart Supplement. extension is removed as the extension no extraordinary circumstances exist north of the airport (within 1.8 miles * * * * * ° that warrant preparation of an each side of the 187 bearing from environmental assessment. ANM WA E4 Tacoma, WA [Removed] Scenn OM extending from the 4-mile Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas radius to 1 mile south of the OM) Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More protects no arrival aircraft within 1,000 Above the Surface of the Earth. feet of the surface. Also, the extension Airspace, Incorporation by reference, * * * * * to the south (within 1.8 miles each side Navigation (air). ° of the 009 bearing from the Graye NDB Adoption of the Amendment ANM WA E5 Tacoma, WA [New] extending from the 4-mile radius to .9 Tacoma Narrows Airport, WA miles north of the NDB; excluding that In consideration of the foregoing, the (Lat. 47°16′05″ N, long. 122°34′41″ W) airspace within the Tacoma, McChord Federal Aviation Administration That airspace extending upward from 700 AFB, WA, Class D airspace area) amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: feet above the surface within 4 miles each

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3681

side of the 007° bearing from the Tacoma location and in a manner consistent removed and now appear in DoD Narrows Airport extending to 8 miles north with the needs of the armed forces Instruction 1315.19. of the airport, and within 4 miles each side Several commenters requested Guard ° while being responsive to the career of a 187 bearing from the airport extending development needs of members. and Reserve components be eligible for to 7 miles south of the airport. In addressing support for military enrollment in the EFMP automatically Issued in Seattle, Washington, on January families, the program provides the rather than allowing each Service to 31, 2019. following: determine the conditions under which Shawn M. Kozica, • Procedures to identify members of their Guard and Reserve members are Manager, Operations Support Group, Western the armed forces who are members of eligible to enroll in the EFMP. Service Center. military families with special needs. DoD declines to make this change [FR Doc. 2019–02074 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] • Mechanisms to ensure timely and because only active duty military BILLING CODE 4910–13–P accurate evaluations of members of such undergo the assignment coordination families who have special needs. process. Therefore, the Department does • Procedures to facilitate the not require the Services to enroll their DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE enrollment of such members of the Guard and Reserve members in the armed forces and their families in program, but also does not prohibit the Office of the Secretary programs of the military department for Services from doing so, in accordance the support of military families with with their respective missions and 32 CFR Part 75 special needs. needs. • Procedures to ensure the Many commenters requested changes [Docket ID: DOD–2011–OS–0127] coordination of DoD health care to Service-specific EFMP policies or RIN 0790–AI82 programs and support programs for assignment coordination procedures military families with special needs, associated with the EFMP program. Exceptional Family Member Program and the coordination of such programs Suggested changes included a request (EFMP) with other Federal, State, local, and that Guard and Reserve components be non-governmental health care programs eligible for EFMP services regardless of AGENCY: Office of the Under Secretary of and support programs intended to serve duty status, a request that a Service Defense for Personnel and Readiness, apply special codes to EFMP families in DoD. such families. • Requirements for resources their data system, a request to cease ACTION: Final rule. (including staffing) to ensure the frequent contact from the EFMP program, a request to mandate a uniform SUMMARY: This part discusses availability through the DoD of set of programming to be provided procedures for identifying a family appropriate numbers of case managers through each Service’s EFMP program member with special needs and to provide individualized support for or at each installation, and a request to coordinating travel for family members military families with special needs. • limit frequent changes to assigned of active duty Service members who Requirements regarding the EFMP coordinators. meet the Department of Defense (DoD) development and continuous updating of an individualized services plan Other suggestions included a request criteria for the Exceptional Family to allow people to examine their own Member Program (EFMP). It also (medical and educational) for each military family with special needs. family member profiles during the describes procedures for processing DoD • assignment coordination process, a civilian employees who have family Requirements for record keeping, reporting, and continuous monitoring of request to allow families more of a voice members with special needs for an in the assignment coordination process, overseas assignment and provides available resources and family needs under individualized services support a request for changes to the process family support services to military when an assignment is denied, requests families with special needs. plans for military families with special needs, including the establishment and for information packets about the EFMP DATES: This final rule is effective on maintenance of a central or various program and local resources at the time March 15, 2019. regional databases for such purposes. of enrollment and permanent change of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: station, requests for greater clarity on Rebecca Lombardi, 571–372–0862. Public Comments how health information and outcomes SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Following the publication of the from previous duty stations are or are proposed rule in December 11, 2015 (80 not considered during assignment Authority and Background FR 76881–76889), 99 public comments coordination, a request that families be This rule implements 10 U.S.C. were received and are discussed below. given an official reason for assignment 1781c, which established the Office of There has been some restructuring of location denials, a request for changes to Community Support for Military the final rule as several sections of the the weight given to family needs during Families with Special Needs (OSN) proposed rule were determined to be assignment coordination, and requests within the Office of the Under Secretary better suited to internal DoD Guidance, for a system to appeal assignment of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. which can be found in DoD Instruction coordination decisions. The purpose of the program is to 1315.19, ‘‘Exceptional Family Member No changes were made to the final enhance and improve DoD support Program,’’ available at http:// rule based on the above Service-specific around the world for military families www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/ comments. All Service EFMP policies with special needs (whether medical or Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/ must conform to this final rule and the educational) through developing 131519p.pdf. associated DoD Instruction 1315.19. policies, disseminating information, Beyond that, the Department believes obtaining referrals for services and in Section 75.1 Purpose the Services must have the flexibility to obtaining services. By statute, the OSN Due to the restructuring of the rule, tailor their EFMP policies to meet the is responsible for developing an EFMP § 75.1 of the final rule includes new specific needs of their missions and policy that applies to members of the paragraphs (a) and (b). Other paragraphs communities. To request changes to armed forces without regard to their in § 75.1 of the proposed rule were Service-specific EFMP policies or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3682 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

assignment coordination procedures, the need for those services does not IDEA services ‘‘expeditiously and please contact your local EFMP office. trigger EFMP enrollment. Instead, the regardless of cost.’’ The Department presence of a device used in connection agrees that additional clarification is Section 75.3 Definitions with a chronic medical condition is the required so all IDEA activities happen Several commenters submitted trigger for enrollment in the EFMP. within the specified timelines. requests for clarification, change, or The definition of ‘‘assistive To that end, § 75.6(b)(4)(i) now reads: inclusion of particular definitions. In technology device’’ at § 75.3 now reads: ‘‘The DoDEA and the Military Medical addition, due to the restructuring of the ‘‘Any item, piece of equipment, or Department responsible for the rule, in § 75.3, the definitions of product system, whether acquired provision of related services to support ‘‘CONUS,’’ ‘‘Medical case commercially off the shelf, modified, or DoDEA at the duty station are required management,’’ ‘‘Non-clinical case customized, that is used to increase, to evaluate school-aged children (ages 3 management,’’ ‘‘Pinpoint location,’’ maintain, or improve functional through 21 years, inclusive) eligible for ‘‘Respite Care Services,’’ and ‘‘Services capabilities of individuals with enrollment in a DoDEA school on a Plan’’ now appear only in DoD disabilities.’’ space-required basis and provide them Instruction 1315.19. Four commenters Four commenters requested that DoD with the special education and related requested that we clarify the meaning of adopt an agency-wide definition of services included in their IEPs in ‘‘adverse’’ and ‘‘adversely.’’ ‘‘child with special medical needs’’ or accordance with 32 CFR part 57.’’ The Department does not believe it is adopt the National Institute of Child Section 75.6(b)(4)(ii) now reads: ‘‘The necessary to clarify the meaning of these Health and Human Development Military Departments are required to terms as they are used in DoD (NICHHD) definition of child and youth provide infants and toddlers (from birth Instruction 1315.19 in the context of the with special health care needs up to 3 years of age, inclusive) eligible factors that must be considered when (CYSHCN) to ensure accurate data for enrollment in a DoDEA school on a stabilization is requested and in the collection. space-required basis with the EIS context of overseas assignments for While we agree the use of standard identified in the IFSPs in accordance active duty Service members, as the definitions is important for the with 32 CFR part 57.’’ Department interprets ‘‘adverse’’ and collection of accurate data, DoD One respondent requested ‘‘adversely’’ to have the plain language declines to make this change. The clarification of the definition of ‘‘family meaning of the terms, which is NICHHD definition of CYSHCN: ‘‘those care plan.’’ Two commenters requested ‘‘unfavorable’’ or ‘‘harmful,’’ and who have or are at risk for a chronic that distinctions between Services Plans ‘‘unfavorably’’ or ‘‘harmfully.’’ For physical, developmental, behavioral, or and family care plans be added. example, when used with respect to a emotional condition and who also The Department declines to add a stabilization decision under DoD require health and related services of a definition of ‘‘family care plan’’ to this Instruction 1315.19, the proper analysis type or amount beyond that required by final rule as each Service defines such will be whether stabilization will have children generally’’ is not, on its own, plans in accordance with its own an unfavorable or harmful effect on the specific enough to ensure appropriate policies. Most military families have a mission requirements of the Military assignment coordination. In addition, family care plan, which is not Service. since this rule sets policy only with predicated on the presence of a One commenter stated the definition respect to the EFMP program, the disability in the family. A family care for ‘‘assistive technology device’’ at establishment of a DoD-wide definition plan may cover issues such as child care § 75.3 was inconsistent with the will require coordination with all other in the case of parental deployment, Individuals with Disabilities Education DoD departments that interact with parental wills and trusts, and any other Act (IDEA) definition of assistive children with special medical needs to instructions or provisions for technology in chapter 33 of Title 20, ensure that all necessary elements of a dependents in case of a Service U.S. Code. Four commenters requested working definition are properly member’s death. Services Plans are part that changes to the definition be made included. The development of a new of the family support services offered to include information related to the definition is an in-depth process, and through EFMP offices and are developed evaluation and selection of such must be tailored to each program to on an as-needed basis for families who devices. The Department partially meet the needs of their unique have a family member with a disability concurred with the comments. The population, and coordination will not in accordance with DoD Instruction definition of ‘‘assistive technology be completed by the time this rule 1315.19. device’’ at § 75.3 is not limited to publishes. Four commenters requested additions devices used by children who receive Two commenters requested that we to or clarifications of the definitions of IDEA services. Instead, in accordance define the term ‘‘CONUS.’’ However, as ‘‘Individualized Education Program with the conditions that trigger EFMP this term is currently defined in DoD (IEP),’’ ‘‘Individualized Family Services enrollment, the term ‘‘assistive Instruction 1315.19 as ‘‘the 48 Plan (IFSP),’’ and ‘‘Special education’’ technology device’’ as used in § 75.5 in contiguous states of the United States, at § 75.3. The requested additions were this final rule, is intended to cover all excluding Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. intended to describe a child’s rights devices used by children and adults territories,’’ no change is made to the under the IDEA, including the right to when the use of such device is required rule. receive instruction while suspended or because of a chronic medical condition. One respondent requested expelled, the requirement to provide To clarify the definition, we have clarification of the term ‘‘expeditiously’’ specially designed instruction that removed the sentence that excluded as used in § 75.6(b)(4)(i) and (ii). These meets the child’s educational needs that surgically implanted medical devices, provisions require Department of result from the disability, and other which was imported from the IDEA Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) technical requirements under the IDEA. definition of assistive technology in the and the Military Medical Departments Three commenters also requested that earlier version of the regulation. We to evaluate and provide services to we add a definition of ‘‘specially decline to broaden the definition to children eligible for enrollment in a designed instruction’’ to clarify incorporate evaluations and training in DoDEA school on a space-required basis educational rights arising under the the use of assistive technology because and to provide them with any required IDEA.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3683

The Department does not agree that definition of related services should technology or certain environmental detailed descriptions of a child’s rights include interpreting services for considerations, and educational needs. under the IDEA or additional definitions children who are English language Should any of the listed conditions be related to the special education process learners. The related services referred to met, then enrollment in EFMP is are necessary or appropriately placed in in the rule arise in the IDEA. Eligibility triggered. The enumerated conditions this final rule. A child’s services under for services under the IDEA is are those that, in the Department’s the IDEA intersect with this final rule predicated on the presence of a experience, require careful coordination because the receipt of IDEA services is disability and is not affected by a child’s during the assignment coordination a trigger for EFMP enrollment under proficiency with English. Services process. While distinguishing disability § 75.5(b). Children of active duty provided under the IDEA are designed from medical or other conditions is Service members and civilian to address educational needs that arise important in certain contexts, for EFMP employees appointed to an overseas from a disability. Children who receive purposes, it is not relevant whether a location who are eligible for enrollment educational services from the DoD and condition is or is not considered to be in a DoD school on a space-required require both special education services a disability. We decline to use only the basis will be identified as having special and services for English language term ‘‘disability ’’ or ‘‘special needs’’ educational needs if they have, or are learners are protected by various because one enrollment trigger for found eligible for, either an IFSP or an Department of Defense Education children, the receipt of IDEA special IEP under 32 CFR part 57 which is the Activity policies. The term ‘‘related education services on an IEP, is DoD’s implementing regulation for the services’’ refers to transportation and predicated on the presence of a IDEA. DoD has clarified the definitions such developmental, corrective, and disability that impacts a student’s of special education, IEP, and IFSP so other supportive services required to ability to benefit from his or her that all IDEA definitions and terms used assist a child with a disability to benefit education. Therefore, in the case of in the final rule refer to the DoD’s IDEA from special education under the child’s enrollment of a child who receives IDEA regulation (identical to or refer to the individualized education program. services, ‘‘special needs’’ would be an definitions in 32 CFR part 57). Special education services are provided inaccurate term. We decline to use the Therefore, the definitions of Early by the Department pursuant to 32 CFR term ‘‘disability’’ exclusively because Intervention Services, Individualized part 57, which explicitly includes the statute that authorizes this final rule, Education Program, Individualized interpreting services for children who 10 U.S.C. 1781c, uses the term ‘‘special Family Service Plan, Related Services, are deaf or hard of hearing in its needs,’’ and we believe that this term is and Special Education were revised in definition of related services. To ensure necessary to capture Congress’ full both the final rule and DoD Instruction uniform understanding and application intent. 1315.19. These definitions now mirror of definitions related to special Section 75.4 Policy definitions in 32 CFR part 57. education, as indicated above, we have Four commenters requested that the changed the definition of ‘‘related Due to the restructuring of the rule, term ‘‘non-clinical case management’’ services’’ so that it refers to the certain paragraphs of § 75.4 (Policy) in be expanded to include coordination of definition in 32 CFR part 57. Thus, the the final rule have been removed from medical services. Two commenters definition of ‘‘related services’’ at § 75.3 the final rule and now appear only in stated that if the definition of non- of the final rule has been revised to DoD Instruction 1315.19. clinical case management is not mirror the definition that is in 32 CFR One commenter recommended we expanded to include coordination of part 57 in both the final rule and in DoD incorporate language from 10 U.S.C. medical services, then the definition Instruction 1315.19. 1781c(e)(3), regarding the assignment of should be changed to exclude reference Six commenters discussed the use of Service members into the rule. The to medical services. terms such as ‘‘special needs’’ versus Department agrees the requested We do not believe that non-clinical ‘‘handicapped’’ or ‘‘disability.’’ One language clarifies the relationship case management includes medical commenter requested that we clarify between assignment or stabilization services coordination. Medical case that the term ‘‘person with special requests, the needs of the armed forces, management is defined in DoD needs’’ may, but does not have to, refer and the career development of active Instruction 1315.19, and it refers readers to a person with a disability. Two duty Service members, and have added to the TRICARE Medical Management commenters requested that we adopt the the requested language. Guide for more information regarding definition of disability used in Section Change: Changes were made to DoD medical case management. However, in 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Instruction 1315.19, which now reads: response, this definition, contained only codified at 29 U.S.C. 705. One ‘‘the assignment or stabilization requests in DoD Instruction 1315.19, has been commenter stated that, if there is no of members of the armed forces who are changed to read: ‘‘The provision of distinction between the terms members of military families with information and referral to families and ‘‘disability’’ and ‘‘special needs’’ for special needs, shall be addressed in a individuals that assist them in making purposes of this rule, we should use manner consistent with the needs of the informed decisions and navigating only one term throughout. armed forces and responsive to the resources to improve their quality of life The Department has made no changes career development of members of the such as educational, social, community, to the rule or the instruction based on armed forces on active duty.’’ housing, legal, and financial services. these comments because DoD has Several commenters discussed the This does not involve coordination and received no evidence indicating this issue of homesteading, or stabilization follow-up of medical treatments.’’ clarification of such matters is of duty stations. Comments included a Five commenters suggested that the necessary. The final rule includes a request to make EFMP status a priority definition of ‘‘related services’’ at § 75.3 number of specific conditions falling when negotiating orders, prioritizing should be expanded to include within the umbrella of ‘‘special needs’’ stabilization requests of families in interpreting services for children who at § 75.5 related to medical diagnosis, which a member is diagnosed with are deaf and interpreting services for medical history, medications, specialty autism, and a request that all Services children who are English language care requirements, chronic need for implement stabilization in the same learners. We do not agree that this adaptive equipment, assistive way.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3684 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

The Department agrees stabilization clinical case management, to military what was § 75.5(e)(18) of the proposed can be important for families. DoD families with special needs regardless of rule, now DoD Instruction 1315.19, be Instruction 1315.19 permits the Services the sponsor’s Service affiliation or made public reports. No change was to stabilize families in Alaska, Hawaii, enrollment status in the EFMP. made to the rule as aggregate data or a CONUS location for a minimum of received through the reports required by Section 75.5 Responsibilities four years so long as stabilization does DoD Instruction 1315.19 is made public not have an adverse effect on the Due to the restructuring of the rule, through the Annual Report to the mission of the Military Service or the what was § 75.5 (Responsibilities) in the Congressional Defense Committees on career development of the Service proposed rule has been removed from the Activities of the Office of Special member. However, we decline to list the final rule and now appears in DoD Needs. specific disabilities or medical Instruction 1315.19. What was § 75.6 Two commenters requested a revision conditions that automatically require (DoD Criteria for Identifying Family of what was § 75.5(d)(4)(iii) of the stabilization or require specific Members with Special Needs) in the proposed rule now in DoD Instruction prioritization of EFMP status because proposed rule has been renumbered to 1315.19, which allows the Director, many disabilities and medical § 75.5 in the final rule. DoDEA, to request reimbursement from conditions manifest in a range of Two commenters erroneously claimed the sending Military Department when severity or intensity of need, which that the proposed rule did not comply there is a failure to coordinate an means that individual analysis of the with 10 U.S.C. 1781c because certain overseas assignment with DoDEA that family member’s needs and statutory duties of the OSN were given results in the assignment of the Service circumstances is always necessary. The to the Under Secretary of Defense for member to a location where DoDEA Military Services are best positioned to Personnel and Readiness (USD(P&R)) incurs expenses (e.g. by hiring perform the necessary analysis in and the Assistant Secretary of Defense additional staff) beyond normal conjunction with an understanding of for Manpower and Reserve Affairs operations to provide special education their current and future missions, (ASD(M&RA)). No change was made to pursuant to the child’s IEP because, as populations, and resources; therefore, the final rule as 10 U.S.C. 1781c(a) written, it could be interpreted to mean each Military Service is the most establishes the OSN as an office in the that command sponsorship should be appropriate arbiter of its own Office of Military Family Readiness denied if educational services are not stabilization process. Policy, which is within the Office of the available. One respondent stated stabilization USD(P&R). Furthermore, DoD The Department does not agree that should not adversely impact career Instruction 1315.19 states the USD(P&R) the language could be interpreted to advancement or promotion. Two provides for the OSN, pursuant to 10 allow denial of command sponsorship commenters stated that Service U.S.C. 1781c, and submits an annual and has made no change to the final members are erroneously told that they report to Congress on the activities of rule. The language in DoD Instruction may not reenlist if they request the OSN on behalf of the Secretary of 1315.19 describes DoDEA’s authority to stabilization. Defense in accordance with 10 U.S.C. seek reimbursement where it incurs While no changes were made to the 1781c (g). Contrary to the commenter’s additional expenses resulting from a final rule, the Department agrees claim that this does not comply with the Service’s failure to coordinate a Service stabilization or requests for stabilization statute, the duties assigned to the member’s overseas move. This is an to accommodate a family member with USD(P&R) under DoD Instruction internal check in the system that special needs must not adversely impact 1315.19 directly reflect statutory duties ensures coordination procedures are the career of the Service member who assigned to the USD(P&R) and/or the observed. Three commenters requested has requested it. DoD Instruction Secretary of Defense and are clarification on what was in § 75.5(d)(2) 1315.19 allows for stabilization in cases appropriately assigned to the USD(P&R). of the proposed rule, now in DoD where the Service member initiates the The commenters also claimed that Instruction 1315.19, regarding the request, the family member has a responsibilities assigned to the responsibility of the Director, DoDEA, to documented need for stabilization per ASD(M&RA) in DoD Instruction 1315.19 make recommendations to the Military Service-specific guidance, stabilization are not in compliance with the statute. Services and other DoD components on does not have an adverse impact to the The Department disagrees. DoD the availability of special education mission requirements of the Military Instruction 1315.19 requires the services. The commenters suggested Service, and the career of the Service ASD(M&RA) to consult with the adding language to clarify several items, member has been considered and is not Secretaries of the Military Departments, including the nature of the Director’s affected adversely. We believe that as appropriate, to ensure the recommendations, whether the stabilization that is granted under these development, implementation, and Director’s responsibilities included conditions will not adversely impact the monitoring of an effective EFMP across making recommendations on all public career of the requesting Service member. DoD. DoD Instruction 1315.19 also schools and charter schools, and Two commenters requested that we requires the ASD(M&RA) to resolve whether the recommendations referred add language to the rule so EFMP disputes among the DoD Components to are for both CONUS and OCONUS programs can be utilized by a member regarding the implementation of locations. of any of the Services whether assigned procedures in § 75.5 through § 75.6 of No change was made to the final rule to an installation run by his or her own the final rule. These responsibilities are as the Department does not believe that Service or another Service. No changes assigned to the ASD(M&RA) because, the Director, DoDEA, requires additional were made to the final rule as the final given the current organizational regulatory clarification on the scope of rule already includes a statement structure of the DoD, such assignment this duty at this time. The Director is describing the duty of the EFMP to provides for the most efficient means of only able to make recommendations provide family support services ensuring the effective operation of the regarding educational services in regardless of Service affiliation. In EFMP within the DoD. locations where DoDEA is responsible addition, DoD Instruction 1315.19 states Two commenters requested that the for the provision of educational it is DoD policy that the EFMP provides annual data reports from the Military services. For example, if a DoDEA family support services, including non- Services to the ASD(M&RA) required at school closes, DoDEA must inform the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3685

military departments that educational enrollment criteria (located at § 75.5 in with enrollment in EFMP. Commenters services, including special educational the final rule), and ensure Military recommended enrollment in EFMP be services, are no longer available at that Treatment Facility personnel are trained standardized, either requiring school. on EFMP policies and procedures. In physicians at MTFs to submit the Two commenters discussed what was addition, DoD Instruction 1315.19 paperwork to initiate EFMP enrollment, in § 75.5(e)(4) of the proposed rule, now requires the Secretaries of the Military or allowing school-provided paperwork in DoD Instruction 1315.19, regarding Departments to provide information on to serve as adequate documentation of the responsibility of the Secretaries of the EFMP to all active duty Service disability for enrollment purposes. the Military Departments to ensure members and their families, regardless The Department appreciates the family members of active duty Service of location, and civilian employees or commenters’ attention to the demands members who are identified with a selectees who have applied for placed on Service members, but makes medical condition meeting the criteria government employment in overseas no changes to the final rule because at what was § 75.6 of the proposed rule locations. enrollment paperwork is already (now § 75.5 of the final rule) be referred Seven commenters submitted standardized across the DoD through to Service-specific points of contact for suggestions about EFMP family support completion of DD Forms 2792,1 enrollment in the EFMP, and stated that staff qualifications, suggesting that documenting special medical needs and the requirement to have the Service- specialized staff should be hired to DD Form 2792–1,2 documenting special specific EFMP point of contact enroll address specific disabilities or medical educational needs. the Service member compounds the conditions, and stating that staff training In an effort to decrease the paperwork problems with access to services for on disability topics, DoD resources, the burden on families, enrollment in EFMP families on joint bases or on disability community, local services, is initiated and substantially completed installations managed by Services other and respite care was needed and should by the MTF and the Service-specific than that to which a member belongs. include family members with special EFMP point of contact. When a family No change is made to the final rule as needs in order to aid staff in providing member of an active duty Service enrollment in the EFMP is currently a effective help to families. While no member is identified within an MTF Service-specific function connected to change is made to the final rule, the with a medical condition that meets the each Service’s assignment coordination Department agrees that, to provide EFMP enrollment criteria at § 75.5 of the process. The Services currently conduct effective support, EFMP staff must have final rule, the MTF must initiate the independent assignment coordination knowledge of areas of importance to EFMP enrollment process by referring activities in keeping with the needs of families with special needs. However, the Service member to the Service- their missions and communities. the Military Departments’ hiring specific EFMP point of contact who Four commenters discussed the need practices are beyond the scope of this ensures the DD Form 2792, ‘‘Family for better communication among EFMP final rule, so we decline to create rules Member Medical Summary’’ is staff and better communication and requiring that specialized EFMP family completed. coordination between medical staff at support staff be hired to address specific For families who receive medical care Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs) disabilities or medical conditions. To outside of the Military Treatment and EFMP staff. One respondent ensure ongoing training and Facility, DoD Instruction 1315.19 suggested making all bases aware of the development of expertise, DoD requires that, under the authority of the EFMP. Three commenters requested Instruction 1315.19 requires the ASD(HA), all medical care providers are more effective public communication Secretaries of the Military Departments made aware of the mandatory about EFMP programming. to ensure annual training is conducted enrollment requirements of the EFMP While no change is made to the final on EFMP policies and procedures as when a family member is identified rule, the Department does agree that well as topics such as Medicaid, with a medical condition meeting the communication about the EFMP and Supplemental Security Income, and criteria at § 75.5 in the final rule. between MTFs and EFMP Family TRICARE benefits. Physicians are part of the EFMP Support Programs is important to ensure One commenter requested we add enrollment process in so far as they families’ special medical and additional language at what was determine that a medical condition educational needs are fully considered § 75.5(e) of the proposed rule, now in exists that requires enrollment, contact through the assignment coordination DoD Instruction 1315.19, to strengthen the Service-specific EFMP point of process and to help families access the requirements for the Military contact to initiate enrollment needed services in a timely manner. We Departments to provide guidance, procedures, and complete the DD Form believe the rule adequately addresses develop programs, and establish 2792, ‘‘Family Member Medical this need, as DoD Instruction 1315.19 services relating to the EFMP. The Summary.’’ We are not able to dictate includes provisions that are intended to Department does not have evidence that how physicians outside of the MTFs increase communication and additional language is necessary at this manage non-medical paperwork, and coordination among the three time, so no change has been made to the therefore believe that Service-specific components of each EFMP program, as final rule. It should be noted that DoD EFMP points of contact are the most well as between MTFs and EFMP Instruction 1315.19 explicitly assigns appropriate personnel to manage the Family Support Programs. responsibility for several EFMP-related EFMP enrollment process. Specifically, DoD Instruction 1315.19 responsibilities, including the Also, the Department is not able to requires the Secretaries of the Military requirements to provide guidance on accept school paperwork as sole Departments to promote collaboration implementation and to establish EFMP documentation of eligibility for EFMP among the components of their services, to the Secretaries of the because the information collected and respective EFMP programs, ensure Military Departments. We will evaluate recorded by schools varies by state and MTFs contact Service-specific EFMP the necessity for additional language points-of-contact at the point that a based on implementation of the final 1 Available online at http://www.esd.whs.mil/ family member of an active duty Service rule by the Military Departments and Portals/54/Documents/DD/forms/dd/dd2792.pdf. member is identified with a medical their Services. Seven commenters were 2 Available online at http://www.esd.whs.mil/ condition that meets the EFMP concerned with the paperwork involved Portals/54/Documents/DD/forms/dd/dd2792-1.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3686 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

within each state. To ensure that all Section 75.7 Coordinating Personnel Activities will remove active required information is collected for Assignments of Active Duty Service duty Service members who have family each family, a standard DoD form is Members Who Have a Family Member members with special medical and necessary. With Special Needs educational needs from overseas orders if no suitable overseas assignment Section 75.6 DoD Criteria for Due to the restructuring of the rule, what was § 75.7 (Coordinating location can be found and there is no Identifying Family Members With adverse impact on the military mission Special Needs Assignments of Active Duty Service Members Who Have A Family Member or on the active duty Service member’s with Special Needs) in the proposed career. The commenters requested that Due to the restructuring of the rule, this requirement only apply to medical rule has been removed and now appears what was § 75.6 (DoD Criteria for needs, not educational needs when in DoD Instruction 1315.19. Identifying Family Members with considering a Service member for Special Needs) in the proposed rule has One commenter stated that Service members were denied critical overseas orders. been renumbered to § 75.5 in the final No changes were made to the final assignments due to common medical rule. rule given that DoD Instruction 1315.19 needs of family members. Three Several commenters suggested that states that, in cases where both the commenters stated that active duty special medical and special educational the criteria for enrollment in the EFMP careers were hurt by having a family be changed so that fewer conditions needs of family members cannot be met, member enrolled in EFMP. While no the Military Personnel Activities will would trigger enrollment, that changes were made to the final rule, enrollment for adults or any individual remove the Service member from DoD Instruction 1315.19 was modified overseas orders, barring any adverse with a well-controlled medical to now read: ‘‘active duty Service impact on the military mission or condition or positive health prognosis members may not be denied service person’s career. be made optional, or that parents be able consideration for an essential (as Two commenters discussed the to determine whether their children defined by the military personnel language which appeared at what was need to be enrolled in the program. One assignment system) duty assignment § 75.7(e) of the proposed rule, now in commenter erroneously stated that overseas solely because of the special DoD Instruction 1315.19, requiring EFMP enrollment is supposed to be needs of a family member.’’ active duty Service members to voluntary. One commenter requested DoD Instruction 1315.19 also states complete DD Forms 2792 and 2792–1 that families be given the opportunity to active duty Service members may not be when they become aware that a family make their own decisions about whether denied consideration for an essential (as member may meet the criteria at what to go to a duty station or not, and asked defined by the military personnel was § 75.6 in the proposed rule, now that they be allowed to waive their assignment system) duty assignment § 75.5 in the final rule. The commenters access to a compassionate reassignment overseas solely because they have recommended informing Service children who are or may be eligible for should the duty station not have members that removing their children EIS or special education services in adequate services and support for the from special education in order to get a accordance with 32 CFR part 57. We family member with special needs. No targeted assignment and then referring agree, however, that this extends to the child for special education services changes were made to the final rule. cover the Service person in the event DoD Instruction 1315.19 states once the new duty station is reached is that they have an adult family member punishable under the UCMJ. No change enrollment for EFMP is mandatory for with special medical needs, and was made to the final rule and the active duty Service members whose therefore have clarified the language in Department does not agree that families include a member with special DoD Instruction 1315.19 to state that additional clarification is required. DoD needs. Also, we do not agree that active duty Service members may not be Instruction 1315.19 states that a Service changes to the enrollment criteria or denied consideration for an essential (as member who fails or refuses to provide mandatory enrollment requirement for defined by the military personnel the required information for a family the EFMP are feasible. The criteria at assignment system) duty assignment member or who knowingly provides § 75.5 that automatically trigger overseas solely because they have a false information about any dependent enrollment in EFMP capture those family member with special needs. may be subject to disciplinary actions in conditions that, whether well-controlled One respondent requested that we accordance with Article 92 or Article or untreated, and whether manifested by add a process for disenrollment from the 107, in violation of 10 U.S.C. chapter 47, a child or an adult, must be considered EFMP program. No changes were made also known as The Uniform Code of when assignments are coordinated to the final rule based on this comment Military Justice. We believe that this because they may require medication because the Department does not sufficiently covers the situation that is not legally available or believe this is necessary. DoD described by the commenters. importable in every overseas location, Instruction 1315.19 requires the Military Services to establish procedures to Section 75.9 Provision of Family may require specialized care that is not Support Services available in certain locations, or may be update the status of family member(s) adversely impacted by the with special needs when conditions Due to the restructuring of the rule, occur, change, or no longer exist, and environmental conditions at particular what was § 75.9 (Provision of Family when Service-specific policy requires. Support Services) in the proposed rule locations. We do not agree that allowing This should be sufficient to ensure has been removed and now appears in families to waive their access to a disenrollment of individuals who no DoD Instruction 1315.19. compassionate reassignment is sound longer meet the enrollment criteria at Two commenters discussed § 75.9 in policy because it could put family § 75.5 in the final rule. the proposed rule, which now appears members who need reassignment in Two commenters requested changes in DoD Instruction 1315.19. The danger of having to stay in a location to what was § 75.7(c)(1)(iii) of the commenters emphasized the importance without adequate or necessary medical proposed rule, now in DoD Instruction of case management and requested that resources. 1315.19, which states that the Military the rule include more detail on case

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3687

management resource requirements and the Department’s implementation of the Five commenters requested that the responsibilities, including case duties of the OSN. Advisory Panel on Community Support management access standards and Six commenters recommended the for Military Families with Special Needs requirements for development and rule explicitly reference the be included in the rule. While no updating of Services Plans. No change responsibilities of the OSN under 10 changes were made to the final rule, was made to the final rule, and we do U.S.C. 1781c. Two commenters relevant language has been added to not agree more detail is required. recommended adding language from the DoD Instruction 1315.19, which now DoD Instruction 1315.19 currently statute delineating the OSN’s indicates that the OSN ‘‘convenes the requires Services Plans to include responsibility to monitor programs of Advisory Panel on Community Support identification of the family’s current the military departments for the for Military Families with Special Needs needs, the services they receive, the assignment and support of members of in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1781c.’’ support they require, and the armed forces who are members of documentation of the support provided military families with special needs. Six commenters requested the to the family and follow-on contacts, One commenter recommended adding development of data systems to evaluate including case notes. We believe that language from the statute delineating the outcomes of DoD programs for these requirements establish an the OSN’s responsibility to monitor the children and establish a common set of appropriate baseline for Services Plans. availability and accessibility of EFMP data evaluation systems across In the realm of respite care services, programs provided by other Federal, the DoD. While no change was made to several commenters questioned the State, local, and non-governmental the final rule, the Department agrees differences in respite care hours agencies to military families with with the necessity to establish an EFMP provided by each Service, suggested that special needs. Four commenters data system to implement and record a all respite care contracts be locally recommended adding language from the set of standardized EFMP-related based, commented on difficulties statute delineating OSN’s responsibility metrics across the Department. To that enrolling in specific respite care to conduct periodic reviews of best end, DoD Instruction 1315.19 was programs and difficulties locating practices in the provision of medical modified to direct the OSN to develop quality care providers, and requested and educational services for children and implement a web-based data that families be given the option to with special needs. management system to support the select their own respite care providers While no change has been made to the EFMP with the Military Departments and utilize respite care services in the final rule, DoD Instruction 1315.19 now and directs the ASD(HA) to participate home or at activities/appointments, that explicitly states that the OSN ‘‘conducts respite care providers provide periodic reviews of best practices in the in the development and deployment of transportation and homemaking provision of services for military the system. services, and that respite care services families with special needs,’’ and Many commenters submitted be established at youth centers or other ‘‘collaborates with the Military comments noting differences and locations outside of the home. Departments to standardize EFMP inconsistencies in their experiences While no changes were made to the components as appropriate.’’ In with EFMP policies, procedures, and final rule, DoD has modified DoD addition, we believe that, by monitoring programs between different Instruction 1315.19 to read: ‘‘family the implementation of DoD Instruction installations, and across the Services. support services may include respite 1315.19, the OSN will ensure the Commenters requested that paperwork, care for family members who meet the issuance is implemented with fidelity services, and programming be made eligibility criteria, regardless of age, by all of the Services and will ensure consistent, and that families at joint according to Service-specific eligibility compliance with the issuance. Relevant bases and sister-Service locations have and guidance.’’ We believe the language has been added to DoD the same level of access to EFMP that definition of respite care services is Instruction 1315.19, which now states they would at installations operated by internal to the Department, and that OSN has the responsibility for their own Service. While the Services decisions on whether to offer respite ‘‘implementation of this part through have flexibility to implement EFMP care programs, as well as specifics as to data review and program monitoring.’’ programs in the manner they deem most Six commenters requested that the who may be a respite care provider, supportive to their unique missions and rule establish uniform benchmarks and hours of service provided, and location most effective for meeting their families’ performance goals for the identification, of service provision, are matters of needs, we agree that, to the extent policy to be determined by each Service. enrollment, and assignment coordination components of the EFMP, practicable, consistency in EFMP Questions or comments regarding policies, procedures, and programs are specific respite care programming or and implement a process for ensuring the compliance of each Service with the of benefit to enrolled families. While no benefits should be directed to the local changes were made to the final rule, EFMP Family Support Office. final rule. OSN and the Military Departments are working to standardize changes were made to DoD Instruction Section 75.10 OSN various aspects of the EFMP across DoD, 1315.19 which now indicates that the Due to the restructuring of the rule, particularly in the areas of OSN ‘‘collaborates with the Military what was § 75.10 (Office of Community identification/enrollment and Departments to standardize EFMP Support for Military Families with assignment coordination, as well as the components as appropriate.’’ We have Special Needs), now appears in DoD provision of family support. Wording also added language to DoD Instruction Instruction 1315.19. about the standardization process has 1315.19 clarifying that, in addition to One respondent requested that we been added to DoD Instruction 1315.19 discovering gaps in available services add a section to the rule reflecting the but not the final rule. In addition, we for families with special needs, the OSN description of the Director of the OSN believe OSN’s monitoring of the is responsible for coordinating with the at 10 U.S.C. 1781c(c). No change was implementation of DoD Instruction Military Departments and other DoD made to the final rule as we do not agree 1315.19 as required by language added entities to ensure standardization of that this level of specificity is required, to DoD Instruction 1315.19 will ensure EFMP policies and procedures as given that statutory requirements guide compliance with the issuance. appropriate.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3688 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

General Comments on the Proposed two programs: Military Department complaints about EFMP services. No Rule Support for Local Centers to Assist change is made to the rule, which does Three commenters asked about the Military Children with Special Needs, not require a complaint process. The inclusion of specialized programs for and the Foundation for Support of rule, however, does not prohibit the adult family members with special Military Families with Special Needs. Services from establishing complaint needs. No changes were made to the No change is being made to the rule or processes for their EFMP programs. DoD rule because it does not mandate DoD Instruction 1315.19 at this time. Instruction 1315.19 gives the Secretaries separate services for adult and child While the Secretary of Defense was of the Military Departments and the EFMP enrollees and incorporates adult given the authority to establish these Assistant Secretary of Defense for and child dependent family members programs in Section 563 of the National Manpower and Reserve Affairs the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal responsibility for ensuring that each with special needs in all aspects of the Year 2010, as amended (published as a EFMP program is effectively EFMP program, with one exception. note to 10 U.S.C. 1781c), neither implemented and monitored. We Specifically, in accordance with program has been established. Should believe the ongoing review by the OSN § 75.5(b) of this final rule, children with the Secretary choose to establish either of each Military Services’ disabilities ages birth to 21 are eligible or both of these programs, any necessary implementation of the rule will for enrollment in the EFMP on the basis rule-making associated with the determine if a DoD-level complaint of having early intervention or special programs will happen at that time. process is needed. The Department may educational needs if they have or are One commenter requested that the reconsider this issue at a later date. eligible to have an IFSP or an IEP under Overarching Coordinating Committee Several commenters recommended 32 CFR part 57. Otherwise, both adults for Military Families with Special Needs DoD centralize the EFMP rather than and children are eligible for enrollment be included in the rule. No changes allowing each Service to implement when meeting the criteria at § 75.5(a)(1) were made to the final rule. Changes their own EFMP program. Commenters through (5) in this final rule. Also, were made, however, to DoD Instruction cited uniformity of procedures and nothing in the rule prohibits the 1315.19 to express that the OSN services provided by EFMP offices, and Services from offering specialized EFMP ‘‘convenes an Overarching Coordinating equitable conditions and services for services for children or adults as Committee meeting at least once a year families as reasons for requesting a necessary to meet the needs of their to review the implementation of this centralized EFMP. No changes are made families. Please contact your local EFMP part.’’ to the rule as it sets baseline Family Support Office to determine One commenter requested the EFMP requirements for enrollment criteria for what EFMP services are available program establish summer camps, after the EFMP, assignment coordination, locally for adults, or to request services school programs, social clubs, or sports family support services, data systems, that address the concerns of adults with teams to support children with and assigns responsibility for various special needs. Online resources for disabilities and their siblings. No aspects of the EFMP program. We adults with special needs are available change is made in the rule or DoD decline to make rules restricting the at Military OneSource (http:// Instruction 1315.19, as nothing Services from developing their own www.militaryonesource.mil/). prohibits the Services from offering EFMP programs because the Services Two commenters requested EFMP these services. Several installation must have the flexibility to design materials in multiple languages. As EFMP family support offices currently programs that meet the needs of their language access requirements are sponsor activities for children with unique missions and families. outside the scope of this rule, no change disabilities and their family members on was made to the rule or DoD Instruction a regular basis, including sports events, Comments Beyond the Scope of This 1315.19. However, the DoD does social, educational, and cultural Rule provide EFMP resources in multiple activities. Please contact your local Many commenters had questions or languages. There are multiple online EFMP family support office to request or submitted suggested changes about resources in eight languages on the suggest events and activities. medical services provided by the Military OneSource website at http:// One organization requested we add Military Departments and TRICARE www.militaryonesource.mil/. language to facilitate collaboration medical policy. Questions, concerns, One commenter requested training between that organization and EFMP and suggestions included a request for videos on the EFMP and specific EFMP programs, and to give families an updated database for finding medical topics, such as required medical and information on the organization’s providers in new locations, resources educational DD Forms, special needs programs in their state. No change is available in case of the death of an programs, case management, and made to the rule or DoD Instruction EFMP member, waiting lists for medical travel. This comment did not 1315.19, as we decline to regulate EFMP specialty care providers, continuity of request a change to the regulation or office relationships with non-DoD medical care, customer service DoD instruction, but we provide the organizations or require that families concerns, pre-enrollment and following information in response: We receive materials and services prepared appointments with new care providers currently have multiple informational by outside organizations. when moving to a new region, TRICARE and training videos on a variety of The Department received several ECHO enrollment procedures, the EFMP-related topics including, but not comments that complimented or collection of data on the efficacy of limited to, online learning and videos thanked the Department for a range of TRICARE wellness programs, lapses in explaining the EFMP and providing an issues including the provision of medical services after moving, overview of early intervention services services to family members with special vaccination schedules, and transfer of (provided by the medical departments), needs, and the inclusion of mental medical records. as well as a number of webinars. They health issues. The Department This rule does not regulate TRICARE are available at: http:// appreciates the many comments programs, policies, or procedures. All www.militaryonesource.mil/. received in support of the EFMP. TRICARE related inquiries should be Three commenters requested One commenter requested we directed to the TRICARE website at additional sections to the rule regarding establish a process for receiving http://www.tricare.mil/.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3689

Also, this rule does not regulate the made in order to align with the Executive Order 13771, ‘‘Reducing provision of medical services by the definitions contained in an associated Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Military Medical Departments, and all rule, 32 CFR part 57. These edits were Costs’’ questions about medical services not made as a result of public This final rule is not subject to the provided by the Military Medical comments. Specifically, the requirements of E.O. 13771 (82 FR 9339, Departments should be directed to the administrative changes updated the February 3, 2017) because this rule is local installation MTF. definitions of Early Intervention related to agency organization, Four commenters submitted Services (EIS), Individualized Education management or personnel. comments requesting specific services Program (IEP), Related Services, and for veterans, such as access to certain Special Education to be consistent with Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ military medical facilities or EFMP 32 CFR part 57. Executive Order 13132 establishes family support services for veterans and certain requirements that an agency their families. One respondent Internal Comments must meet when it promulgates a requested that DoD ensure public proposed rule (and subsequent final schools serving military children Section 75.4(b) of the proposed rule was amended to read ‘‘assignment rule) that imposes substantial direct provide a Free Appropriate Public requirement costs on State and local process’’ in the final rule due to an Education. One respondent requested governments, preempts State law, or internal DoD comment received. This that medical services for high-risk otherwise has Federalism implications. amendment was made because the pregnancies, autism, asthma, and This rule will not have a substantial special needs of the family member mental health be made available at effect on State and local governments. every location where family members must be taken into account during the are able to accompany Service members. assignment process. If the Service Sec. 202, Public Law 104–4, ‘‘Unfunded One respondent recommended that DoD Member is not identified as having a Mandates Reform Act’’ provide educational attorneys in every family member with a special need, Section 202 of the Unfunded state to assist military families with there is no need for coordination during Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) special education mediation and due the assignment process. (Pub. L. 104–4) requires that agencies process hearings. One respondent Expected Impact of the Final Rule assess anticipated costs and benefits requested that ABA therapists be placed before issuing any rule whose mandates in every school. Two commenters The Department of Defense and the require spending in any one year of discussed service-specific housing Military Services, which are responsible $100 million in 1995 dollars, updated policies. One commenter discussed the for providing services to military annually for inflation. In 2014, that Army’s compassionate reassignment families with special needs, receive threshold is approximately $141 procedures. One commenter their funding for the Exceptional Family million. This rule will not mandate any recommended designating staff or a help Member Program from the defense-wide requirements for State, local, or tribal line to help families navigate the forms Operations and Maintenance (O&M) governments, nor will it affect private and processes followed to establish appropriation. The approximate cost for sector costs. dependency status with the Defense the Exceptional Family Member Finance and Accounting Services. Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory It should be noted that the regulation Program for FY2016 was $48,300,000. Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. 601) There is no change to program eligibility of veterans affairs and the regulation of The Department of Defense certifies educational services provided by non- or reporting requirements based on this final rule. that this rule is not subject to the DoD public schools is not within the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601) authority of the Secretary of Defense Regulatory Procedures because it would not, if promulgated, and individuals should contact a local have a significant economic impact on veterans’ affairs office to discuss Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory a substantial number of small entities. concerns. While DoD regulates the Planning and Review’’ and Executive Therefore, the Regulatory Flexibility provision of educational services by Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation Act, as amended, does not require us to DoDEA, it does not have the authority and Regulatory Review’’ prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis. to regulate educational services provided by State and local Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork governments. To address concerns with direct agencies to assess all costs and Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) non-DoD schools, please contact the benefits of available regulatory It has been determined that 32 CFR local school district administration. The alternatives and, if regulation is part 75 does impose reporting or allocation of medical resources, legal necessary, to select regulatory recordkeeping requirements under the staffing, and school staffing within the approaches that maximize net benefits Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DoD is beyond the scope of this (including potential economic, These reporting requirements have been regulation. Local Military Treatment environmental, public health and safety approved by the Office of Management Facilities can discuss medical effects, distribute impacts, and equity). and Budget and assigned OMB Control resourcing, and local DoDEA schools Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the Number 0704–0411, titled Exceptional can discuss school-based services in importance of quantifying both costs Family Member Program. DoD schools. and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting System of Record Notices (SORN) and Administrative Changes flexibility. This final rule has been Privacy Impact Assessments (PIA) After the proposed rule was published designated a ‘‘significant regulatory The applicable SORNs and PIAs for in the Federal Register and the public action,’’ although not economically the Exceptional Family Member comments were adjudicated, four significant, under section 3(f) of Program are: administrative edits were made. The Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, 1. DMDC 02 DoD. The system name edits pertained to the Definitions the rule has been reviewed by the Office is the Defense Enrollment Eligibility section (§ 75.3) of the rule and were of Management and Budget (OMB). Reporting Systems (DEERS) (available at

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3690 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

http://dpcld.defense.gov/Privacy/ referral, evaluation, eligibility, and the Identification/Enrollment and SORNsIndex/DOD-wide-SORN-Article- service plan data for children with Assignment Coordination components View/Article/627618/dmdc-02-dod/). special needs who are eligible for MHS of the EFMP. The Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) services under IDEA. This system is a Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ for this program is available at https:// distributed data collection application www.dmdc.osd.mil/documents/PIA_ with database servers distributed at Executive Order 13132 establishes DEERS.pdf. various Military Treatment Facilities certain requirements that an agency This system collects demographic (MTFs) located within the Continental must meet when it promulgates a information on DoD beneficiaries, United States (CONUS) and Outside the proposed rule (and subsequent final including Service members and Continental United States (OCONUS). rule) that imposes substantial direct dependents, to provide a database for SNPMIS is currently used in 45 EDIS requirement costs on State and local determining eligibility for DoD clinics at Army, Navy, and Air Force governments, preempts State law, or entitlements and privileges and support installations worldwide. otherwise has Federalism implications. DoD health care management programs 4. DPR 34 DoD. The system name is This proposed rule will not have a through the Defense Health Agency. the Defense Civilian Personnel Data substantial effect on State and local This demographic information is used System (available at http:// governments. to verify Service affiliation for the dpcld.defense.gov/Privacy/ EFMP. SORNsIndex/DOD-wide-SORN-Article- List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 75 2. EDHA 07 DoD. The system name is View/Article/570697/dpr-34-dod/. Children, Family health, Special the Military Health Information System The Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) needs. (available at http://dpcld.defense.gov/ for this program is available at http:// ■ Accordingly, 32 CFR part 75 is added Privacy/SORNsIndex/DOD-wide-SORN- www.dhra.mil/webfiles/docs/Privacy/ to read as follows: Article-View/Article/570672/edha-07/). PIA/DHRA.XX.DCPAS.DCPDS.4. The Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) 12.2013.pdf. PART 75—EXCEPTIONAL FAMILY for this program is available at https:// The Defense Civilian Personnel Data MEMBER PROGRAM (EFMP) health.mil/Reference-Center/Forms/ System collects personnel information 2016/06/23/MHSMDR. on civilian employees to provide Subpart A—General The Military Health Information support to the DoD civilian workforce. Sec. System collects information regarding This personnel information is used to 75.1 Purpose. medical care at Military Treatment document staff processing of EFMP 75.2 Applicability. Facilities (MTFs), including beneficiary paperwork. 75.3 Definitions. eligibility and enrollment in health 5. DoDEA 26. The system name is the Subpart B—Policy programs within the DoD, medical DoDEA Educational Records system 75.4 Policy. records, and diagnosis procedures, to (available at http://dpcld.defense.gov/ support benefits determinations for DoD Privacy/SORNsIndex/DOD-wide-SORN- Subpart C—Procedures healthcare programs. This medical Article-View/Article/570573/dodea-26/. 75.5 DoD criteria for identifying family information is used to determine the The Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) members with special needs. needs of military families during the for this program is available at http:// 75.6 Civilian employees on overseas Identification/Enrollment and www.dodea.edu/upload/pia_SIRs_ assignment. Assignment Coordination components AIRs.pdf. Authority: 10 U.S.C. 1781c. of the EFMP. The DoDEA Educational Records 3. EDHA 16 DoD. The system name is system maintains student educational Subpart A—General the Special Needs Program Management records to inform the management, § 75.1 Purpose. Information System (SNPMIS) Records funding, and tracking of DoD schools. (available at http://dpcld.defense.gov/ This information is used to determine This part: Privacy/SORNsIndex/DODwideSORN the educational needs of children (a) Provides guidance and prescribes ArticleView/tabid/6797/Article/570679/ during the Identification/Enrollment procedures for: edha-16-dod.aspx). and Assignment Coordination (1) Identifying a family member with The Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) components of the EFMP. special needs who is eligible for services for this program is available at https:// 6. DoDEA 29. The system name is the as defined in this part. health.mil/Reference-Center/Forms/ DoDEA Non-DoD Schools Program (2) Processing DoD civilian employees 2015/12/01/PIA-Summary-for-Special- system (available at http:// who have family members with special Needs-Program-Management- dpcld.defense.gov/Privacy/ needs for an overseas assignment. Information-System_SNPMIS. SORNsIndex/DOD-wide-SORN-Article- (b) Does not create any rights or The Special Needs Program View/Article/570576/dodea-29/). remedies in addition to those already Management Information System The Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) otherwise existing in law or regulation, (SNPMIS) provides access to a for this program is available at http:// and may not be relied upon by any comprehensive program of therapy, www.dodea.edu/upload/pia_SIRs_ person, organization, or other entity to medical support, and social services for AIRs.pdf. allege a denial of such rights or young Department of Defense (DoD) The DoDEA Non-DoD Schools remedies. Military Health System (MHS) Program system maintains the beneficiaries with special needs. educational records for all students who § 75.2 Applicability. SNPMIS is the Military Health System receive non-DoD schooling funded by This part applies to: (MHS) automated information system the DoD to track obligations and (a) Service members who have family designed to ensure the DoD meets the invoices for transportation, tuition, and members with special needs as unique information requirements tutoring payments and to determine described in this part. associated with implementation of the eligibility and enrollment by grade. This (b) All DoD civilian employees in Individuals with Disabilities Education information is used to determine the overseas locations and selectees for Act (IDEA). SNPMIS captures records educational needs of children during overseas positions who have family

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3691

members with special needs as employee for the purposes of § 75.6 of Special education. Specially designed described in this part. this part only. instruction (including instruction in Family support services. Encompasses physical education) provided at no cost § 75.3 Definitions. the non-clinical case management to the parent to meet the unique needs Unless otherwise noted, these terms delivery of information and referral for of a child with a disability, conducted and their definitions are for the purpose families with special needs, including in the classroom, in the home, in of this part. the development and maintenance of an hospitals and institutions, and in other Assistive technology device. Any item, individualized Services Plan (SP). settings. piece of equipment, or product system, Individualized Education Program Special needs. Includes special whether acquired commercially off the (IEP). A written document that is medical and educational needs of family shelf modified, or customized, that is developed, reviewed, and revised at a members who meet the DoD criteria for used to increase, maintain, or improve meeting of the Case Study Committee, enrollment in the EFMP as found in functional capabilities of individuals identifying the required components of § 75.5 of this part. with disabilities. the individualized education program Specialty care. Specialized health Assistive technology service. Any for a child with a disability. care required for health maintenance service that directly assists an Individualized Family Service Plan and provided by a physician whose individual with a disability in the (IFSP). A written document identifying training focused primarily in a specific selection, acquisition, or use of an the specially designed services for an field, such as neurology, cardiology, assistive technology device. infant or toddler with a disability and rheumatology, dermatology, oncology, CONUS. The 48 contiguous states of orthopedics, or ophthalmology. the United States, excluding Alaska, the family of such infant or toddler. Hawaii, and U.S. territories or other Overseas. Any location outside of the Subpart B—Policy overseas insular areas of the United 48 contiguous United States including States. Alaska, Hawaii, and all U.S. Territories § 75.4 Policy. Early Intervention Services (EIS). or other overseas insular areas of the It is DoD policy that: Developmental services for infants and United States. (a) The EFMP identifies family toddlers with disabilities, as defined in Related services. Transportation and members with special needs, enrolls 32 CFR part 57, that are provided under such developmental, corrective, and sponsors in the program, and the supervision of a Military other supportive services required to participates in the coordination of Department, including evaluation, IFSP assist a child with a disability to benefit assignments for active duty Service development and revision, and service from special education under the child’s members in order for the special needs coordination provided at no cost to the IEP. The term includes services or of family members to be considered child’s parents. consults in the areas of speech-language during the assignment process. Evaluations. Medical, psychological, pathology, audiology services, (b) Active duty Service members and educational assessments required to interpreting services, psychological whose families include a member with define a medical or educational services, physical and occupational special needs must enroll in the EFMP condition suspected after a screening therapy, recreation (including to ensure their family member’s special procedure. therapeutic recreation), social work needs are considered during the Family member. A dependent as services, school nurse services designed assignment process. defined by 37 U.S.C. 401, to include a to enable a child with a disability to (c) The special needs of a civilian spouse and certain children of a Service receive a Free Appropriate Public employee’s family member will not be member, who is eligible to receive a Education (FAPE) as described in the considered in the selection of a civilian DoD identification card, medical care in child’s IEP, early identification and for an overseas position. a DoD Military Treatment Facility, and assessment of disabilities in children, Subpart C—Procedures command sponsorship or DoD- counseling services (including sponsored travel. To the extent rehabilitation counseling), orientation § 75.5 DoD criteria for identifying family authorized by law and in accordance and mobility services, and medical members with special needs. with Service implementing guidance, services for diagnostic or evaluative (a) Special medical needs. Individuals the term may also include other purposes. who meet one or more of the criteria in nondependent family members of a Related services assigned to the this section will be identified as a Service member. For the purposes of military medical departments overseas. family member with special medical § 75.6 of this part only, this definition Services provided by Educational and needs: also includes the dependents of a Developmental Intervention Services to (1) Potentially life-threatening civilian employee on an overseas Department of Defense Dependent conditions or chronic (duration of 6 assignment, or being considered for an School students for the development or months or longer) medical or physical overseas assignment, who are, or will implementation of an IEP, which are conditions requiring follow-up care be, eligible to receive a DoD necessary for the student to benefit from from a primary care manager (to include identification card during that overseas special education. Those services may pediatricians) more than once a year or assignment. To the extent authorized by include medical services for diagnostic specialty care. law and in accordance with Service or evaluative purposes, social work, (2) Current and chronic (duration of 6 implementing guidance, the term may community health nursing, nutrition, months or longer) mental health also include other nondependent family occupational therapy, physical therapy, conditions (such as bi-polar, conduct, members of a civilian employee on an audiology, ophthalmology, and major affective, thought, or personality overseas assignment, or being psychological testing and therapy. disorders); inpatient or intensive considered for an overseas assignment. Responsible military department. The (greater than one visit monthly for more Family member travel. Refers to Military Department responsible for than 6 months) outpatient mental health family member permanent change of providing EIS or related services in the service within the last 5 years; or station authorization that is requested geographic areas assigned under 32 CFR intensive mental health services by a Service member or civilian part 57. required at the present time. This

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3692 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

includes medical care from any (b) Employee rights. (1) The DoD (iii) Include the following statements provider, including a primary care Components must select civilian in recruitment information: manager. employees for specific positions based (A) If an employee brings a child to (3) A diagnosis of asthma or other on job requirement and merit factors in an overseas location and that child is respiratory-related diagnosis with accordance with 5 U.S.C. 2302, and 29 entitled to attend a DoD school on a chronic recurring symptoms that U.S.C. 791 through 794d. Selection for space-required basis in accordance with involves one or more of the following: an overseas position must not be DoDEA Regulation 1342.13 (available at (i) Scheduled use of inhaled or oral influenced by the special needs of a http://www.dodea.edu/aboutDoDEA/ anti-inflammatory agents or civilian employee’s family member(s), upload/1342_13.pdf), DoDEA and the bronchodilators. or any other prohibited factor. Military Department responsible for (ii) History of emergency room use or (2) The civilian employee or selectee providing related services will ensure clinic visits for acute asthma will be given comprehensive medical, that the child, if eligible for special exacerbations or other respiratory- dental, and educational information education, receives a free appropriate related diagnosis within the last year. about the overseas community where public education, including special (iii) History of one or more the position is located to help the education and related services pursuant hospitalizations for asthma, or other employee make an informed choice to 32 CFR part 57. respiratory-related diagnosis within the about accepting the position. (B) If an employee brings an infant or past 5 years. (4) A diagnosis of attention deficit (3) Refer to the Joint Travel toddler (up to 3 years of age) to an disorder or attention deficit Regulations (available at https:// overseas location, and that infant or hyperactivity disorder that involves one www.defensetravel.dod.mil/Docs/ toddler, but for the child’s age, is or more of the following: perdiem/JTR.pdf) for PCS travel and entitled to attend the DoDEA on a space- (i) Includes a co-morbid psychological transportation allowances for eligible required basis in accordance with diagnosis. civilian employees and their family DoDEA Regulation 1342.13, then the (ii) Requires multiple medications, members. Military Department responsible for EIS psycho-pharmaceuticals (other than (4) Civilian employees or selectees will provide the infant or toddler with stimulants) or does not respond to assigned to positions overseas are the required EIS in accordance with the normal doses of medication. generally responsible for obtaining eligibility criteria consistent with 32 (iii) Requires management and medical and dental services and paying CFR part 57. treatment by a mental health provider for such services, except services (C) If an employee brings a family (e.g., psychiatrist, psychologist, social provided pursuant to 32 CFR part 57. member to an overseas location who worker or psychiatric nurse Their family members may have access requires medical or dental care, then the practitioner). to the MHS on a space-available, employee will be responsible for (iv) Requires the involvement of a reimbursable basis only, except for obtaining and paying for such care. specialty consultant, other than a services pursuant to 32 CFR part 57. Access for civilian employees and their primary care manager, more than twice (i) DoDEA and the Military Medical families to military medical and dental a year on a chronic basis. Department responsible for the treatment facilities is on a space- (v) Requires modifications of the provision of related services to support available and reimbursable basis only. educational curriculum or the use of DoDEA at the duty station are required (2) When the gaining human behavioral management staff. to evaluate school-aged children (ages 3 resources representatives process a (5) A chronic condition that requires: through 21 years, inclusive) eligible for civilian for an overseas position where (i) Adaptive equipment (such as an enrollment in a DoDEA school on a family member travel is authorized at apnea home monitor, home nebulizer, space- required basis and provide them government expense, then they must ask wheelchair, custom-fit splints/braces/ with the special education and related the selectee to determine whether a orthotics (not over-the-counter), hearing services included in their IEPs in family member has special needs, using aids, home oxygen therapy, home accordance with 32 CFR part 57. the criteria provided in § 75.5 of this ventilator, etc.). (ii) The Military Departments are part. All selectees must be asked only (ii) Assistive technology devices (such required to provide infants and toddlers after they have been notified of their as communication devices) or services. (from birth up to 3 years of age, selection in accordance with 29 U.S.C. (iii) Environmental or architectural inclusive) eligible for enrollment in a 791 through 794d, and 29 CFR 1630.14. considerations (such as medically DoDEA school on a space-required basis If the selectee indicates that a family required limited numbers of steps, with the EIS identified in the IFSPs in member has special needs: wheelchair accessibility, or housing accordance with 32 CFR part 57. (i) The DoD civilian human resources modifications and air conditioning). (b) Special educational needs. Family (c) Processing a civilian employee for representatives may not coerce or members of active duty Service an overseas position. (1) When pressure the selectee to decline the job members (regardless of location) and recruiting for an overseas position, DoD offer in light of that information. civilian employees appointed to an human resources representatives will: (ii) The selectee may voluntarily overseas location eligible for enrollment (i) Provide information on the forward to the civilian human resources in a DoDEA school on a space-required requirements of this part related to representative completed DD Forms basis will be identified as having special civilian employees or applicants for 2792 or 2792–1 for each family member educational needs if they have, or are employment, including employee rights with special needs to provide found eligible for, either an IFSP or an provided in DoD Instruction 1315.19. information on the availability of IEP under 32 CFR part 57. (ii) Provide information on the medical and educational services. DD availability of medical and educational Form 2792–1 must be submitted if the § 75.6 Civilian employees on overseas services, including a point of contact for selectee intends to enroll his or her assignment. the applicant to ask about specific child in a school funded by the DoD or (a) Vocabulary. Section 75.3 provides special needs. This information must be a school in which DoD is responsible for definitions of ‘‘family member’’ that contained in any document used for paying the tuition for a space-required apply only to this section. recruitment for overseas positions. family member.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3693

(3) The gaining human resources option will allow the Office to examine option and described key aspects of the activity will coordinate with the each work for copyrightable authorship, proposal. First, applicants would be appropriate military medical and create a more robust record of the claim, required to use a new online application educational personnel on availability of and improve the overall efficiency of the specifically designed for registering services and inform the selectee in registration process. In addition, the groups of unpublished works, in lieu of writing of the availability of medical, final rule makes certain technical the Standard Application or a paper educational, and early intervention amendments to the regulations application. Second, applicants would resources and services to allow the governing the group registration option be required to upload an electronic copy civilian employee to make an informed for photographs. or phonorecord of each work, in lieu of choice whether to accept the position. DATES: Effective March 15, 2019. providing a physical deposit. Third, the The notice will include: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: filing fee for this option would be $55, (i) Comprehensive medical, dental, Robert J. Kasunic, Associate Register of the same fee that currently applies to and educational information on the Copyrights and Director of Registration individual works claims submitted on overseas community where the position Policy and Practice by email at rkas@ the Standard Application. Fourth, is located. copyright.gov; Erik Bertin, Deputy applicants could include no more than (ii) A description of the local DoDEA Director of Registration Policy and five works in each claim, with a limited facility and programs, specifying the Practice by email at ebertin@ exception to allow applicants to register programs for children with special copyright.gov; or Mark Gray, Attorney- up to five sound recordings together education needs. Advisor, by email at mgray@ with the musical work, dramatic work, (iii) A description of the local EIS copyright.gov; all can be reached by or literary work embodied in each available for infants and toddlers with telephone at 202–707–8040. recording. Fifth, the author and disabilities. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: claimant for each work in the group (iv) A statement indicating that the must be the same. Sixth, the works must lack of EIS or special education I. Background be registered in the same administrative resources (including related services The Copyright Act authorizes the class, and the authorship statement for assigned to the military medical Register of Copyrights to specify by each work must be exactly the same. departments) cannot serve as a basis for regulation the administrative classes of Seventh, the proposed rule confirmed the denial of family travel at works available for the purpose of that a registration for a group of government expense and required seeking a registration and the nature of unpublished works will cover each services will be provided even if a local the deposits required for each class. The work in the group and each one would program is not currently established in Register also has discretion to allow be registered as a separate work. Finally, accordance with 32 CFR part 57. groups of related works to be registered it clarified that applicants could not (d) Use of EFMP Family Support with one application and one filing fee, assert a claim in the selection, Services. Civilian employees may utilize a procedure known as ‘‘group coordination, or arrangement of the EFMP family support services on a registration.’’ 1 Pursuant to this works within the group, and that the space-available basis. authority, the Register has issued group as a whole will not be considered Dated: February 7, 2019. regulations permitting the Copyright a compilation, a collective work, or a Office to issue group registrations for Aaron T. Siegel, derivative work. certain limited categories of works, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison The Office received 113 comments in provided that certain conditions have response to the NPRM, discussed in Officer, Department of Defense. 2 been met. more detail below. The majority of [FR Doc. 2019–02107 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] On October 12, 2017, the Office comments were submitted by BILLING CODE 5001–06–P issued a notice of proposed rulemaking individuals, including photographers, (NPRM) proposing to create a new group illustrators, graphic designers, and other registration option for unpublished visual artists. The Office also received LIBRARY OF CONGRESS works, labeled ‘‘GRUW,’’ to replace a comments from (1) Author Services, longstanding registration Inc., representing the literary, theatrical, Copyright Office accommodation known as the and musical works of the late L. Ron ‘‘unpublished collection’’ option.3 Hubbard; (2) the law firm of Browning- 37 CFR Parts 201 and 202 Applicants have been able to use the Smith, which represents artists, [Docket No. 2017–15] unpublished collection option to register an unlimited number of sculptors, and illustrators; (3) the Group Registration of Unpublished unpublished works with one Copyright Alliance; (4) the Graphic Works application and filing fee.4 The Artists Guild, Inc.; (5) the Kernochan regulation governing the existing option, Center for Law, Media and the Arts at AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library however, was based on longstanding Columbia Law School (‘‘Kernochan of Congress. Office practices, and it was not Center’’); (6) Science Fiction and ACTION: Final rule. specifically adopted under the Office’s Fantasy Writers of America, Inc. authority to issue group registrations (‘‘SFWA’’), American Society of SUMMARY: The U.S. Copyright Office is under section 408(c)(1) of the Copyright Journalists and Authors (‘‘ASJA’’), and modernizing its practices and Act. The National Writers Union (‘‘NWU’’) procedures to increase the efficiency The NPRM explained the rationale for (collectively the ‘‘SFWA Commenters’’); and quality of the registration process. replacing the unpublished collection (7) NWU, ASJA, SFWA, and the As part of this effort, this final rule option with a new group registration Textbook & Academic Authors establishes a new group registration Association (collectively the ‘‘NWU option for a limited number of 1 See 17 U.S.C. 408(c)(1). Commenters’’); and (8) The Authors unpublished works, replacing the prior 2 See generally 37 CFR 202.3(b)(5), 202.4. Guild, Inc., SFWA, The Association of accommodation for ‘‘unpublished 3 See 82 FR 47415 (Oct. 12, 2017). Garden Communicators, Society of collections.’’ The new group registration 4 37 CFR 202.3(b)(4)(i)(B). Children’s Book Writers and Illustrators,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3694 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

and Songwriters Guild of America, Inc. Services—supported the five-work limit. group registration option,15 and is not (collectively the ‘‘Authors Guild While some of the commenters limited to certain kinds of works. These Commenters’’).5 sympathized with the Office’s rationale features have ‘‘always made it an oddity While no commenter fully opposed for limiting the number of works in Copyright Office practice’’ 16 and the Office’s proposal to eliminate the allowable in each claim, they contested complicated the Office’s efforts to unpublished collections option, nearly the proposed limit. Several suggested efficiently administer the registration all objected to the proposed limit on the that the proposal was unfair, given that system. number of works that may be included photographers may register up to 750 While the Office considered in each claim.6 Another common unpublished photos with one eliminating the unpublished collections concern was the perceived difficulty of application, while other creators would option entirely, it ultimately determined determining whether a particular work be limited to five.9 The Copyright that creating a group registration option is published or unpublished, especially Alliance, Graphic Artists Guild, and for unpublished works would be for works distributed online. Those Authors Guild Commenters, and several beneficial for a particular class of concerns are discussed in more detail individuals argued that it would be cost- copyright owners: ‘‘[i]ndividual creators below. prohibitive for authors who create a or small businesses who might not Having carefully considered each of large volume of material to file multiple otherwise use the more expensive the comments, the Office now issues a applications to register their works, and standard registration application to final rule that closely follows the suggested the limit would discourage register their unpublished works on an proposed rule, with some modifications. authors from seeking registration.10 individual basis.’’ 17 The group First, the final rule increases the number As an alternative, one commenter registration option aims to do that, of works that may be included in each suggested a limit of 20 works would be without undermining the general rule of submission from five to ten. The final appropriate for claims involving sound ‘‘one work per registration.’’ rule also makes other minor recordings and musical works, as the After carefully reviewing the adjustments, including clarifying that average compact disc can hold up to 20 comments and weighing the issues applicants must obtain guidance from songs.11 But the Authors Guild involved, the Office has decided to the Office of Registration Policy & Commenters encouraged the Office to increase the limit on the number of Practice before correcting or amplifying allow ‘‘at least several hundred in the works that can be included in the group the information in a registration for a case of text-based works, perhaps more from five to ten. As stated in the NPRM, group of unpublished works and making depending on the nature of the work,’’ the Office is committed to conducting a several technical amendments to or preferably ‘‘all works created in a complete and thorough examination of streamline group registration of calendar quarter.’’ 12 each work that is submitted under this 18 photographs by removing some prior As an initial matter, the Office group registration option. To maintain technical limitations. emphasizes that the general rule reasonable fees for this service, this requires each individual work—whether requires an appropriate limit on the II. The Final Rule unpublished or not—to be submitted number of works included in each A. The Number of Works in the Group with a separate registration application claim. The final rule also provides a and a separate fee.13 The Standard and limited exception for sound recordings, The NPRM proposed to limit the Single Applications can be used to allowing applicants to include up to ten number of works that may be included register individual works. The Office sound recordings in each claim, together in each claim to five works. The Office has adopted certain narrow exceptions with the musical work, dramatic work, acknowledged that this would be a to this general rule, where it has or literary work embodied in each significant change, given that applicants determined that, absent the ability to recording. currently may register an unlimited file multiple works on one application In increasing the limit, the Office number of works as an unpublished with one filing fee, registration would considered several factors. First, the rule collection. The Office explained that not be made. In nearly every such must anticipate the amount of effort limiting the number of works in the circumstance, the Office has created a required to examine the wide-range of group would allow the Office to group registration option for a particular claims that may be included in this efficiently examine each work for kind of work—e.g., serials, newspapers, group. As noted, under the GRUW copyrightable authorship and improve photographs.14 But the existing option, applicants may register nearly the quality of the public registration unpublished collections option is not a any type of work.19 But as the Authors record.7 Guild Commenters acknowledged, the A majority of commenters objected to at 3; Final Rule: Group Registration of Photographs, amount of time needed to examine each this proposal. Only two organizations— 83 FR 2542 (Jan. 18, 2018). 8 the Kernochan Center and Author 9 See, e.g., Browning-Smith Comment at 1; NWU 15 See 82 FR at 47416. et al. Comment at 5; Judy Sorrels Comment at 1; 16 Id. 5 All of the comments received in response to the Benjamin Hummel Comment at 1; Cherish Flieder 17 See 82 FR at 47418. Comment at 1. NPRM can be found on the Copyright Office’s 18 The commenters supported this objective. For 10 website at https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/ See, e.g., Authors Guild et al. Comment at 4– example, the Authors Guild Commenters group-unpublished/. 5; Copyright Alliance Comment at 2; Graphics acknowledged that examining each work and 6 Though most commenters did not support Artists Guild Comment at 2; Barbara Tourtillotte documenting its findings in the record ‘‘will retaining the unpublished collections option on its Comment at 1; Megan D. Comment at 1; Laura facilitate licensing of works while reducing the own merits, the Authors Guild Commenters Matthews Comment at 1. potential for works to become orphaned.’’ Authors requested that unpublished collections remain a 11 Sergey Vernyuk Comment at 1. Guild et al. Comment at 4. registration option if the five-work limit is not 12 Authors Guild et al. Comment at 6. 19 The Office explained in the NPRM that dramatically increased. Authors Guild et al. 13 See U.S. Copyright Office, Compendium of U.S. compilations, collective works, databases, and Comment at 3. Copyright Office Practices, Third Edition sec. 511 websites will not be eligible for this group 7 82 FR at 47417. (‘‘As a general rule, a registration covers one registration option, because they typically contain 8 The Kernochan Center supported the proposal individual work, and an applicant should prepare multiple works of authorship. Similarly, based on the (correct) assumption that the limit a separate application, filing fee, and deposit for architectural works cannot be registered with this would not apply to unpublished photographs, each work that is submitted for registration.’’) option, because the regulations expressly prohibit which are eligible for registration under a separate (‘‘Compendium’’). the Office from registering multiple architectural group registration option. Kernochan Ctr. Comment 14 See generally 37 CFR 202.4. works with one application. 82 FR at 47417 n.6.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3695

work for copyrightable authorship, will increases the number of works application.24 The Office is also vary depending on the ‘‘class and nature permitted on one application, the preparing a proposed group option for of the work.’’ 20 For example, sound Office’s examination costs will increase musical works and sound recordings recordings, musical works, audiovisual commensurately. Indeed, as the Authors included as part of a music album.25 works, and choreographic works take Guild Commenters acknowledged, the These separate proposals should significantly more time to examine than resources required to adequately address some of the concerns raised by literary or photographic works, because examine an application involving many commenters about the limit for this each file must be opened, buffered, and different works ‘‘cannot be supported unpublished option.26 played to determine if the work contains with the fee for a single registration.’’ 22 The Office similarly recognizes that a sufficient amount of creative Those costs must be covered in some visual artists other than photographers expression. An examiner can more fashion, likely by raising the fee for are often prolific, and the comments easily review a large set of photographs GRUW applications. But that result provided useful information about the for copyrightable authorship than a would discriminate against creators needs of these artists and the volume of large quantity of software or other visual trying to register relatively few works, material they typically create.27 The works. These important differences since the same fee would apply whether comments suggest that—from an artist between claims involving unpublished creators register 5, 10, 20, or 100 works. perspective—a group option for graphic photographs and other types of works In light of these considerations, the and other visual art works could be justify differential treatment in Office has determined that limiting the limited to between 20–100 works, but registration.21 Because the GRUW GRUW application to ten copyrighted the Office does not have currently registration option will not be limited in works strikes the appropriate balance. sufficient information on the length of the categories of works that can be The Office recognizes that applicants time that would be needed to examine included, the GRUW option instead previously submitted dozens, hundreds, these types of works if they were accommodates the full range of or even thousands of works through the grouped together.28 Consequently, the potential categories of works and unpublished collections option, and Office will monitor the amount of time resource demands on the Office. that going forward, some applicants will needed to examine visual art claims Second, the Office must consider the need to file multiple applications submitted under GRUW. The Office will impact of the group option on the instead of registering all of their works use that information to determine overall registration scheme, in light of with one submission. The Office takes whether it would be appropriate to current staffing levels and the seriously the additional cost and burden create a separate group registration capabilities of the current registration this may impose, especially on option for visual art works other than system. In contrast to claims involving individual filers and small businesses. photographs. a single work, claims involving dozens, But the Office never intended B. Distinguishing Between Published hundreds, or even thousands of unpublished collections claims to and Unpublished Works unpublished works may require several include such a large quantity of works, hours or more to complete. Allowing and this new limit is necessary to The final rule confirms that this group more than ten works to be registered ensure that the Office can reasonably registration option may only be used to with one application and one basic and efficiently fulfill its statutory register unpublished works. The Office filing fee would burden the Office’s obligations to ensure that each work recognizes that applicants may struggle resources, and the additional workload constitutes copyrightable subject matter with determining whether a work is associated with those claims would and meets the other legal and formal published or unpublished, and this have an adverse effect on pendency requirements for registration. determination can be less than times for other types of works While the Office has determined that straightforward in many instances. But throughout the Registration Program. ten is the most appropriate limit for the ‘‘publication’’ is a statutorily defined Third, and relatedly, the Office must GRUW option, it will continue term, and the Office is required under account for the financial impact of exploring whether additional group section 409 to ask for the publication permitting a greater number of works to options (or other accommodations) are status of works on the registration be filed on one application with one necessary to ensure that the standard filing fee. In seeking an increase in the rule of one application per work does 24 83 FR 65612 (Dec. 21, 2018). 25 number of works filed in a single GRUW not drive certain creators to forgo See Update to Compendium of U.S. Copyright 23 Office Practices, 82 FR 45625, 45628 (Sept. 29, application, commenters presumably registration altogether. For example, 2017) (explaining plans in response to comments request that the Office maintain the since the proposed GRUW option was regarding registering music on an album). same fee. There is no fiscally published, the Office not only finalized 26 See, e.g., Sergey Vernyuk Comment at 1 responsible way to do that. If the Office its proposed rule regarding group (suggesting raising the GRUW limit to 20 works to registration of published and allow for group registration of ‘‘an unpublished CD’s-worth of music’’); Copyright Alliance 20 Authors Guild et al. Comment at 4 & n.2. unpublished photographs, with a limit Comment at 2 (outlining needs for a group 21 Many comments pointed to the difference in of up to 750 photographs per registration for musical works and sound recordings the number of works registrable under GRUW and application, it also issued a separate as well as new options for bloggers and other online the 750-work limit for group registrations of NPRM proposing to create a group creators); Authors Guild et al. Comment at 8 photographs. See, e.g., Cherish Flieder Comments (requesting creation of additional group registration wat 1 (pointing to disparity and requesting equal registration option for qualifying short options for various classes of works). rules for all visual works); Browning-Smith online literary works; under that 27 See, e.g., Rachel Fritz Comment at 1; Barbara Comment at 1 (characterizing 750-work limit for proposed rule, applicants may submit Tourtillotte Comment at 1; Shari Warren Comment photographs as ‘‘special treatment’’). But other up to 50 works with the same at 1; Jeffrey West. comments support the Office’s flexibility in crafting 28 See, e.g., Jeffrey West Comment at 1–2 registration options tailored to the nuances of the (estimating creation of fine art works to be several works at issue. See Jeffrey West Comment at 1–2 22 Authors Guild et al. Comment at 3. hundred images per year and suggesting limit of (proposing higher limit for illustrations, graphic 23 See 82 FR at 47416–17 (citing H.R. Rep. No. 250–300); Benjamin Hummel Comment at 1 designs, and fine artwork based on the ‘‘reasonable 94–1476, at 154 (1976), as reprinted in 1976 (children’s book illustrators generally require number of images’’ created in a professional U.S.C.C.A.N. 5659, 5770; S. Rep. No. 94–473, at 136 creation of 20–40 images); Graphic Artists Guild practice); Graphic Artists Guild Comment at 1–2 (1975) (regulatory authority to create group Comment at 1 (citing survey that creating logo (member survey showed artists generate average of registration of related works is because such options results in average of 15 works and noting that some 15 works in the process of designing a logo). are ‘‘needed and important’’). logos require close to 50 sketches).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3696 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

application.29 As noted in the uncertainty regarding the definition of be included in each claim. Browning- Compendium and other publications, publication.36 Indeed, since this NPRM Smith and the Copyright Alliance urged the applicant is responsible for was published, the Office has adopted a the Office to offer a sliding fee schedule, determining whether a work is final rule regarding group registration where the amount of the fee would vary unpublished, and the Office generally options for published and unpublished depending on the number of works accepts that determination unless it is photographs that grappled with many of submitted.41 The SFWA Commenters contradicted by information contained the same issues.37 But the Office noted that the Office uses a similar within the registration materials.30 appreciates that applicants have raised sliding-fee structure for recordation, Several commenters expressed important questions about their where remitters pay extra for each concern about this requirement. The challenges in applying the definition of additional group of ten titles listed in Copyright Alliance, Graphic Artists publication, particularly in the context the document.42 The Copyright Alliance Guild, and Authors Guild Commenters of works that are only made available also encouraged the Office to adopt a noted that applicants find it difficult to online, and plans to issue a notice of subscription-based fee that would allow determine whether a work is published inquiry to solicit comments regarding applicants to pay a periodic fee for or unpublished, especially for works issues related to online publication, and registering all the works they produce distributed online.31 To that end, the ultimately to provide additional during a given timeframe.43 The Office Graphic Artists Guild requested that the guidance for applicants. Meanwhile, the welcomes these suggestions and will Office issue further guidance ‘‘on what Office believes that prompt take them into account in developing constitutes publication for online promulgation of this final rule will aid the business requirements for its next works.’’ 32 Similarly, the Authors Guild the Office in fulfilling its statutory generation registration system.44 The Commenters suggested that the obligations and administering the current registration system, however, ‘‘explanations of the meaning of copyright registration system. does not permit the Office to adopt ‘publication’ and associated terms’’ in these types of alternative fee structures. the Compendium ‘‘requires a knowledge C. Filing Fee of copyright law that few applicants’’ The NPRM proposed a $55 filing fee D. Other Eligibility Requirements possess, particularly with respect to for registering a group of unpublished While the remaining eligibility ‘‘works disseminated online.’’ 33 The works, the same fee that currently requirements sparked little or no Authors Guild Commenters applies to clams submitted on the opposition, the Office offers the acknowledged that the Office ‘‘cannot Standard Application.38 The Office following points of clarification: unilaterally amend the definition of stated that it would monitor the cost of The final rule provides that the works ‘publication’ ’’ because it is ‘‘embodied’’ examining these claims once the final must be registered in the same in the Copyright Act.34 But they rule had been implemented. Since the administrative class, and the authorship suggested that the Office could NPRM, the Office has conducted a fee statement for each work must be exactly promulgate a regulatory definition for study that proposed a filing fee of $85 the same. The Authors Guild ‘‘online publication’’ through an for each GRUW submission, the same as Commenters and the Kernochan Center administrative rulemaking, which the fee that currently applies to claims supported this idea, noting that it would would give interested parties the involving the group registration option eliminate the need to have examiners in opportunity to ‘‘weigh in and ensure for contributions to periodicals.39 Until different divisions review the same that all issues are properly vetted,’’ or the proposed fees in the fee study go works.45 By contrast, the Graphic Artists perhaps replace the ‘‘published/ into effect, the Office has adopted the Guild expressed concern that it would unpublished distinction’’ with a noticed $55 fee for GRUW claims. In prevent visual artists from registering ‘‘concept such as ‘disseminated to the this regard, the Office notes that the unpublished works that contain public’ or ‘made available to the GRUW option updates and replaces the multiple forms of authorship, such as public.’ ’’ 35 unpublished collection option, which children’s books, graphic novels, comics In light of section 409’s statutory was also available for the same $55 fee and cartoons, or illustrated short stories requirement, and the Office’s pursuant to the Standard Application. containing text and artwork.46 longstanding existing guidance and Accordingly, the Office does not To be clear, applicants will be able to practices regarding the need for consider the availability of the GRUW register unpublished works that contain applicants to specify whether their option for the same rate as the Standard different types of authorship. When works are published or unpublished, the Application to constitute an completing the application, applicants Office concludes that it is not necessary ‘‘adjustment’’ of fees.40 should select the administrative class to delay implementation of the new In response to the proposed $55 fee, that would be most appropriate for the group registration option due to any several commenters encouraged the predominant form of authorship in each Office to develop alternate fee structure work, and the authorship term that best 29 See 17 U.S.C. 409(8) (requiring copyright for unpublished works in order to describes the work as a whole. For application to include ‘‘the date and nation of [ ] expand the number of works that may example, when registering a group of first publication’’ if a work has been published). comic strips that contain a substantial 30 See, e.g., Compendium sec. 1904.1; U.S. Copyright Office, Circular 1: Copyright Basics, at 7 36 Contra id. at 8. amount of artwork combined with some (Sept. 2017), https://www.copyright.gov/circs/ 37 83 FR 2542 (Jan. 18, 2018). circ01.pdf. 38 See 82 FR at 47419. 41 See Browning-Smith Comment at 1–2; 31 Authors Guild et al. Comment at 6; Copyright 39 See 83 FR 24054, 24059 (May 24, 2018). Copyright Alliance Comment at 2. 42 Alliance Comment at 2 n.2, Graphic Artists Guild 40 See 37 CFR 201.3 (listing current registration SFWA et al. Comment at 3. Comment at 1–2. fees); 17 U.S.C. 708(b) (describing process for 43 Copyright Alliance Comment at 2. 32 Graphic Artists Guild Comment at 2. adjustment of registration fees); see also Booz Allen 44 See Notification of Inquiry: Registration 33 Authors Guild et al. Comment at 7. Hamilton, U.S. Copyright Office, Fee Study, Modernization, 83 FR 52336, 52339 (Oct. 17, 2018) 34 Id. Questions and Answers at 6 (Dec. 2017), https:// (seeking input on whether the Office should adopt 35 Id. at 7–8. The Authors Guild Comment did not www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/feestudy2018/fee_ scaled fees based on the number and types of works specify whether it was advocating for statutory study_q&a.pdf (Question 3 discussing propriety of registered). change or suggesting that the Office could somehow charging certain group registration options the same 45 Authors Guild et al. Comment at 9; Kernochan ‘‘replace’’ the concept of publication with ‘‘made rate as the Standard Application if they required Ctr. Comment at 3. available to the public’’ through a rulemaking. similar resources for processing). 46 Graphic Artists Guild Comment at 3.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3697

text, applicants should select the class application for supplementary Final Regulations 50 for ‘‘visual arts works’’ and should use registration. For the reasons set forth in the the term ‘‘unpublished pictorial or The Office created multiple versions preamble, the U.S. Copyright Office graphic works’’ to describe those works. of this form that may be used to correct amends 37 CFR parts 201 and 202 as When registering a group of illustrated or amplify the information in a follows: short stories that contain a substantial registration for a group of photographs, amount of text combined with some serials, newspapers, newsletters, or PART 201—GENERAL PROVISIONS illustrations, applicants should select contributions to periodicals. But the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 201 the class for ‘‘literary works’’ and Office has not yet created a similar continues to read as follows: should use the term ‘‘unpublished version for a registration for a group of literary works’’ to describe those works. unpublished works. Therefore, the final Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702. If the types of authorship in each work rule clarifies that applicants should ■ 2. Amend § 201.3 by redesignating are roughly equal—as is often the case contact the Office of Registration Policy paragraphs (c)(8) though (22) as (c)(9) with a children’s book—applicants may & Practice to obtain instructions before through (23) and adding a new select ‘‘literary works’’ or ‘‘visual arts seeking a supplementary registration paragraph (c)(8) to read as follows: works,’’ and depending on which class involving these types of claims. has been selected, they may use the § 201.3 Fees for registration, recordation, term ‘‘unpublished literary works’’ or F. Technical Amendments and related services, special services, and ‘‘unpublished pictorial or graphic services performed by the Licensing works’’ to describe those works. The final rule makes a few technical Division. changes intended to clarify the Perhaps because it represents an * * * * * regulations, update cross-references, (c) * * * author who is deceased, Author and simplify the registration of Services said it would be unable to use photographs by accepting more formats Registration, recordation and Fees the group registration option, because and material. Specifically, the final rule related services ($) the author and claimant for each work removes a superfluous sentence from must be the same person or § 202.4(h) which states that a group of organization.47 To be clear, an author ***** unpublished photographs cannot be may always be named as the copyright (8) Registration of a claim in registered as an unpublished collection claimant for purposes of this group a group of unpublished and removes a provision from § 202.4(h) works ...... 55 registration option, even if that and (i), and § 202.20(c), stating that individual has transferred their photographers should not include any ***** copyright or has died.48 But if Author form of punctuation in the file names Services prefers to list itself as the that they upload to the electronic * * * * * claimant, it would be ineligible for this registration system.51 The Office was group registration option and could PART 202—PREREGISTRATION AND concerned that punctuation in the file instead register the works individually; REGISTRATION OF CLAIMS TO names might cause a technical error that as noted, entities to which copyrights COPYRIGHT could prevent the system from opening have been transferred are not intended the files, but after testing the new to be the primary beneficiary of this ■ 3. The authority citation for part 202 applications the Office has confirmed rule. continues to read as follows: that punctuation should not cause this Authority: 17 U.S.C. 408(f), 702. E. Supplementary Registration type of problem.52 This represents a change in a ‘‘rule[] of agency ■ 4. Amend § 202.3 by revising A supplementary registration is a organization, procedure, or practice,’’ 53 paragraph (b)(4) and adding paragraph special type of registration that may be that does not ‘‘alter the rights or (c)(4) to read as follows: used ‘‘to correct an error in a copyright interests of parties’’ to require notice § 202.3 Registration of copyright. registration or to amplify the and comment 54—if anything, it eases information given in a registration.’’ 49 the requirements for applicants that use * * * * * The NPRM explained that if applicants this option. (b) * * * need to correct or amplify the (4) Registration as one work. For the information appearing in a registration List of Subjects purpose of registration on one application and upon the payment of for a group of unpublished works, they 37 CFR Part 201 will be required to use the online one filing fee, the following shall be Copyright, General provisions. considered one work: In the case of 47 Author Services Comment at 1. published works, all copyrightable 48 See Compendium sec. 619.7 (‘‘The author may 37 CFR Part 202 elements that are otherwise recognizable always be named as the copyright claimant . . . as self-contained works, that are Copyright, Preregistration and even if the author does not own any of the rights included in the same unit of under copyright when the application is filed.’’); registration of claims to copyright. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Registration of publication, and in which the copyright Copyright: Definition of Claimant, 77 FR 29257, claimant is the same. 50 82 FR at 47419. 29258 (May 17, 2012) (author may always be listed * * * * * as a copyright claimant ‘‘because an author may 51 37 CFR 202.4(h)(9), (i)(9); id. at always have a reversionary or beneficial interest in 202.20(c)(2)(vii)(D)(8). (c) * * * the work’’); see also Compendium sec. 619.13(Q) 52 For similar reasons, the Office removed a (4) In the case of applications for (‘‘If the author is the only party who is eligible to provision from the deposit requirements for GRUW registration made under paragraphs be named as the copyright claimant, and if the that encouraged applicants to submit their works in (b)(4) through (5) of this section or author is deceased . . . the U.S. Copyright Office a .zip file, rather than uploading them one at a time. will accept an application that names the author as 53 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A). under § 202.4, the ‘‘year of creation,’’ the copyright claimant.’’). 54 JEM Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 22 F.3d 320, 326 ‘‘year of completion,’’ or ‘‘year in which 49 17 U.S.C. 408(d). (D.C. Cir. 1994). creation of this work was completed’’

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3698 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

means the latest year in which the designated for a group of unpublished LIBRARY OF CONGRESS creation of any copyrightable element works. The application may be was completed. submitted by any of the parties listed in Copyright Office * * * * * § 202.3(c)(1). 37 CFR Part 202 ■ 5. Amend § 202.4 as follows: (9) The applicant must submit one ■ a. Add paragraph (c). complete copy or phonorecord of each [Docket No. 2017–16] ■ b. In paragraph (h)(8), remove the work. Each work must be contained in second sentence, which is in a separate electronic file that complies Group Registration of Newspapers with § 202.20(b)(2)(iii). The files must parentheses. AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library be submitted in one of the electronic ■ c. In paragraph (h)(9), remove the of Congress. formats approved by the Office, they second sentence. ACTION: Final rule. ■ d. In paragraph (i)(9), remove the must be assembled in an orderly form, second sentence. and they must be uploaded to the SUMMARY: The U.S. Copyright Office is ■ e. In paragraph (n), remove electronic registration system. The file amending its regulation governing the ‘‘paragraph (g), (h), (i), or (k)’’ and add size for each uploaded file must not group registration option for newspaper in its place ‘‘paragraphs (c), (g), (h), (i), exceed 500 megabytes; the files may be issues. This rule will eliminate the or (k)’’. compressed to comply with this three-month deadline for submitting The addition reads as follows: requirement. this type of claim. Based on requests (10) In an exceptional case, the received from several newspaper § 202.4 Group registration. Copyright Office may waive the online publishers, the Office has determined * * * * * filing requirement set forth in paragraph that there is a legitimate need to make (c) Group registration of unpublished (c)(8) of this section or may grant special this change effective immediately. works. Pursuant to the authority granted relief from the deposit requirement DATES: Effective February 18, 2019. by 17 U.S.C. 408(c)(1), the Register of under § 202.20(d), subject to such FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Copyrights has determined that a group conditions as the Associate Register and Regan A. Smith, General Counsel and of unpublished works may be registered Director of the Office of Registration Associate Register of Copyrights; Robert in Class TX, PA, VA, or SR with one Policy and Practice may impose on the J. Kasunic, Associate Register of application, the required deposit, and applicant. Copyrights and Director of Registration the filing fee required by § 201.3(c) of * * * * * Policy and Practice; or Erik Bertin, this chapter, if the following conditions ■ 6. Amend § 202.6 as follows: Deputy Director of Registration Policy are met: ■ a. Redesignate paragraphs (e)(2) and Practice, by telephone at 202–707– (1) All the works in the group must be through (7) as paragraphs (e)(3) through 8040 or by email at regans@ unpublished, and they must be (8). copyright.gov, [email protected] and registered in the same administrative ■ [email protected]. class. b. In newly redesignated paragraph SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1992 (2) Generally, the applicant may (e)(8), remove ‘‘paragraph (e)(1)’’ and add in its place ‘‘paragraph (e)(1) or the Copyright Office established a group include up to ten works in the group. If registration option that allows the conditions set forth in (2)’’. ■ newspaper publishers to register an § 202.3(b)(1)(iv)(A) through (C) have c. Add new paragraph (e)(2). The addition reads as follows: entire month of issues with one been met, the applicant may include up application and one filing fee.1 Initially, to ten sound recordings and ten musical § 202.6 Supplementary registration. applicants were required to submit a works, literary works, or dramatic works * * * * * paper application and submit microfilm in the group. (e) * * * deposit copies, and they had to submit (3) The group may include individual these materials within three months works, joint works, or derivative works, (2) To seek a supplementary registration for a group of unpublished after the publication of the most recent but may not include compilations, issue in the group.2 This deadline was collective works, databases, or websites. works registered under § 202.4(c), an applicant must complete and submit the intended to benefit the Library of (4) The applicant must provide a title Congress by ensuring that newspaper for each work in the group. online application designated for supplementary registration after issues could be added to its collections (5) All the works must be created by and made available to its patrons in a the same author or the same joint consultation with and under the direction of the Office of Registration timely manner. But newspaper authors, and the author and claimant publishers often submitted their claims information for each work must be the Policy & Practice. * * * * * after the three-month deadline due to same. the high cost of producing microfilm. (6) The works may be registered as § 202.20 [Amended] Many publishers could not afford to anonymous works, pseudonymous send their newspapers to a microfilm ■ 7. Amend § 202.20(c)(2)(vii)(D)(8) by works, or works made for hire if they are producer until they had a sufficient removing the fourth sentence. identified in the application as such. number of issues to justify the cost, (7) The applicant must identify the Dated: January 28, 2019. which delayed the production and authorship that each author or joint Karyn A. Temple, delivery of the microfilm.3 author contributed to the works, and the Acting Register of Copyrights and Director Last year the Office updated its authorship statement for each author or of the U.S. Copyright Office. regulation governing this group joint author must be the same. Claims in registration option.4 Under the current the selection, coordination, or Approved by: Carla D. Hayden, arrangement of the group as a whole 1 57 FR 39615 (Sept. 1, 1992). Librarian of Congress. will not be permitted on the application. 2 37 CFR 202.3(b)(6)(F) (1992). (8) The applicant must complete and [FR Doc. 2019–02185 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] 3 82 FR 51369, 51378 (Nov. 6, 2017). submit the online application BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 4 83 FR 4144 (Jan. 30, 2018).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3699

rule, a publisher may register a group of The Office will monitor this change to PART 202—PREREGISTRATION AND newspapers if the applicant submits the the rule to determine whether it REGISTRATION OF CLAIMS TO claim using the appropriate electronic succeeds in incentivizing increased COPYRIGHT application and submits a PDF copy of registrations and to ensure that it does each issue within three months after the not have an adverse effect on the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 202 publication of the earliest issue in the Library’s collections. In the meantime, continues to read as follows: group.5 Unlike the paper application, the Office has prepared a video tutorial Authority: 17 U.S.C. 408(f), 702. the electronic registration system that provides step-by-step instructions contains automated validations that on how to complete the electronic § 202.4 [Amended] enforce this three-month deadline. application and upload digital copies.7 ■ 2. Amend § 202.4 by removing Since the Office implemented these The help text that accompanies the paragraph (e)(7). new requirements, several newspaper application also provides answers to 8 Dated: January 31, 2019. publishers have reported difficulty and frequently asked questions. And the Office has published a circular that Karyn A. Temple, delays in creating PDF copies. Many Acting Register of Copyrights and Director publishers have not been able to submit provides detailed information about the 9 Of the U.S. Copyright Office. their claims before the three-month group registration process. deadline. And some publishers have The Office still encourages publishers Approved by: attempted to bypass the validations in to submit their claims within three Carla D. Hayden, the electronic system by submitting a months of publication, because it may Librarian of Congress. paper application and microfilm copies. provide certain legal benefits. To seek [FR Doc. 2019–02186 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] statutory damages and attorney’s fees in The Office has refused to register these BILLING CODE 1410–30–P claims, because they were submitted on an infringement action, publishers must a paper form and with the wrong register their issues in a timely manner. deposit, or because they were received Specifically, a publisher typically may LIBRARY OF CONGRESS after the deadline. On average, it takes seek these remedies if a newspaper three months or more to process a paper issue was registered (i) before the Copyright Office application and a physical deposit,6 so infringement commenced or (ii) within by the time the Office has issued a three months after the first publication 37 CFR Part 203 refusal, the publisher may not have an of that work. See 17 U.S.C. 412. The Office finds there is good cause [Docket No. 2017–1] opportunity to resubmit their claim on for adopting this amendment without the appropriate form and with an Freedom of Information Act first publishing a notice of proposed appropriate deposit. Regulations rulemaking, because it is a ‘‘rule[ ] of To address these problems and ensure agency organization, procedure, or AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library that newspaper publishers can obtain practice.’’ 10 It does not adversely ‘‘alter of Congress. the statutory benefits of registration, the the rights or interests of parties’’—if ACTION: Final rule. Office has decided to eliminate the anything, it eases the requirements for three-month filing requirement. This applicants choosing to exercise this SUMMARY: The U.S. Copyright Office is will provide more flexibility for option by removing the time restriction issuing a final rule that amends its applicants, and allow them to register on its availability.11 It therefore merely regulations governing its practices and issues that otherwise would be ‘‘alter[s] the manner in which the procedures under the Freedom of ineligible for registration. The Office parties present themselves . . . to the Information Act (FOIA). The final rule will remove the automated validation agency.’’ 12 Id. Thus, notice and closely follows the February 7, 2017 that prevents publishers from comment is not required under the interim rule, implementing the FOIA submitting issues that are more than Administrative Procedure Act. Improvement Act of 2016. The final rule three months old. Beginning on All other provisions in the current makes limited modifications to align February 18, 2019, publishers will be regulation on group registration of with public comments and to promote permitted to submit claims through the newspapers remain unaffected. further regulatory clarity and customer electronic registration system, regardless service. List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 202 of when their issues were published. DATES: Effective date: March 15, 2019. Likewise, publishers may electronically Copyright. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: resubmit claims that were refused For the reasons set forth above, the Regan A. Smith, General Counsel and because they were filed on a paper form Copyright Office amends 37 CFR part Associate Register of Copyrights, by or without a digital deposit, or because 202 as follows: email at [email protected], or by they were received after the three month telephone at 202–707–8350; or deadline. To do so, publishers must 7 See Group of Newspaper Issues Tutorial, U.S. Catherine Zaller Rowland, Associate submit a new application (using the Copyright Office, https://www.copyright.gov/eco/ Register of Copyrights and Director of electronic form designated for newspaper.mp4. 8 Public Information and Education, by newspaper issues), a new digital See Help: Group Registration of Newspaper Issues, U.S. Copyright Office, https:// email at [email protected], or by deposit, and a new filing fee. www.copyright.gov/eco/help-newspapers.html. telephone at 202–707–0956. 9 See U.S. Copyright Office, Circular 62A: Group SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 5 37 CFR 202.4(e). The new deadline was based Registration of Newspapers (2018), available at https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ62a.pdf. on the date of publication for the earliest issue in I. Background the group (rather than the most recent) for the 10 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). reasons stated in the notice of proposed rulemaking 11 JEM Broad. Co. v. FCC, 22 F.3d 320, 326 (D.C. The Freedom of Information Act dated November 6, 2017. See 82 FR at 51377–78. Cir. 1994); see also 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) (publication (FOIA), section 552 of title 5 of the 6 See U.S. Copyright Office, Registration 30 days before effective date of substantive rule not Processing Times, available at https:// required for rule that ‘‘grants or recognizes an United States Code, provides a statutory www.copyright.gov/registration/docs/processing- exemption or relieves a restriction’’). right of access to federal agency records. times-faqs.pdf. 12 JEM Broad. Co., 22 F.3d at 326. In part, FOIA establishes procedures by

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3700 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

which a member of the public may (GRS) 14. NARA notes that GRS 14 was circumstances, and the final rule now request records from a federal agency replaced with a new records schedule, reflects the Office’s practices. and the parameters by which an agency GRS 4.2.7 The final rule incorporates Second, the final rule clarifies in must operate when responding to a this change. § 203.11(j) that only Privacy Act 9 request from the public. FOIA requires requests are processed under the B. Comments From Individuals agencies to promulgate regulations Office’s Privacy Act fee schedule. The addressing the logistical requirements of Both individual commenters wrote in Office makes this technical amendment making requests, fees, and expedited support of the Office’s interim rule as an to clear up any possible confusion about processing 1 while providing areas of effort to provide citizens with access to the Privacy Act fee schedule by discretionary authority. records and improve agency changing the language to focus on the In 2017, the Copyright Office (the responsiveness to the public. One type of request rather than the requester. ‘‘Office’’) published an Interim Rule 2 in commenter also voiced a general Third, the Office has amended response to the FOIA Improvement Act concern that access to records should § 203.11(k) to adopt the streamlined fee of 2016 (the ‘‘Act’’),3 which amended not be dependent upon access to waiver factors published by the DOJ OIP 8 FOIA to address a range of procedural technology. The Office recognizes that subsequent to the publication of the issues and required federal agencies individuals without access to Office’s interim rule.10 This updated subject to FOIA to review and update technology can encounter unique template language improves regulatory their regulations. In its interim rule, the obstacles to accessing the Office’s clarity but does not materially change Office updated its regulations to information and records but believes the proposed § 203.11(k). conform with the Act, including the that these concerns are adequately Accordingly, for the reasons Act’s prohibition on charging fees after addressed by the Office’s regulations explained above, the Office has certain agency failures, specifying a and practices and that no amendments determined that these additional ninety-day period for filing an are required to the rule. amendments comprise non-substantive, administrative appeal, and requiring The Office receives a large number of procedural changes not ‘‘alter[ing] the that records be made available in its FOIA requests from individuals rights or interests of the parties,’’ and electronic format. The Office also without access to technology, often for thus are not subject to further notice and adopted, where appropriate, the records that are already made publicly comment requirements of the available by the Office in electronic template for agency FOIA regulations Administrative Procedure Act.11 released by the Office of Information form. When the Office receives such a Policy at the Department of Justice (DOJ request, it responds in writing by mail List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 203 OIP). The template provided a clear and includes copies of the requested Freedom of information. structure for the required regulatory documents, even if they are otherwise Final Regulations provisions, allowed the Office to publicly available on the Office’s formalize its multi-track processing website at www.copyright.gov. Further, For the reasons set forth above, the practices, and established clear the Office maintains the Public Copyright Office adopts the interim rule regulatory language to improve Information Office (PIO), which assists amending 37 CFR part 203 which was customer service.4 In December 2018, callers and correspondents in accessing published at 82 FR 9505 on February 7, the Office also made minor technical information, including by providing 2017, as amended by 83 FR 63064 on changes to its FOIA regulations to printed copies of proactively disclosed December 7, 2018, as final with the reflect the Office’s current records upon request. following changes: organizational structure while updating C. Other Considerations and Technical PART 203—FREEDOM OF its licensing regulations relating to Changes 5 INFORMATION ACT: POLICIES AND section 115 of title 17. The Office has made three additional The Office received comments from PROCEDURES technical changes to the final rule based two individuals as well as the National on its ongoing review of the law and ■ Archives and Records Administration 1. The authority citation for part 203 additional guidance made publicly (NARA).6 Having reviewed and continues to read as follows: available by DOJ OIP. First, the Office carefully considered these comments, Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552. has added language to the rule in the Office now issues a final rule that § 203.7(c), explaining that the Office ■ 2. Amend § 203.7 by revising closely follows the proposed rule, with will alert requesters as to the availability paragraph (c)(1)(i) introductory text to minor amendments as discussed below. of mediation services offered by NARA’s read as follows: II. Discussion of Comments and Other Office of Government Information § 203.7 Timing of responses to requests. Considerations Services when the Office provides notice of unusual circumstances. The * * * * * A. NARA Record Schedule Technical interim rule included language (c) * * * Correction explaining that the Office would alert a NARA submitted a technical 9 5 U.S.C. 552a. requester of the dispute resolution 10 See Template for Agency FOIA Regulations, comment related to § 203.10, services when issuing a denial https://www.justice.gov/oip/template-agency-foia- Preservation of Records, which notification but inadvertently omitted regulations (last updated Feb. 22, 2017). referenced General Records Schedule similar language in the rule with regard 11 See Nat’l Mining Ass’n v. McCarthy, 758 F.3d to notices of delays due to unusual 243, 250 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (‘‘The critical feature of 1 5 U.S.C. 552 (a)(1), (a)(4)(A)(i), and (a)(6)(E)(i). a procedural rule is that it covers agency actions circumstances. The Office’s practices that do not themselves alter the rights or interests 2 82 FR 9505 (Feb. 7, 2017). have been to notify requesters of their of parties, although it may alter the manner in 3 Public Law 114–185, 130 Stat. 538 (2016). right to dispute resolution services in which the parties present themselves or their 4 82 FR at 9506 (Feb. 7, 2017). both denials and notices of unusual viewpoints to the agency.’’) (internal quotation 5 83 FR 63061 at 63064–65 (Dec. 7, 2018). marks omitted); 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A) (notice and 6 The comments can be found on the Copyright comment not required for ‘‘interpretative rules, Office’s website at https://www.copyright.gov/ 7 NARA Comment at 1. general statements of policy, or rules of agency rulemaking/foia2016/. 8 Jenna Rainey Comment at 1. organization, procedure, or practice’’).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3701

(1)(i) Whenever the Office cannot with a connection that is direct and a waiver of fees, a waiver shall be meet the statutory time limit for clear, not remote or attenuated. granted for those records. processing a request because of (ii) Disclosure of the requested (4) Requests for a waiver or reduction ‘‘unusual circumstances,’’ as defined in information is likely to contribute of fees should be made when the request paragraph (c)(2) of this section, the significantly to public understanding of is first submitted to the Office and Office will notify the requester in those operations or activities. This should address the criteria referenced writing of the unusual circumstances factor is satisfied when the following above. A requester may submit a fee and the estimated date of determination, criteria are met: waiver request at a later time so long as and alert requesters to the availability of (A) Disclosure of the requested the underlying record request is the Office of Government Information records must be meaningfully pending or on administrative appeal. Services (OGIS) to provide dispute informative about government When a requester who has committed to resolution services. Where an extension operations or activities. The disclosure pay fees subsequently asks for a waiver of time greater than 10 days is required, of information that already is in the of those fees and that waiver is denied, the Office will give the requester the public domain, in either the same or a the requester shall be required to pay opportunity to: substantially identical form, would not any costs incurred up to the date the fee * * * * * be meaningfully informative if nothing waiver request was received. new would be added to the public’s Dated: January 28, 2019. § 203.10 [Amended] understanding. Karyn A. Temple, ■ 3. Amend § 203.10 by removing (B) The disclosure must contribute to Acting Register of Copyrights and Director ‘‘General Records Schedule 14’’ and the understanding of a reasonably broad of the U.S. Copyright Office. audience of persons interested in the adding in its place ‘‘General Records Approved by: Schedule 4.2’’. subject, as opposed to the individual Carla D. Hayden, ■ understanding of the requester. A 4. Amend § 203.11 by revising Librarian of Congress. paragraphs (j) and (k) to read as follows: requester’s expertise in the subject area as well as the requester’s ability and [FR Doc. 2019–02181 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] § 203.11 Fees. intention to effectively convey BILLING CODE 1410–30–P * * * * * information to the public will be (j) Other statutes specifically considered. The Office will presume providing for fees. The provisions of this that a representative of the news media ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION section do not apply with respect to the will satisfy this consideration. AGENCY charging of fees for which the copyright (iii) The disclosure must not be law requires a fee to be charged. primarily in the commercial interest of 40 CFR Part 52 Requests processed under the Privacy the requester. To determine whether [EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0212; FRL–9989–23– Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, shall be disclosure of the requested information Region 5] subject to the fee schedule found in is primarily in the commercial interest § 204.6 of this chapter. Fees for services of the requester, the Office will consider Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; by the Office in the administration of the following criteria: Reasonable Further Progress Plan and the copyright law are contained in (A) The Office shall identify whether Other Plan Elements for the Moderate § 201.3 of this chapter. In instances the requester has any commercial Nonattainment Chicago Area for the where records responsive to a request interest that would be furthered by the 2008 Ozone Standards are subject to the statutorily-based fee requested disclosure. A commercial AGENCY: Environmental Protection schedule, the Office will inform the interest includes any commercial, trade, Agency (EPA). or profit interest. Requesters shall be requester of the service and appropriate ACTION: Final rule. fee. given an opportunity to provide (k) Requirements for waiver or explanatory information regarding this SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection reduction of fees. (1) Requesters may consideration. Agency (EPA) is finalizing approval of seek a waiver of fees by submitting a (B) If there is an identified a revision to the Wisconsin State written application demonstrating how commercial interest, the Office shall Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet the disclosure of the requested information determine whether that is the primary base year emissions inventory, is in the public interest because it is interest furthered by the request. A reasonable further progress (RFP), RFP likely to contribute significantly to waiver or reduction of fees is justified contingency measure, nitrogen oxides public understanding of the operations when the requirements of paragraphs (NOX) reasonably available control or activities of the government and is (k)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section are technology (RACT), and motor vehicle not primarily in the commercial interest satisfied and any commercial interest is inspection and maintenance (I/M) of the requester. not the primary interest furthered by the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) (2) The Office shall furnish records request. The Office ordinarily will for the Wisconsin portion of the responsive to a request without charge presume that when a news media Chicago-Naperville, Illinois-Indiana- or at a reduced rate when it determines, requester has satisfied factors in Wisconsin nonattainment area (Chicago based on all available information, that paragraphs (k)(2)(i) and (ii) of this area) for the 2008 ozone National the factors described in paragraphs section, the request is not primarily in Ambient Air Quality Standards (k)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section are the commercial interest of the requester. (NAAQS or standards). EPA is also satisfied: Disclosure to data brokers or others who finalizing approval of the 2017 and 2018 (i) Disclosure of the requested merely compile and market government transportation conformity motor vehicle information would shed light on the information for direct economic return emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the operations or activities of the will not be presumed to primarily serve Wisconsin portion of the Chicago area government. The subject of the request the public interest. for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA must concern identifiable operations or (3) Where only some of the records to proposed approval of these attainment activities of the Federal Government be released satisfy the requirements for planning elements on August 16, 2018,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3702 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

and received no adverse comments parts per million (ppm).1 Promulgation and Kendall Counties in Illinois; Lake germane to this action. Therefore, EPA of a revised NAAQS triggers a and Porter Counties in Indiana; and the is finalizing approval of this SIP requirement for EPA to designate areas eastern portion of Kenosha County in revision pursuant to section 110 and of the country as nonattainment, Wisconsin. On May 4, 2016,7 pursuant part D of the CAA and EPA’s regulations attainment, or unclassifiable for the to section 181(b)(2) of the CAA, EPA because it satisfies the emission standards. For the ozone NAAQS, this determined that the Chicago area failed inventory, RFP, RFP contingency also involves classifying any to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the measure, NOX RACT, I/M, and nonattainment areas at the time of July 20, 2015, marginal area attainment transportation conformity requirements designation.2 Ozone nonattainment deadline and thus reclassified the area for the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago areas are classified based on the severity from marginal to moderate area, which is classified as moderate of their ozone levels (as determined nonattainment. In that action, EPA nonattainment for the 2008 ozone based on the area’s ‘‘design value,’’ established January 1, 2017, as the due NAAQS. which represents air quality in the area date for all moderate area nonattainment for the most recent three years). The plan SIP requirements applicable to DATES: This final rule is effective on classifications for ozone nonattainment newly reclassified areas. March 15, 2019. areas are marginal, moderate, serious, II. What action is EPA taking? ADDRESSES: EPA has established a severe, and extreme.3 docket for this action under Docket ID Areas that EPA designates As explained in the proposed No. EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0212. All nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS are rulemaking,8 EPA is approving revisions documents in the docket are listed on subject to certain requirements, to Wisconsin’s SIP pursuant to section the www.regulations.gov website. including the general nonattainment 110 and part D of the CAA and EPA’s Although listed in the index, some area planning requirements of CAA regulations. Wisconsin’s April 17, 2017, information is not publicly available, section 172 and the ozone-specific submission and January 23, 2018, i.e., Confidential Business Information nonattainment planning requirements of supplement along with a prior (CBI) or other information whose CAA section 182. Ozone nonattainment submission made on August 15, 2016, disclosure is restricted by statute. areas in the lower classification levels satisfy the emission inventory, RFP, RFP Certain other material, such as have fewer and/or less stringent contingency measure, NOX RACT, copyrighted material, is not placed on mandatory air quality planning and emissions statement, I/M, and the internet and will be publicly control requirements than those in transportation conformity requirements available only in hard copy form. higher classifications. For marginal for the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago Publicly available docket materials are areas, a state is required to submit a area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. available either through baseline emissions inventory, adopt provisions into the SIP requiring III. Statutory and Executive Order www.regulations.gov or at the Reviews Environmental Protection Agency, emissions statements from stationary Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 sources in the area, and implement a Under the CAA, the Administrator is West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, nonattainment new source review (NSR) required to approve a SIP submission Illinois 60604. This facility is open from program for the relevant ozone that complies with the provisions of the 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through NAAQS.4 For moderate areas, a state CAA and applicable Federal regulations. Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We needs to comply with the marginal area 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). recommend that you telephone Jenny requirements, plus additional moderate Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, Liljegren, Physical Scientist, at (312) area requirements, including the EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 886–6832 before visiting the Region 5 requirement to submit a modeled provided that they meet the criteria of office. demonstration that the area will attain the CAA. Accordingly, this action the NAAQS as expeditiously as merely approves state law as meeting FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: practicable but no later than six years Federal requirements and does not Jenny Liljegren, Physical Scientist, after designation, the requirement to impose additional requirements beyond Attainment Planning and Maintenance submit an RFP plan, the requirement to those imposed by state law. For that Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), adopt and implement certain emissions reason, this action: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, controls, such as RACT and I/M, and the • Is not a significant regulatory action Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, requirement for greater emissions offsets subject to review by the Office of Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6832, for new or modified major stationary Management and Budget under [email protected]. sources under the state’s nonattainment Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 5 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NSR program. October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, Throughout this document, whenever January 21, 2011); B. Background on the Chicago 2008 • ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean Ozone Nonattainment Area Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 EPA. This supplementary information FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory On June 11, 2012,6 EPA designated section is arranged as follows: action because SIP approvals are the Chicago area as a marginal exempted under Executive Order 12866; I. What is the background for this action? nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone • Does not impose an information II. What action is EPA taking? NAAQS. The Chicago area includes III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews collection burden under the provisions Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 I. What is the background for this and Will Counties and part of Grundy U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); action? • Is certified as not having a 1 73 FR 16436. A. Background on the 2008 Ozone 2 CAA sections 107(d)(1) and 181(a)(1). significant economic impact on a NAAQS 3 CAA section 181(a)(1). substantial number of small entities 4 CAA section 182(a). On March 27, 2008, EPA promulgated 5 CAA section 182(b). 7 81 FR 26697. a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.075 6 77 FR 34221, effective July 20, 2012. 8 83 FR 40715 (August 16, 2018).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3703

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 affect the finality of this action for the emissions for the year 2017, and 1.44 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); purposes of judicial review nor does it tons per summer day of VOC emissions • Does not contain any unfunded extend the time within which a petition and 2.75 tons per summer day of NOX mandate or significantly or uniquely for judicial review may be filed, and emissions for the year 2018. affect small governments, as described shall not postpone the effectiveness of [FR Doc. 2019–02057 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act such rule or action. This action may not BILLING CODE 6560–50–P of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); be challenged later in proceedings to • Does not have Federalism enforce its requirements. (See section implications as specified in Executive 307(b)(2).) ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, AGENCY 1999); List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 • Is not an economically significant Environmental protection, Air 40 CFR Part 52 regulatory action based on health or pollution control, Incorporation by safety risks subject to Executive Order [EPA–R07–OAR–2018–0700; FRL–9988–46– reference, Intergovernmental relations, Region 7] 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile • Is not a significant regulatory action organic compounds. Air Plan Approval; Missouri; subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Dated: December 20, 2018. Emissions Inventory for the Missouri 28355, May 22, 2001); • James O. Payne, Jackson County and Jefferson County Is not subject to requirements of 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Section 12(d) of the National Acting Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 5. Air Quality Standard Nonattainment Technology Transfer and Advancement Areas Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: application of those requirements would AGENCY: Environmental Protection be inconsistent with the CAA; and PART 52—APPROVAL AND Agency (EPA). • Does not provide EPA with the PROMULGATION OF ACTION: Final rule. discretionary authority to address, as IMPLEMENTATION PLANS appropriate, disproportionate human SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 health or environmental effects, using Agency (EPA) is approving two continues to read as follows: practicable and legally permissible submissions from the Missouri methods, under Executive Order 12898 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Department of Natural Resources (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). ■ 2. Section 52.2585 is amended by (MoDNR) revising the State In addition, the SIP is not approved adding paragraph (ff) to read as follows: Implementation Plan (SIP) for the State to apply on any Indian reservation land of Missouri. The SIP revision or in any other area where EPA or an § 52.2585 Control strategy: Ozone. submissions address the Clean Air Act Indian tribe has demonstrated that a * * * * * (CAA) section 172 requirement to tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of (ff) Approval—On April 17, 2017, as submit a base year emissions inventory Indian country, the rule does not have supplemented on January 23, 2018, for Missouri’s partial Jackson County tribal implications and will not impose Wisconsin submitted a revision to its and partial Jefferson County substantial direct costs on tribal State Implementation Plan along with a nonattainment areas of the 2010 1-hour governments or preempt tribal law as prior submission on August 15, 2016, to Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) National Ambient specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 satisfy the emissions statement, Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). FR 67249, November 9, 2000). emission inventory, reasonable further DATES: This final rule is effective on The Congressional Review Act, 5 progress (RFP), RFP contingency March 15, 2019. U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small measure, oxides of nitrogen (NOX) ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a Business Regulatory Enforcement reasonably available control technology docket for this action under Docket ID Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides (RACT), motor vehicle inspection and No. EPA–R07–OAR–2018–0700. All that before a rule may take effect, the maintenance (I/M), and transportation documents in the docket are listed on agency promulgating the rule must conformity requirements for the the https://www.regulations.gov submit a rule report, which includes a Wisconsin portion of the Chicago area website. Although listed in the index, copy of the rule, to each House of the for the 2008 ozone NAAQS moderate some information is not publicly Congress and to the Comptroller General nonattainment plan. These elements of available, i.e., CBI or other information of the United States. EPA will submit a the plan meet the requirements of whose disclosure is restricted by statute. report containing this action and other section 110 and part D of the CAA for Certain other material, such as required information to the U.S. Senate, the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago copyrighted material, is not placed on the U.S. House of Representatives, and area, which was reclassified on May 4, the internet and will be publicly the Comptroller General of the United 2016, as moderate nonattainment for the available only in hard copy form. States prior to publication of the rule in 2008 ozone NAAQS. The April 17, Publicly available docket materials are the Federal Register. A major rule 2017, submittal as supplemented on available through https:// cannot take effect until 60 days after it January 23, 2018, also established new www.regulations.gov or please contact is published in the Federal Register. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets the person identified in the FOR FURTHER This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as (MVEB) for volatile organic compounds INFORMATION CONTACT section for defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). (VOC) and NOX for the years 2017 and additional information. Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 2018. The MVEBs for the Wisconsin FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: petitions for judicial review of this portion of the Chicago 2008 ozone Tracey Casburn, Environmental action must be filed in the United States NAAQS nonattainment area, which is Protection Agency, Air Planning and Court of Appeals for the appropriate the portion of Kenosha County inclusive Development Branch, 11201 Renner circuit by April 15, 2019. Filing a and east of Interstate 94, are now: 1.56 Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219, by petition for reconsideration by the tons per summer day of VOC emissions telephone at (913) 551–7016, or by Administrator of this final rule does not and 3.05 tons per summer day of NOX email at [email protected].

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3704 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal requirements and does not tribal implications and will not impose Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ impose additional requirements beyond substantial direct costs on tribal and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. those imposed by state law. For that governments or preempt tribal law as reason, this action: specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 I. What action is the EPA taking? • II. The EPA’s Response to Comments Is not a significant regulatory action FR 67249, November 9, 2000). III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews subject to review by the Office of The Congressional Review Act, 5 Management and Budget under I. What action is the EPA taking? U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, Business Regulatory Enforcement The EPA is approving two SIP October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides revision submissions from the MoDNR January 21, 2011); • that before a rule may take effect, the addressing the CAA section 172(c)(3) Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 agency promulgating the rule must requirement to submit a base year FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory submit a rule report, which includes a emissions inventory for Missouri’s action because SIP approvals are copy of the rule, to each House of the partial Jackson County and partial exempted under Executive Order 12866. • Congress and to the Comptroller General Jefferson County nonattainment areas of Does not impose an information of the United States. EPA will submit a the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. The EPA collection burden under the provisions report containing this action and other is finalizing its determination that these of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 required information to the U.S. Senate, emission inventory SIP revision U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); the U.S. House of Representatives, and submissions were submitted in • Is certified as not having a the Comptroller General of the United accordance with sections 110, 191(a), significant economic impact on a States prior to publication of the rule in and 172(c)(3) of the CAA. On November substantial number of small entities the Federal Register. A major rule 23, 2018, the EPA published a notice of under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 cannot take effect until 60 days after it proposed rulemaking proposing to U.S.C. 601 et seq.); is published in the Federal Register. approve the emissions inventories in the • Does not contain any unfunded This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as Federal Register. See 83 FR 59348. The mandate or significantly or uniquely defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). public comment period opened on affect small governments, as described November 23, 2018 (the date of the in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 proposed rule’s publication in the of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Federal Register) and closed on • Does not have Federalism Environmental protection, Air December 24, 2018. implications as specified in Executive pollution control, Incorporation by Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, reference, Sulfur oxides. II. The EPA’s Response to Comments 1999); Dated: December 28, 2018. • The EPA received comments in Is not an economically significant Edward H. Chu, response to the notice of proposed regulatory action based on health or Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. rulemaking (see the docket for this safety risks subject to Executive Order action). The comments address subjects 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); For the reasons stated in the outside the scope of the proposed • Is not a significant regulatory action preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part action, do not explain (or provide a legal subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 52 as set forth below: basis for) how the proposed action 28355, May 22, 2001); should differ in any way, and make no • Is not subject to requirements of the PART 52—APPROVAL AND specific mention of the proposed action. National Technology Transfer and PROMULGATION OF Therefore, the comments are not Advancement Act (NTTA) because this IMPLEMENTATION PLANS germane, and the EPA is not providing rulemaking does not involve technical response. standards; and ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 • Does not provide EPA with the continues to read as follows: III. Statutory and Executive Order discretionary authority to address, as Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Reviews appropriate, disproportionate human Under the CAA, the Administrator is health or environmental effects, using Subpart—AA Missouri required to approve a SIP submission practicable and legally permissible that complies with the provisions of the methods, under Executive Order 12898 ■ 2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph Act and applicable Federal regulations. (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). (e) is amended by adding entries ‘‘(76)’’ 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). In addition, the SIP is not approved and ‘‘(77)’’ in numerical order to read as Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, to apply on any Indian reservation land follows: EPA’s role is to approve state choices, or in any other area where EPA or an provided that they meet the criteria of Indian tribe has demonstrated that a § 52.1320 Identification of plan. the CAA. Accordingly, this action tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of * * * * * merely approves state law as meeting Indian country, the rule does not have (e) * * *

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI NONREGULATORY SIP PROVISIONS

Name of nonregulatory SIP Applicable geographic or State submittal provision nonattainment area date EPA approval date Explanation

******* (76) Jackson County 1-Hour Jackson County ...... 10/15/2015 2/13/2019, [Insert Federal [EPA–R07–OAR–2018–0700; FRL– SO2 NAA Baseline Emis- Register citation]. 9988–46–Region 7]. sions Inventory.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3705

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI NONREGULATORY SIP PROVISIONS—Continued

Name of nonregulatory SIP Applicable geographic or State submittal provision nonattainment area date EPA approval date Explanation

(77) Jefferson County 1- Jefferson County ...... 6/1/2015 2/13/2019, [Insert Federal [EPA–R07–OAR–2018–0700; FRL– Hour SO2 NAA Baseline Register citation]. 9988–46–Region 7]. Emissions Inventory.

[FR Doc. 2019–02068 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] if at all possible, you contact the person unclassifiable as required by part C of BILLING CODE 6560–50–P listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION title I of the CAA, with the exception of CONTACT section to schedule your the portions of the SIP revision related inspection. The Regional Office’s to the e-Notice Rule. EPA has addressed ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION official hours of business are Monday the e-notice portions of the SIP revision AGENCY through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., in a separate action on December 14, excluding Federal holidays. 2018 (83 FR 64285). 40 CFR Part 52 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: EPA is approving changes submitted [EPA–R04–OAR–2018–0073; FRL–9989–22– D. Brad Akers, Air Regulatory in South Carolina’s September 5, 2017, Region 4] Management Section, Air Planning and SIP revision to modify the PSD Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides regulations to make minor edits for Air Plan Approval; South Carolina: and Toxics Management Division, U.S. internal consistency and to adopt Revisions to Prevention of Significant Environmental Protection Agency, changes for consistency with EPA’s Deterioration Rules Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, 2016 permit rescission rule entitled Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Akers can be ‘‘Rescission of Preconstruction Permits AGENCY: Environmental Protection Issued Under the Clean Air Act’’ Final Agency (EPA). reached via telephone at (404) 562–9089 or via electronic mail at akers.brad@ Rule, 81 FR 78043 (November 7, 2016). ACTION: Final rule. epa.gov. On September 21, 2018 (83 FR 47855), EPA published a notice of proposed SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: rulemaking (NPRM) proposing to Agency (EPA) is approving portions of I. What action is EPA taking? approve the portions of South Carolina’s a State Implementation Plan (SIP) SIP revision described in Section II, of revision submitted by the State of South On September 5, 2017, SC DHEC this preamble. The details of South Carolina, through the South Carolina submitted a SIP revision to EPA for approval that involves changes to South Carolina’s SIP revision and the rationale Department of Health and for EPA’s actions are further explained Environmental Control (SC DHEC), on Carolina’s NSR permitting regulations to make them consistent with federal in the NPRM. EPA received no adverse September 5, 2017, that seek to revise comments on the proposed approval. certain New Source Review (NSR) requirements for NSR permitting, regulations regarding the Prevention of correct typographical errors, make II. Analysis of South Carolina’s Significant Deterioration (PSD) internal references consistent, and Submittal update public noticing procedures.1 permitting program. EPA is finalizing The September 5, 2017, SIP revision These changes include revisions to NSR this action pursuant to the Clean Air Act makes several changes to Regulation 61– public notice requirements in SC DHEC (CAA or Act). 62.5, Standard No. 7 at section (w)— Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7— DATES: This rule is effective on March entitled ‘‘Permit rescission’’—to be ‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration 15, 2019. consistent with the federal provisions (PSD) at sections (q) and (w)(4) to for rescinding PSD permits.2 Paragraph ADDRESSES: EPA has established a address the federal rule entitled (w)(1) currently states that PSD permits docket for this action under Docket ‘‘Revisions to Public Notice Provisions issued pursuant to Standard No. 7 Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– in Clean Air Act Permitting Programs,’’ remain in effect until they expire or are 2018–0073. All documents in the docket Final Rule, 81 FR 71613 (October 18, rescinded. This subparagraph is revised are listed on the www.regulations.gov 2016) (also referred to as the e-Notice in South Carolina’s submittal to clarify website. Although listed in the index, Rule). In this final action, EPA is that section (w) is the only provision some information may not be publicly approving the SIP revision that makes under which permit rescission is available, i.e., Confidential Business changes to South Carolina’s NSR allowed. Next, paragraph (w)(2) is Information or other information whose regulations at SC DHEC Regulation 61– revised to remove the date restriction disclosure is restricted by statute. 62.5, Standard No. 7 which applies to that limits rescission to PSD permits Certain other material, such as the construction or modification of any issued under PSD rules in effect on or copyrighted material, is not placed on major stationary source in areas before July 30, 1987. South Carolina’s the internet and will be publicly designated as attainment or available only in hard copy form. revised language is consistent with the federal Permit Rescission Rule, allowing Publicly available docket materials are 1 Also on September 5, 2017, South Carolina available either electronically through submitted separate SIP revisions with: Changes to for permit rescission if the permit meets www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at Regulation 61–62.1, Section I—‘‘Definitions’’ and the requirement of paragraph (w)(3). the Air Regulatory Management Section, Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 5.2—‘‘Control of Finally, paragraph (w)(3) is revised to Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx);’’ the adoption of change the word ‘‘shall’’ to ‘‘may’’ to Air Planning and Implementation Regulation 61–62.97—‘‘Cross State Air Pollution Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Rule (CSAPR) Trading Program;’’ and changes to clarify that this provision does not Management Division, U.S. the regional haze SIP. The SIP revision related to Regulation 61–62.97 (CSAPR) was previously 2 South Carolina also revised Regulation 61–62.5, Environmental Protection Agency, approved on October 13, 2017 (82 FR 47939). EPA Standard No. 7 at paragraph (w)(4) to address EPA’s Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, will address the remaining SIP revisions in separate eNotice Rule. As discussed above, EPA has Georgia 30303–8960. EPA requests that actions. addressed this change in a separate action.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3706 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

create a mandatory duty for the State. V. Statutory and Executive Order November 9, 2000), because it does not This change is consistent with the Reviews have substantial direct effects on an Permit Rescission Rule at 40 CFR Under the CAA, the Administrator is Indian Tribe. The Catawba Indian 52.21(w)(3). required to approve a SIP submission Nation Reservation is located within the The September 5, 2017, SIP revision that complies with the provisions of the boundary of York County, South also revises other paragraphs in Act and applicable Federal regulations. Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7 for See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Ann. 27–16–120, ‘‘all state and local consistency in formatting, to correct Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, environmental laws and regulations internal references, and to correct EPA’s role is to approve state choices, apply to the [Catawba Indian Nation] typographical errors. Section (b) is provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. This action merely approves and Reservation and are fully modified at paragraph (34), enforceable by all relevant state and subparagraph (vi), to correct a state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose local agencies and authorities.’’ EPA typographical error in the definition of notes this action will not impose ‘‘Net emissions increase.’’ Next, sections additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, substantial direct costs on Tribal (w), (aa), and (bb) are revised to be in this action: governments or preempt Tribal law. bold font for internal consistency. • Is not a significant regulatory action The Congressional Review Act, 5 Finally, Standard No. 7 is revised to subject to review by the Office of U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small make internal references and formatting Management and Budget under Business Regulatory Enforcement consistent by making changes in section Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides (aa) at (aa)(1)(i), (aa)(9), (aa)(11)(i), and October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, that before a rule may take effect, the (aa)(14)(i). EPA finds that South January 21, 2011); agency promulgating the rule must Carolina’s revised rules are consistent • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 submit a rule report, which includes a with federal requirements and CAA FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory copy of the rule, to each House of the section 110. action because SIP approvals are Congress and to the Comptroller General III. Incorporation by Reference exempted under Executive Order 12866; of the United States. EPA will submit a • Does not impose an information report containing this action and other In this document, EPA is finalizing collection burden under the provisions required information to the U.S. Senate, regulatory text that includes of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 the U.S. House of Representatives, and incorporation by reference. In U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); the Comptroller General of the United • accordance with requirements of 1 CFR Is certified as not having a States prior to publication of the rule in 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation significant economic impact on a the Federal Register. A major rule by reference of the SC DHEC regulatory substantial number of small entities cannot take effect until 60 days after it paragraphs identified above in Section II under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 is published in the Federal Register. U.S.C. 601 et seq.); within South Carolina Regulation 61– This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as • Does not contain any unfunded 62.5, Standard No. 7, entitled defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). mandate or significantly or uniquely Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, ‘‘Prevention of Significant affect small governments, as described petitions for judicial review of this Deterioration,’’ state effective on August in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act action must be filed in the United States 25, 2017. EPA has made, and will of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Court of Appeals for the appropriate continue to make, these materials • Does not have Federalism circuit by April 15, 2019. Filing a generally available through implications as specified in Executive petition for reconsideration by the www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, Administrator of this final rule does not Region 4 Office (please contact the 1999); affect the finality of this action for the person identified in the FOR FURTHER • Is not an economically significant purposes of judicial review nor does it INFORMATION CONTACT section of this regulatory action based on health or extend the time within which a petition preamble for more information). safety risks subject to Executive Order for judicial review may be filed, and Therefore, these materials have been 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); shall not postpone the effectiveness of • Is not a significant regulatory action approved by EPA for inclusion in the such rule or action. This action may not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR SIP, have been incorporated by be challenged later in proceedings to 28355, May 22, 2001); reference by EPA into that plan, are enforce its requirements. See section • Is not subject to requirements of fully federally enforceable under 307(b)(2). sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of Section 12(d) of the National the effective date of the final rulemaking Technology Transfer and Advancement List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 of EPA’s approval, and will be Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would Environmental protection, Air incorporated by reference in the next pollution control, Carbon monoxide, update to the SIP compilation.3 be inconsistent with the CAA; and • Does not provide EPA with the Incorporation by reference, IV. Final Action discretionary authority to address, as Intergovernmental relations, Lead, appropriate, disproportionate human Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate This is a final action based on the health or environmental effects, using matter, Reporting and recordkeeping proposed rule (see 83 FR 47855). For the practicable and legally permissible requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile reasons discussed above, EPA is methods, under Executive Order 12898 organic compounds. approving the aforementioned changes (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Dated: December 21, 2018. to the South Carolina SIP, submitted on In addition, this final action for the Mary S. Walker, September 5, 2017. State of South Carolina does not have Tribal implications as specified by Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 3 See 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997). Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3707

PART 52—APPROVAL AND Authority: 42.U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Standards’’ by revising the entry for PROMULGATION OF ‘‘Standard No. 7’’ to read as follows: Subpart PP—South Carolina IMPLEMENTATION PLANS § 52.2120 Identification of plan. ■ 2. Section 52.2120(c), is amended in ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 the table under the heading ‘‘Regulation * * * * * continues to read as follows: No. 62.5 Air Pollution Control (c) * * *

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS FOR SOUTH CAROLINA

State effective State citation Title/subject date EPA approval date Explanation

******* Regulation No. 62.5 ...... * * *.

******* Standard No. 7 ...... Prevention of Significant De- 8/25/2017 2/13/2019 [Insert Federal The SIP does not include the terioration. Register]. August 25, 2017 state-ef- fective version of Standard No. 7, paragraphs (b)(32)(i)(a), (b)(32)(iii)(b)(t), and (i)(1)(vii)(t). Instead, the SIP includes the June 25, 2005 state-effective version of these para- graphs, conditionally ap- proved by EPA on June 2, 2008, and fully approved on June 23, 2011. The SIP does not include Standard No. 7, paragraphs (b)(30)(v) and (b)(34)(iii)(d) because the state withdrew these paragraphs from EPA’s consideration for ap- proval on December 20, 2016. The SIP does not include the August 25, 2017 state-ef- fective version of Standard No. 7, paragraph (b)(34)(iii)(c) because the state withdrew the August 25, 2017 state-effective version of this paragraph from EPA’s consideration for approval on June 27, 2017. Instead, the SIP in- cludes the June 25, 2005 state-effective version of this paragraph conditionally approved by EPA on June 2, 2008, and fully approved on June 23, 2011.

*******

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2019–02059 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3708 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. problem in Houston and not including AGENCY Wendy Jacques, 214–665–7395, these episodic emissions in the RFP is [email protected]. erroneous. The commenter states that 40 CFR Part 52 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the RFP SIP must include a ‘‘comprehensive, accurate, current [EPA–R06–OAR–2017–0056; FRL–9988–61– Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ Region 6] and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA. inventory of actual emissions from all sources.’’ Approval and Promulgation of I. Background Response: CAA section 182(a)(1) Implementation Plans; Texas; The background for this action is requires states with ozone Reasonable Further Progress Plan for discussed in detail in our April 25, 2018 nonattainment areas to submit a SIP the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Ozone proposal (83 FR 17964). In that revision with a comprehensive, Nonattainment Area document we proposed to approve the accurate, current inventory of actual RFP demonstration, contingency emissions from all sources in an ozone AGENCY: Environmental Protection measures, MVEBs and an updated 2011 nonattainment area in accordance with Agency (EPA). base year emissions inventory for the guidance provided by the ACTION: Final rule. HGB area. Administrator. CAA section 182(b)(1) We received comments of support on requires ozone nonattainment areas SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean the proposal from the Texas classified as Moderate and above to Air Act (CAA or the Act), the Commission on Environmental Quality submit a RFP SIP revision. To Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and two relevant adverse comments implement CAA emissions inventory is approving a revision to the Texas from Environmental Integrity Project. requirements for the 2008 ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet Our response to the adverse comments NAAQS we promulgated ‘‘Emissions the Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) are below. inventory requirements’’ at 40 CFR requirements for the Houston- 51.1115. The emissions values are Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) moderate II. Response to Comments required to be an average day’s 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area Comment: Environmental Integrity emissions for a typical ozone season (HGB area). EPA is approving the RFP Project commented that (1) it is unclear work weekday (40 CFR 51.1115(c) and demonstration, contingency measures, whether episodic emissions of ozone 40 CFR 51.1100(cc)). motor vehicle emissions budgets forming pollutants resulting from To implement the RFP requirements (MVEBs) and an updated 2011 base year unplanned startups, shutdowns, for the 2008 ozone NAAQS we emissions inventory. maintenance, upsets and other promulgated ‘‘Requirements for DATES: This rule is effective on March unauthorized emissions are included in reasonable further progress’’ at 40 CFR 15, 2019. the Emissions Inventory ozone season 51.1110. The values of the base year ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a daily nitrogen oxide (NOX) and volatile emissions inventory for RFP plans are to docket for this action under Docket ID organic compound (VOC) values upon be an average day’s emissions for a No. EPA–R06–OAR–2017–0056. All which the RFP plan is based and (2) to typical ozone season work weekday (40 documents in the docket are listed on the extent that these values used to CFR 51.1110(b) and 40 CFR the http://www.regulations.gov website. develop the baseline and future year 51.1100(cc)). Although listed in the index, some emissions inventories do not include Texas submitted a 2011 base year information is not publicly available, episodic emissions the RFP plan fails as emissions inventory SIP revision for the e.g., Confidential Business Information a matter of law because the emissions HGB area on July 16, 2014 and we or other information whose disclosure is inventories fail to include all actual approved it as meeting the emissions restricted by statute. Certain other emissions. The commenter notes that inventory requirements for the 2008 material, such as copyrighted material, these emissions are quantifiable since ozone standard on February 20, 2015 is not placed on the internet and will be companies report these episodic (80 FR 9204). The RFP demonstration publicly available only in hard copy emissions to be included in TCEQ’s updated the previously approved form. Publicly available docket emission inventory. The commenter emissions inventory with better materials are available either also noted that researchers in the past estimates of an average day’s emissions electronically through http:// have confirmed that these episodic for a typical ozone season work www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at emissions are important as they can weekday. A summary of the update to the EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, sometimes result in large increases of the 2011 base year emissions inventory Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. ozone and are significant to the ozone is found in table 1.

TABLE 1—UPDATE TO THE 2011 BASE YEAR EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR THE HGB AREA [Tons per day]

Source Previous Updated Previous Updated category NOX NOX VOC VOC

Point ...... 108.44 108.33 94.83 95.99 Area ...... 21.14 21.15 308.73 304.90 On-road ...... Mobile ...... 196.21 188.02 82.62 80.73 Non-road ...... Mobile ...... 121.11 142.44 49.93 49.78

Total ...... 446.90 459.94 536.12 531.40

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3709

EPA’s rules and guidance call for an by nature, unpredictable and given the have included best management estimate of typical ozone season day myriad different types of malfunctions practice improvements for flaring, (summer weekday) emissions to set the that can occur, malfunction emissions which is one of the sources related with RFP baseline. EPA’s emission inventory would be difficult to estimate and malfunctions and that may have the guidance recommends including future-year malfunction events cannot potential to impact ozone levels. These Startup, Shutdown, and Maintenance be readily predicted. Thus, states are not best management practice emissions in the RFP baseline and obligated to include malfunction improvements are expected to result in future year weekday ozone season day emissions in the base inventory for the emission reductions, but EPA emission inventory values if the NAA, ROP/RFP plans, or attainment acknowledges that quantification of emissions can be reasonably and projected inventory for the NAA. baseline and future year emission events sufficiently quantified with regular and However, to the extent that and non-authorized/unplanned start-up, predictable emissions.1 Similarly, Texas malfunctions become a regular and shutdown, and maintenance emissions emission inventory guidance is to predictable event, then such emissions (future year would be expected to be include all authorized/planned 2 Start- should be quantified with regular and different than baseline) with the up, Shutdown and Maintenance predictable emissions and included in certainty required for a RFP SIP is not emissions in the ozone season day emission inventories for planning reasonably possible. emissions reported in annual emission purposes. The elimination of high In sum, Texas’s approach is consistent inventories submitted by sources that emissions during routinely reoccurring with our emissions inventory guidance are used by TCEQ for the RFP baseline malfunctions could potentially help regarding non-authorized/unplanned and future year RFP inventories.3 In achieve significant emissions reductions episodic/malfunction emissions. EPA their RFP SIP, TCEQ included needed by a state in attaining the believes these emissions can vary authorized/planned Start-up, relevant NAAQS.’’ Malfunctions in significantly and unpredictably from Shutdown, and Maintenance (SSM) EPA’s terminology are very similar to day to day and therefore it is acceptable emissions from 2011 in their 2011 unplanned events in TCEQ’s regulatory these emissions not be included in the baseline inventory and also included structure. Because of the periodic emissions inventory required authorized/planned emissions that unpredictability and variability of under 40 CFR 51.1115(b) or the occurred in 2014 in the 2014 inventory unplanned and/or unauthorized emissions inventory for RFP purposes. that they used to project the 2017 future emissions due to malfunctions, as We note Texas recognizes the RFP inventory. Since the amount and explained in the EPA guidance it is importance of these emissions and has magnitude of authorized/planned events reasonable that Texas did not include undertaken efforts to reduce episodic varies from day to day, Texas includes these emissions in its estimate of emissions. In conclusion, TCEQ has met the average value of these emissions in average ozone season weekday the requirements of 40 CFR 51.1110, 40 the RFP average weekday inventory.4 emissions. CFR 51.1115 and sections 182(a)(1) and So, Texas does include an estimate of Although these unauthorized 182(b)(1) of the CAA. authorized/planned Start-up, emissions are not appropriate to be Comment: Environmental Integrity Shutdown, and Maintenance emissions. included in the RFP plan, TCEQ Project also stated that we may not rely Texas does not include unplanned recognizes the importance of emissions on motor vehicle emissions reductions startups, shutdowns, maintenance, from startups, shutdowns, maintenance, that we intend to discontinue. The upsets and other unauthorized and upsets/malfunctions. These comment stated that the single largest emissions in their RFP inventories. This episodic emissions (planned and anticipated vehicle emissions reduction is consistent with EPA’s guidance unplanned) are quantified and included is from the Federal Motor Vehicle which states;5 ‘‘Since malfunctions are, in the attainment demonstration Control Program (FMVCP) and referred modeling which better lends itself for to an April announcement that we 1 ‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for utilization of day to day variation of would work with the National Highway Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter emissions because daily emissions from Traffic Safety Administration to revise National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations’’; EPA–454/B–17– specific historic episodes are modeled the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 003, July 2017; pages 79–80. And ‘‘Emissions versus typical ozone season day standards and Corporate Average Fuel Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone weekday emissions used in the RFP Economy (CAFE) standards for model and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air 6 year 2022 and 2025 light-duty vehicles. Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze inventories. Furthermore, based on the Regulations’’, EPA–454/B–17–003; July 2017, page evolving knowledge about unplanned Response: EPA agrees that SIPs can 19, Section 2.5.2. episodic emissions and the potential only rely upon reductions that are 2 The commenter discussed unplanned and impacts on ozone levels, TCEQ has enforceable for the purpose and years unauthorized emissions and TCEQ guidance centers conducted a number of studies that have addressed by the SIP. However, it is around authorized and non-authorized and does not incorrect that the RFP SIP relies on use the unplanned/planned language. For this resulted in best management practice Response to Comment we are interpreting that the improvements for some point source motor vehicle emissions reductions that commenter was equating planned with authorized categories to reduce episodic emission we intend to discontinue. The RFP SIP and unplanned with non-authorized. events.7 For example, TCEQ’s studies addresses NOx and VOC emission levels 3 TCEQ RG–360A/11 ‘‘2011 Emission Inventory for the year 2011 to 2018, and during Guidelines’’ pages 65–70 and TCEQ RG–360A/14, ‘‘2014 Emission Inventory Guidelines’’ pages 70–72. 6 EPA–R06–OAR–2017–0053–0004; ‘‘Appendix B: that time period the SIP relies on NOx 4 Texas receives data on the hours that the Emissions Modeling for the HGB Attainment and VOC emission reductions that have emissions occurred for each occurrence and then Demonstration sip Revision for the 2008 Eight-Hour already occurred. In the case of the totals the emissions during ozone season and Ozone Standard’’ contingency measure reductions, these divides by the total number of hours that these 7 For a discussion of the studies please see pages types of emissions occurred to yield an average 248–251 of the Technical Support Document for the are expected to occur in 2018 due to emission rate (lb/hr that is translated to OSD) that Houston Galveston Brazoria Modeling and Other regulations that have been is included in the RFP inventories. Analyses Attainment Demonstration (HGB– implemented. In addition, it is 5 ‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for MOAAD) at https://www.regulations.gov/ important to note that the SIP relies Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter document?D=EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0387-0002. Also upon EPA’s emissions standard National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) see documents available at https:// and Regional Haze Regulations’’; EPA–454/B–17– www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/stationary-rules/ regulations which reduce criteria 003, July 2017; page 80. stakeholder/flare_stakeholder.html. pollutant emissions. The GHG

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3710 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

regulations cited by the commenter do • Does not have Federalism Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean not affect criteria pollutant emissions implications as specified in Executive Air Act, petitions for judicial review of standards and are also not related to the Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, this action must be filed in the United years addressed by the SIP. 1999); States Court of Appeals for the • Is not an economically significant appropriate circuit by April 15, 2019. III. Final Action regulatory action based on health or Filing a petition for reconsideration by We are approving the HGB RFP SIP safety risks subject to Executive Order the Administrator of this final rule does revision submitted on December 29, 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); not affect the finality of this action for 2016, to meet the RFP requirements for • Is not a significant regulatory action the purposes of judicial review nor does the HGB moderate 2008 8-hour ozone subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR it extend the time within which a nonattainment area as well as an 28355, May 22, 2001); petition for judicial review may be filed, updated 2011 base year emissions • Is not subject to requirements of and shall not postpone the effectiveness inventory for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. section 12(d) of the National of such rule or action. This action may This action is being taken under section Technology Transfer and Advancement not be challenged later in proceedings to 110 of the Act. Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because enforce its requirements. (See section IV. Statutory and Executive Order application of those requirements would 307(b)(2).) Reviews be inconsistent with the CAA; and • Does not provide EPA with the List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Under the CAA, the Administrator is discretionary authority to address, as required to approve a SIP submission Environmental protection, Air appropriate, disproportionate human pollution control, Incorporation by that complies with the provisions of the health or environmental effects, using Act and applicable Federal regulations. reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, practicable and legally permissible Reporting and recordkeeping 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). methods, under Executive Order 12898 Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the requirements, Volatile organic (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). compounds. EPA’s role is to approve state choices, In addition, the SIP is not approved Dated: February 6, 2019. provided that they meet the criteria of to apply on any Indian reservation land the CAA. Accordingly, this action or in any other area where EPA or an Anne Idsal, merely approves state law as meeting Indian tribe has demonstrated that a Regional Administrator, Region 6. Federal requirements and does not tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of impose additional requirements beyond 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: Indian country, the rule does not have those imposed by state law. For that tribal implications and will not impose PART 52—APPROVAL AND reason, this action: • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory substantial direct costs on tribal PROMULGATION OF action’’ subject to review by the Office governments or preempt tribal law as IMPLEMENTATION PLANS of Management and Budget under specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 ■ Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 1. The authority citation for part 52 October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, The Congressional Review Act, 5 continues to read as follows: January 21, 2011); U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 Business Regulatory Enforcement FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides Subpart SS—Texas action because SIP approvals are that before a rule may take effect, the exempted under Executive Order 12866; agency promulgating the rule must ■ 2. In § 52.2270(e), the second table • Does not impose an information submit a rule report, which includes a titled ‘‘EPA Approved Nonregulatory collection burden under the provisions copy of the rule, to each House of the Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 Congress and to the Comptroller General Measures in the Texas SIP’’ is amended U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); of the United States. EPA will submit a by adding an entry at the end for ‘‘HGB • Is certified as not having a report containing this action and other Area Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) significant economic impact on a required information to the U.S. Senate, Plan, RFP Contingency Measures, RFP substantial number of small entities the U.S. House of Representatives, and Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 the Comptroller General of the United 2017, and Revised 2011 Base Year U.S.C. 601 et seq.); States prior to publication of the rule in Emissions Inventory for the 2008 Ozone • Does not contain any unfunded the Federal Register. A major rule NAAQS’’ to read as follows: mandate or significantly or uniquely cannot take effect until 60 days after it affect small governments, as described is published in the Federal Register. § 52.2270 Identification of plan. in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as * * * * * of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). (e) * * *

EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP

State Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic submittal/ EPA approval date Comments or nonattainment area effective date

******* HGB Area Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) Brazoria, Chambers, 12/29/2016 2/13/2019, [Insert Fed- Plan, RFP Contingency Measures, RFP Motor Fort Bend, Galveston, eral Register citation]. Vehicle Emission Budgets for 2017, and Re- Harris, Liberty, Mont- vised 2011 Base Year Emissions Inventory for gomery and Waller the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. Counties, TX.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3711

* * * * * information is not publicly available, mention of the substantive aspects of [FR Doc. 2019–02021 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] e.g., Confidential Business Information the proposed action. Consequently, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P or other information whose disclosure is these comments are not germane to this restricted by statute. Certain other rulemaking and require no further material, such as copyrighted material, response. In addition, one commenter ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION is not placed on the internet and will be submitted several comments that do not AGENCY publicly available only in hard copy suggest a change in or specific problems form. Publicly available docket with our proposed action. Therefore, 40 CFR Part 52 materials are available either through these comments also require no further [EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0147; FRL–9989–33– http://www.regulations.gov, or please response. Region 5] contact the person identified in the FOR III. What action is EPA taking? FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section Air Plan Approval; Indiana; for additional availability information. Based on the above and the Reasonable Further Progress Plan and information contained in EPA’s FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Other Plan Elements for the Chicago proposed rule, EPA is approving Kathleen D’Agostino, Environmental Nonattainment Area for the 2008 revisions to Indiana’s SIP pursuant to Scientist, Attainment Planning and Ozone Standard section 110 and part D of the CAA and Maintenance Section, Air Programs EPA’s regulations because Indiana’s AGENCY: Environmental Protection Branch (AR–18J), Environmental February 28, 2017 nonattainment plan Agency (EPA). Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West submission and January 1, 2018, Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois ACTION: Final rule. supplement satisfy the emissions 60604, (312) 886–1767, inventory, RFP, RFP contingency SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection [email protected]. Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to measures, transportation conformity, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VOC RACT, I/M, and nonattainment the Indiana State Implementation Plan Throughout this document whenever (SIP) to meet the base year emissions moderate area NSR requirements of the ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean CAA for the Indiana portion of the inventory, reasonable further progress EPA. (RFP), RFP contingency measure, Chicago area for the 2008 ozone nonattainment new source review I. What is being addressed in this NAAQS. Final approval of Indiana’s SIP (nonattainment NSR), volatile organic document? as meeting these nonattainment NSR compound (VOC) reasonably available requirements of the CAA for the 2008 This rule addresses revisions to the ozone NAAQS permanently stops the control technology (RACT), and motor Indiana SIP submitted by the Indiana vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/ and FIP clock triggered by EPA’s Department of Environmental February 3, 2017 finding that Indiana M) requirements of the Clean Air Act Management (IDEM) on February 28, (CAA) for the Indiana portion of the failed to submit a marginal ozone 2017 and supplemented on January 9, nonattainment NSR plan. Chicago-Naperville, Illinois-Indiana- 2018. EPA is approving a number of Wisconsin area (Chicago area) for the nonattainment plan elements included IV. Statutory and Executive Order 2008 ozone national ambient air quality in that submission, specifically a Reviews standard (NAAQS or standard). EPA is revised 2011 base year emissions Under the CAA the Administrator is also approving the 2017 transportation inventory for VOC and oxides of conformity motor vehicle emissions required to approve a SIP submission nitrogen (NOX), a 15% RFP plan, a 3% that complies with the provisions of the budgets (MVEBs) for the Indiana portion RFP contingency measure plan, 2017 of the Chicago area for the 2008 ozone CAA and applicable Federal regulations. VOC and NOX motor vehicle emissions 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). NAAQS. EPA is approving the state’s budgets, a nonattainment NSR submission as a SIP revision pursuant to Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, certification, a VOC RACT certification, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, section 110 and part D of the CAA and and an enhanced I/M certification. The EPA’s regulations because it satisfies the provided that they meet the criteria of background for this action is discussed the CAA. Accordingly, this action emission inventory, RFP, RFP in detail in EPA’s proposal, dated contingency measure, nonattainment merely approves state law as meeting August 28, 2018 (83 FR 43825). As Federal requirements and does not NSR, VOC RACT, I/M, and discussed in the proposal, final transportation conformity requirements impose additional requirements beyond approval of Indiana’s nonattainment those imposed by state law. For that for areas classified as moderate NSR certification permanently stops the nonattainment for the 2008 ozone reason, this action: FIP clock triggered by EPA’s February 3, • Is not a significant regulatory action NAAQS. This final action permanently 2017 finding that Indiana failed to subject to review by the Office of stops the Federal Implementation Plan submit a marginal ozone nonattainment Management and Budget under (FIP) clock triggered by EPA’s February NSR plan. Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 3, 2017 finding that Indiana failed to October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, submit a marginal ozone nonattainment II. What comments did we receive on the proposed rule? January 21, 2011); NSR plan. EPA proposed to approve • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 these provisions on August 28, 2018 and EPA provided a 30-day review and FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory received public comments. comment period for the August 28, action because SIP approvals are DATES: This final rule is effective March 2018, proposed rule. The comment exempted under Executive Order 12866; 15, 2019. period ended on September 27, 2018. • Does not impose an information ADDRESSES: EPA has established a We received a number of anonymous collection burden under the provisions docket for this action under Docket ID comments that address subjects outside of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 No. EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0147. All the scope of our proposed action, do not U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); documents in the docket are listed in explain (or provide a legal basis for) • Is certified as not having a the http://www.regulations.gov website. how the proposed action should differ significant economic impact on a Although listed in the index, some in any way, and make no specific substantial number of small entities

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3712 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Indian country, the rule does not have for judicial review may be filed, and U.S.C. 601 et seq.); tribal implications and will not impose shall not postpone the effectiveness of • Does not contain any unfunded substantial direct costs on tribal such rule or action. This action may not mandate or significantly or uniquely governments or preempt tribal law as be challenged later in proceedings to affect small governments, as described specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 enforce its requirements. (See section in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 307(b)(2).) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); The Congressional Review Act, 5 • Does not have Federalism U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 implications as specified in Executive Business Regulatory Enforcement Environmental protection, Air Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides pollution control, Incorporation by 1999); that before a rule may take effect, the reference, Intergovernmental relations, • Is not an economically significant agency promulgating the rule must Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Volatile regulatory action based on health or submit a rule report, which includes a organic compounds. safety risks subject to Executive Order copy of the rule, to each House of the 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Congress and to the Comptroller General Dated: December 21, 2018. • Is not a significant regulatory action of the United States. EPA will submit a James O. Payne, subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR report containing this action and other Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 28355, May 22, 2001); required information to the U.S. Senate, 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: • Is not subject to requirements of the U.S. House of Representatives, and Section 12(d) of the National the Comptroller General of the United PART 52—APPROVAL AND Technology Transfer and Advancement States prior to publication of the rule in PROMULGATION OF Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because the Federal Register. A major rule IMPLEMENTATION PLANS application of those requirements would cannot take effect until 60 days after it be inconsistent with the CAA; and is published in the Federal Register. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 • Does not provide EPA with the This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as continues to read as follows: discretionary authority to address, as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. appropriate, disproportionate human Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, health or environmental effects, using petitions for judicial review of this ■ 2. In § 52.770, the table in paragraph practicable and legally permissible action must be filed in the United States (e) is amended by adding an entry in methods, under Executive Order 12898 Court of Appeals for the appropriate alphabetical order for ‘‘Lake and Porter (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). circuit by April 15, 2019. Filing a Counties 2008 8-hour Ozone Moderate In addition, the SIP is not approved petition for reconsideration by the Planning Elements’’ to read as follows: to apply on any Indian reservation land Administrator of this final rule does not or in any other area where EPA or an affect the finality of this action for the § 52.770 Identification of plan. Indian tribe has demonstrated that a purposes of judicial review nor does it * * * * * tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of extend the time within which a petition (e) * * *

EPA-APPROVED INDIANA NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Title Indiana date EPA approval Explanation

******* Lake and Porter Counties 2/28/2017 and 1/9/2018 ..... 2/13/2019, [Insert Federal 2011 base year emissions inventory, Reasonable Fur- 2008 8-hour Ozone Mod- Register citation]. ther Progress (RFP) plan, RFP contingency measure erate Planning Elements. plan, 2017 VOC and NOX motor vehicle emissions budgets, nonattainment new source review certifi- cation, VOC reasonable further progress certifi- cation, and enhanced motor vehicle inspection and maintenance program certification.

*******

[FR Doc. 2019–02212 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACTION: Final rule. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P AGENCY SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 40 CFR Part 62 Agency (EPA) is notifying the public that we have received from Indiana [EPA–R05–OAR–2018–0600; FRL–9989–36– requests for withdrawals of the Region 5] previously approved state plans and notification of negative declarations for Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Negative Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Declarations for Commercial and Incineration (CISWI) units and Sewage Industrial Solid Waste Incineration and Sludge Incineration (SSI) units. The Sewage Sludge Incineration Units for Indiana Department of Environmental Designated Facilities and Pollutants Management (IDEM) submitted its CISWI withdrawal and negative AGENCY: Environmental Protection declaration by letter dated July 31, 2017 Agency (EPA). and its SSI withdrawal and negative

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3713

declaration by letter dated July 31, 2017. CISWI units currently operating in FR 3821, January 21, 2011). For this IDEM notified EPA in its negative Indiana.1 reason, this action is also not subject to declaration letters that there are no IDEM submitted a SSI state plan on Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions CISWI or SSI units subject to the February 27, 2013. EPA approved the Concerning Regulations That requirements of the Clean Air Act (Act) state plan and it became effective on Significantly Affect Energy Supply, currently operating in Indiana. On August 12, 2013. 78 FR 34918. On July Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May October 3, 2018, EPA published a notice 31, 2017, IDEM submitted its SSI 22, 2001). This action is not an of proposed rulemaking for these withdrawal and negative declaration, in Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, negative declarations. which it certified that there are no February 2, 2017) regulatory action longer any existing SSI units currently because this action is not significant DATES: This final rule is effective on operating in Indiana. Because there are under E.O. 12866. This action merely March 15, 2019. no existing sources subject to the 2013 approves state law as meeting Federal ADDRESSES: EPA has established a state plan, IDEM is requesting to requirements and merely notifies the docket for this action under Docket ID withdraw the 2013 state plan and public of EPA’s receipt of negative No. EPA–R05–OAR–2018–0600. All replace it with a negative declaration. declarations from an air pollution documents in the docket are listed on On October 3, 2018, EPA published a control agency without any existing notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) the http://www.regulations.gov website. CISWI or SSI units in its state. This proposing notice of Indiana’s negative Although listed in the index, some action imposes no requirements beyond declarations for CISWI and SSI. The information is not publicly available, those imposed by the state. Accordingly, specific details of Indiana’s request and i.e., Confidential Business Information the Administrator certifies that this rule the rationale for EPA’s approval are (CBI) or other information whose will not have a significant economic discussed in the NPRM and will not be impact on a substantial number of small disclosure is restricted by statute. restated here. Certain other material, such as entities under the Regulatory Flexibility copyrighted material, is not placed on II. What public comments were Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this the internet and will be publicly received on the proposed approval and rule pertains to pre-existing available only in hard copy form. what is EPA’s response? requirements under state law and does Publicly available docket materials are EPA received one anonymous not impose any additional enforceable available either through comment on its November 1, 2018, duty beyond that required by state law, www.regulations.gov or at the proposal. This comment addresses it does not contain any unfunded Environmental Protection Agency, subjects outside the scope of our mandate or significantly or uniquely Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 proposed action, does not explain (or affect small governments, as described West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, provide a legal basis for) how the in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Illinois 60604. This facility is open from proposed action should differ in any of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). This rule is not 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through way, and makes no specific mention of approved to apply on any Indian Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We the substantive aspects of the proposed reservation land or in any other area recommend that you telephone Margaret action. Therefore, this comment is not where EPA or an Indian tribe has Sieffert, Environmental Engineer, at germane to this rulemaking and requires demonstrated that a tribe has (312) 353–1151 before visiting the no further response. jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian Region 5 office. country, the rule does not have tribal III. What action is EPA taking? implications and will not impose FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: EPA is notifying the public of EPA’s substantial direct costs on tribal Margaret Sieffert, Environmental receipt of IDEM’s negative declarations governments or preempt tribal law as Engineer, Environmental Protection for both CISWI and SSI facilities and specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson amending 40 CFR part 62 to reflect both FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This Boulevard (AT–18J), Chicago, Illinois negative declarations. EPA received the action also does not have Federalism 60604, (312) 353–1151, CISWI and SSI negative declarations implications because it does not have [email protected]. and withdrawal requests by letters dated substantial direct effects on the states, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: July 31, 2017. In this action, EPA is on the relationship between the national Throughout this document whenever finalizing its notification. EPA is also government and the states, or on the ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean revising 40 CFR part 62.3660 and distribution of power and 62.3670 to reflect these notifications. responsibilities among the various EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION levels of government, as specified in section is arranged as follows: IV. Statutory and Executive Order Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, Reviews I. Background August 10, 1999). This action merely II. What public comments were received on A. General Requirements provides notice of receipt of negative the proposed approval and what is EPA’s This action is not a ‘‘significant declarations, and does not alter the response? regulatory action’’ under the terms of relationship or the distribution of power III. What action is EPA taking? Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, and responsibilities established in the IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews October 4, 1993) and therefore is not Act. This rule also is not subject to I. Background subject to review by the Office of Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, Management and Budget under April 23, 1997), because it just notifying IDEM submitted a CISWI state plan on Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 the public regarding receipt of the December 20, 2002. EPA approved the negative declarations. state plan and it became effective on 1 Previously, an incinerator located at Covance In reviewing state plan submissions, August 11, 2003. 68 FR 35181. On July Laboratories, Inc. was listed by Indiana as subject EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 31, 2017, IDEM submitted its CISWI to the CISWI. In a letter dated June 18, 2018, however, EPA determined that Covance’s provided that they meet the criteria of negative declaration, in which it incinerator was not a ‘‘CISWI unit’’ under the the Act. With regard to negative certified that there are no longer any regulations. declarations for designated facilities

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3714 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

received by EPA from states, EPA’s role Sludge Incineration Units, Reporting ACTION: Final rule. is to notify the public of the receipt of and record-keeping requirements. such negative declarations and revise 40 SUMMARY: This final rule amends the Dated: December 21, 2018. General Services Administration CFR part 62 accordingly. In this context, James O. Payne, in the absence of a prior existing Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) coverage Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. requirement for the state to use on construction contracts, including voluntary consensus standards (VCS), 40 CFR part 62 is amended as follows: provisions and clauses for solicitations EPA has no authority to disapprove a and resultant contracts, to clarify, PART 62—APPROVAL AND state plan submission or negative update, and incorporate existing PROMULGATION OF STATE PLANS declaration for failure to use VCS. It construction contract administration FOR DESIGNATED FACILITIES AND would thus be inconsistent with procedures. This final rule includes new POLLUTANTS information collection requirements that applicable law for EPA, when it reviews will be submitted to OMB for review a state plan or negative declaration ■ 1. The authority citation for part 62 and approval. submission, to use VCS in place of a continues to read as follows: state plan or negative declaration DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is submission that otherwise satisfies the Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. effective on March 15, 2019. provisions of the Act. Thus, the ■ 2. Revise § 62.3660 to read as follows: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For requirements of section 12(d) of the clarification about content, contact Mr. § 62.3660 Identification of plan—negative Tony O. Hubbard, Acquisition Policy National Technology Transfer and declaration. Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Division, by phone at 202–357–5810 or On July 31, 2017, the Indiana 272 note) do not apply. This rule does by email at [email protected]. For Department of Environmental not impose an information collection information pertaining to status or Management submitted a negative burden under the provisions of the publication schedules, contact the declaration letter to EPA certifying that Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Regulatory Secretariat division by mail there are no existing Commercial and U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). at 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC Industrial Solid Waste Incineration 20405, or by phone at 202–501–4755. The Congressional Review Act, 5 (CISWI) units in the State of Indiana U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Please cite the GSAR Case 2015–G503, subject to the emissions guidelines at 40 Construction Contract Administration. Business Regulatory Enforcement CFR part 60, subpart DDDD. Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ■ 3. Revise § 62.3670 to read as follows: that before a rule may take effect, the I. Background agency promulgating the rule must § 62.3670 Identification of plan—negative GSA published a proposed rule in the submit a rule report, which includes a declaration. Federal Register at 81 FR 62434 on copy of the rule, to each House of the On July 31, 2017, the Indiana September 9, 2016 to revise sections of Congress and to the Comptroller General Department of Environmental GSAR part 536, Construction and of the United States. EPA will submit a Management submitted a negative Architect-Engineer Contracts, and report containing this action and other declaration letter to EPA certifying that related parts, to maintain consistency required information to the U.S. Senate, there are no existing Sewage Sludge with the Federal Acquisition Regulation the U.S. House of Representatives, and Incineration (SSI) units in the State of (FAR) and to clarify, update and the Comptroller General of the United Indiana subject to the emissions incorporate existing construction States prior to publication of the rule in guidelines at 40 CFR part 60, subpart contract administration guidance the Federal Register. A major rule MMMM. previously implemented through cannot take effect until 60 days after it internal Public Building Service (PBS) is published in the Federal Register. § 62.3671 [Removed and Reserved] policies. No comments were submitted This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as ■ 4. Section 62.3671 is removed and on the proposed rule. defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). reserved. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, II. Discussion and Analysis § 62.3672 [Removed and Reserved] petitions for judicial review of this Beyond a minor technical correction, ■ action must be filed in the United States 5. Section 62.3672 is removed and no changes were made to the rule. The Court of Appeals for the appropriate reserved. minor technical correction regards circuit by April 15, 2019. Filing a [FR Doc. 2019–02209 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] GSAR Clause 552.243–71 Equitable petition for reconsideration by the BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Adjustments. The proposed rule Administrator of this final rule does not discussion and analysis section noted affect the finality of this action for the incorrectly that only the prescription for purposes of judicial review nor does it GENERAL SERVICES this existing clause changed. The text of extend the time within which a petition ADMINISTRATION the clause in addition to the for judicial review may be filed, and prescription is revised to include the shall not postpone the effectiveness of 48 CFR Parts 501, 511, 517, 532, 536, changes clause for simplified such rule or action. This action may not 543, 546, and 552 acquisitions and the differing site be challenged later in proceedings to [GSAR Change 98; GSAR Case 2015–G503; conditions clause. The CFR enforce its requirements. (See section Docket No. 2016–0015; Sequence No. 1] amendments to the clause prescription 307(b)(2).) and clause text identified in the RIN 3090–AJ63 List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62 proposed rule were correct. General Services Administration III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 Administrative practice and Acquisition Regulation (GSAR); procedure, Air pollution control, Construction Contract Administration Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 of Environmental protection, Commercial September 30, 1993, Regulatory and Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators, AGENCY: Office of Acquisition Policy, Planning and Review, directs agencies Intergovernmental relations, Sewage General Services Administration (GSA). to assess all costs and benefits of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3715

available regulatory alternatives and, if clauses currently in use in construction requires the contractor to identify a regulation is necessary, to select solicitations and contracts. The rule does not schedule of values, to provide updates regulatory approaches that maximize pose any new reporting, recordkeeping or specifically weekly or monthly, and to net benefits (including potential other compliance requirements. follow a critical path method in some economic, environmental, public health The Regulatory Secretariat Division cases. However, the clause does not add and safety effects, distributive impacts, has submitted a copy of the FRFA to the burden to what is already estimated for and equity). Section 6(b) of the E.O. Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small FAR Clause 52.236–15 Schedules for requires the OMB Office of Information Business Administration. Interested Construction Contracts under OMB and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) to review parties may obtain a copy of the FRFA Control Number 9000–0058 Schedules regulatory actions that have been from the Regulatory Secretariat for Construction Contracts. identified as significant regulatory Division. The new provision at GSAR 552.236– actions by the promulgating agency or VI. Paperwork Reduction Act 76 Basis of Award-Sealed Bidding OIRA. This rule is not a significant Construction removes the use of regulatory action and was therefore not The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 alternates in sealed bidding. The subject to OIRA review. This rule is not U.S.C. Chapter 35) does apply because provision was previously GSAR a ‘‘major rule,’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. the final rule contains six clauses and 552.236–73 Basis of Award- 804. provisions with information collection Construction Contracts. The provision requirements. However, five of these title and prescription are revised to IV. Executive Order 13771 clauses and provisions do not impose provide clarity, and the provision This final rule is not subject to E.O. additional information collection regulations are simplified. This 13771, because this rule is not a requirements to the paperwork burden provision change will reduce the significant regulatory action under E.O. previously approved under existing complexity to businesses during 12866. OMB Control Numbers. Only one of the contract solicitation as bid sheet line six involves information collection V. Regulatory Flexibility Act items will be more clearly understood requirements that have not previously for pricing. The provision does not add GSA does not expect this final rule to been approved by OMB. burden to what is already estimated have a significant economic impact on Clauses and Provisions Already Covered under OMB Control Number 3090–0163 a substantial number of small entities by Existing Information Collections Information Specific to a Contract or within the meaning of the Regulatory Contracting Action. Flexibility Act, at 5 U.S.C. 601, et. seq., The new clause at GSAR 552.211–13 because the rule will incorporate Time Extensions requires the contractor Clauses and Provisions Not Covered by clauses that are currently in use in GSA to submit a written request detailing an Existing Information Collections analysis to justify a time extension. construction solicitations and contracts The new clause at GSAR 552.236–72 However, the clause does not add and contractors are familiar with and Submittals involves an existing burden to what is already estimated for are currently complying with these information collection requirement that FAR Clause 52.243–4 Changes under practices. However, a Final Initial has never been previously approved by OMB Control Number 9000–0026 Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) OMB. The information collected is used has been prepared. There were no Change Order Accounting. The new clause at GSAR 552.211–70 by PBS to evaluate a contractor’s comments submitted in response to the proposals, negotiate contract initial regulatory flexibility analysis Substantial Completion requires the contractor to submit a written notice of modifications, evaluate a contractor’s provided in the proposed rule. progress, and review payment requests The FRFA has been prepared proposed substantial completion date for the construction work. However, the during contract administration. The consistent with the criteria of 5 U.S.C. clause was previously GSAR 552.236– 604 and is summarized as follows: clause does not add burden to what is already estimated for FAR Clause 78 Shop Drawings, Coordination This final rule amends the General 52.236–15 Schedules for Construction Drawings, and Schedules. The clause is Services Administration Acquisition simplified, including removing the Regulation (GSAR) coverage on construction Contracts under OMB Control Number 9000–0058 Schedules for Construction requirement for a specific number of contracts, including provisions and clauses prints and copies of various submittals. for solicitations and resultant contracts, to Contracts. clarify, update, and incorporate existing The new clause at GSAR 552.232–5 This simplification will ease the construction contract administration Payments under Fixed-Price compliance burden for the contractor procedures. Construction Contracts requires the during contract administration from the The objective of this rule is to amend the contractor to use certain GSA forms to current state. GSAR to revise sections of GSAR Part 536, submit the information necessary for a Public reporting burden for GSAR Construction and Architect-Engineer 552.236–72 Submittals is estimated to Contracts, and related parts, to maintain complete payment request. However, the clause does not add burden to what average 8 hours per response, including consistency with the FAR and to incorporate the time for reviewing instructions, existing agency guidance previously is already estimated for GSAR 532.905– implemented through internal PBS policies. 70 Final Payment—Construction and searching existing data sources, There were no comments submitted and Building Service Contracts, FAR Clause gathering and maintaining the data therefore no significant issues raised by the 52.232–5 Payments under Fixed-Price needed, and completing and reviewing public in response to the initial regulatory Construction Contracts, and FAR Clause the collection of information. flexibility analysis provided in the proposed 52.232–27 Prompt Payment for The annual public reporting burden is rule. Construction Contracts under OMB estimated as follows: The final rule changes will apply to Control Numbers 3090–0080 Contract Respondents: 3,758. approximately 3,900 GSA construction Responses per respondent: 1. contracts. Of these, approximately 3,500 (90 Financing Final Payment, 9000–0070 percent) construction contracts are held by Payments, and 9000–0102 Prompt Total annual responses: 3,758. small businesses. The rule is unlikely to Payment. Preparation hours per response: 8. affect small businesses awarded GSA The new clause at GSAR 552.236–15 Total response burden hours: 30,064. construction contracts as it implements Schedules for Construction Contracts Cost per hour: $54.30.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3716 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

Estimated cost burden to the public: ■ a. Removing the entry for solicitations and stock replenishment $1,632,475. ‘‘532.111(c)’’; contracts that do not include the The estimated cost of $54.30 per hour ■ b. Revising the entry for ‘‘532.905– Availability for Inspection, Testing, and is based on the task being accomplished 70’’; Shipment/Delivery clause at 552.211–83 by mid-level contractor personnel ■ c. Removing the entry for ‘‘532.905– and require shipment within 45 equivalent to a GS–12, Step 5 salary 71’’; and calendar days after receipt of the order. (Base Pay and Rest of US Locality Pay) ■ d. Adding, in numerical sequence, If shipment is required in more than 45 (Salary Table 2018–GS, Effective entries for ‘‘552.211–13(a)’’, ‘‘552.211– days, the contracting officer shall use January 2018), with fringe of 36.25 70(b)’’, ‘‘552.232–5’’, ‘‘552.236–15’’ and Alternate I of 552.211–81. percent (OMB Memo M–08–13). ‘‘552.236–72’’. (3) Indeterminate testing time. The Government burden for GSAR The revision and additions read as contracting officer shall insert 552.211– 552.236–72 Submittals is estimated to follows: 83, Availability for Inspection, Testing, average 2 hours per response, including 501.106 OMB approval under the and Shipment/Delivery, in solicitations the time to review the submittal Paperwork Reduction Act. and contracts that provide for source documents. inspection by Government personnel The annual government burden is and that require lengthy testing for GSAR OMB Control No. estimated as follows: reference which time frames cannot be Total annual responses: 3,758. determined in advance. If the contract is Review hours per response: 2. for stock items, the contracting officer Total review time: 7,516. ***** 532.905–70 ...... 3090–0080 shall use Alternate I of 552.211–83. Cost per hour: $54.30. (4) Stock program supply delivery Estimated cost burden to the public: time. The contracting officer shall insert $408,119. ***** 552.211–13(a) ...... 9000–0026 the clause at 552.211–94, Time of The estimated cost of $54.30 per hour 552.211–70(b) ...... 9000–0058 Delivery, in solicitations and contracts is based on the task being accomplished for supplies for the Stock Program when by mid-level government personnel ***** neither of the FAR delivery clauses equivalent to a GS–12, Step 5 salary 552.232–5 ...... 3090–0080, 9000–0070, (FAR 52.211–8 or 52.211–9) is suitable. (Base Pay and Rest of US Locality Pay) and 9000–0102 (b) Construction. (1) The contracting (Salary Table 2018–GS, Effective officer shall insert the clause at January 2018), with fringe of 36.25 ***** 552.211–10, Commencement, percent (OMB Memo M–08–13). 552.236–15 ...... 9000–0058 Prosecution, and Completion of Work, GSA solicited public comments on 552.236–72 ...... 3090–0308 in solicitations and contracts when a this information collection requirement ***** fixed-price construction contract is at the proposed rule stage. There were contemplated. no public comments received. GSA will (2) The contracting officer shall insert submit to OMB a request to review and PART 511—DESCRIBING AGENCY the clause at 552.211–70, Substantial approve this new information collection NEEDS Completion in solicitations and requirement. For a copy of the ■ 3. The authority citation for 48 CFR contracts when a fixed-price information collection documents, part 511 continues to read as follows: construction contract is contemplated. contact the Regulatory Secretariat Division by mail at 1800 F Street NW, Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c). ■ 5. Add subpart 511.5 to read as Washington, DC 20405, or by phone at ■ 4. Revise section 511.404 to read as follows: 202–501–4755. Please cite OMB Control follows: Subpart 511.5—Liquidated Damages Number 3090–0308, Construction 511.404 Contract clauses. Contract Administration. 511.504 Contract clauses. (a) Supplies or services—(1) Shelf-life List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 501, items. The contracting officer shall use (a) The contracting officer shall insert 511, 517, 532, 536, 543, 546, and 552. the following clauses in solicitations the clause at 552.211–12, Liquidated Damages-Construction, in solicitations Government procurement. and contracts that require delivery of shelf-life items within a specified and contracts for construction, other Dated: February 4, 2019. number of months from the date of than cost-plus-fixed-fee, when the Jeffrey A. Koses, manufacture or production: contracting officer determines that Senior Procurement Executive, Office of (i) The contracting officer shall insert liquidated damages are appropriate (see Acquisition Policy, Office of Government- 552.211–79, Acceptable Age of FAR 11.501(a)). wide Policy, General Services Administration. Supplies, if the required shelf-life (b) The contracting officer shall insert For the reasons described in the period is 12 months or less, and lengthy the clause at 552.211–13, Time preamble, GSA amends 48 CFR parts acceptance testing may be involved. For Extensions, in solicitations and 501, 511, 517, 532, 536, 543, 546, and items having a limited shelf-life, contracts for construction that use the 552 as set forth below: substitute Alternate I when required by clause at 552.211–12, Liquidated the program director. Damages-Construction. PART 501—GENERAL SERVICES (ii) The contracting officer shall insert ADMINISTRATION ACQUISITION 552.211–80, Age on Delivery, if the PART 517—SPECIAL CONTRACTING REGULATION SYSTEM required shelf-life period is more than METHODS 12 months, or when source inspection ■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR ■ 6. The authority citation for 48 CFR can be performed within a short time part 501 continues to read as follows: part 517 is revised to read as follows: period. Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c). (2) Stock replenishment contracts. Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c). ■ 2. Amend section 501.106 in the table The contracting officer shall insert ■ 7. Revise sections 517.200 and by— 552.211–81, Time of Shipment, in 517.202 to read as follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3717

517.200 Scope of subpart. PART 536—CONSTRUCTION AND adjustment based on cost or price (a) Except as provided in paragraph ARCHITECT–ENGINEER CONTRACTS indexes of labor or materials (see FAR (b) of this section, this subpart applies 16.203–4(d)). Subject to the approval of to contracts for supplies and services, ■ 10. The authority citation for 48 CFR the Head of the Contracting Activity including architect-engineer services. part 536 continues to read as follows: (HCA), the contracting officer may (b) Policies and procedures for the use Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c). develop and insert a project-specific of options in solicitation provisions and ■ 11. Revise subparts 536.2 and 536.5 to price adjustment clause into the solicitation. contract clauses for services involving read as follows: construction, alteration, or repair 536.270–2 Solicitations. (including dredging, excavating, and Subpart 536.2—Special Aspects of painting) of buildings, bridges, roads, or Solicitations containing options shall: Contracting for Construction (a) Include appropriate option other kinds of real property are provisions and clauses when resulting prescribed in 536.270. FAR subpart 17.2 Sec. contracts will provide for the exercise of and this subpart do not apply to the use 536.270 Options in construction options (see 536.270–5); of options in solicitation provisions and contracting. 536.270–1 Use of options. (b) State the period within which the contract clauses for services involving 536.270–2 Solicitations. options may be exercised; and construction, alteration, or repair 536.270–3 Evaluation. (c) State whether the basis of (including dredging, excavating, and 536.270–4 Exercise of options. evaluation is inclusive or exclusive of painting) of buildings, bridges, roads, or 536.270–5 Solicitation provisions and the options (if exclusive, see 536.270– other kinds of real property. contract clauses. 4(c)). 517.202 Use of options. 536.270 Options in construction 536.270–3 Evaluation. contracting. (a) Options may be used when they For sealed bidding that includes meet one or more of the following 536.270–1 Use of options. options: objectives: (a) Subject to the limitations in this (a) The low bidder for purposes of (1) Reduce procurement lead time and section, contracting officers may include award is the responsible bidder offering associated costs. the lowest aggregate price for the base (2) Ensure continuity of contract options in contracts when it is in the Government’s interest. bid and all options designated to be support. evaluated. (3) Improve overall contractor (b) The scope of work in the base contract at award shall require the (b) Before opening bids that include performance. options, the contracting officer must (4) Facilitate longer term contractual contractor to provide a discrete and fully functional deliverable. Options determine, and record in the contract relationships with those contractors that file, the amount of funds available for continually meet or exceed quality shall not be used to incrementally deliver work required to fulfill the the project. The amount recorded must performance expectations. be announced at the beginning of the (b) An option is normally in the requirements of the scope of work for the base contract. bid opening. This amount may be Government’s interest in the following increased later when determining the circumstances: (c) Contracting officers shall justify in writing the use of options. items to be awarded to the low bidder (1) There is an anticipated need for if the following condition is met: The additional supplies or services during (d) Including an option may be in the Government’s interest when, in the award amount of the base bid and the contract term. evaluated options does not exceed the (2) When there is both a need for judgment of the contracting officer: (1) Additional work beyond the base amount offered for the base bid, the additional supplies or services beyond evaluated options, and the same the basic contract period and the use of contract is reasonably foreseeable; (2) It would not be advantageous to combination of items by any other multi-year contracting authority is responsible bidder whose bid conforms inappropriate. award a separate contract; (3) It would not be advantageous to to the solicitation. This requirement (3) There is a need for continuity of prevents the displacement of the low supply or service support. permit an additional contractor to work on the same site; bidder by manipulating the options to (c) An option shall not be used if the be used. market price is likely to change (4) Services arising out of or relating substantially and an economic price to the underlying construction contract 536.270–4 Exercise of options. adjustment clause inadequately protects may be required during or after (a) The contracting officer shall the Government’s interest. substantial completion of the scope of exercise options in writing within the work. For instance, if building time period specified in the contract. PART 532—CONTRACT FINANCING equipment (e.g., mechanical and (b) The contracting officer may electrical equipment) will be installed exercise options only after determining, ■ 8. The authority citation for 48 CFR under the construction contract, it may in writing, that all the following part 532 continues to read as follows: be advantageous to have the conditions exist: Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c). construction contractor maintain and (1) Funds are available. ■ 9. Revise section 532.111 to read as service the equipment. In such an (2) The requirement covered by the follows: instance, the services performed may be option fulfills an existing Government included as an option to the underlying need. 532.111 Contract clauses for non- construction contract. Contracting (3) Exercising the option is the most commercial purchases. officers shall ensure that the applicable advantageous method of satisfying the Insert the clause at 552.232–5, clauses are included in any such option Government’s need, price and other Payments under Fixed-Price (e.g., Service Contract Act); or factors considered. Construction Contracts, in solicitations (5) It is otherwise justified. (4) The contractor is not listed in the and contracts when a fixed-price (e) Options for construction work may System for Award Management construction contract is contemplated. provide for an economic price Exclusions (see FAR 9.405–1).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3718 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

(5) The contractor’s performance 536.572 Submittals. 536.572 Submittals. 536.573 Subcontracts. under the contract met or exceeded the Insert the clause at 552.236–72, Government’s expectation for quality 536.506 Superintendence by the Submittals, in solicitations and performance, unless another contractor. contracts if construction, dismantling, circumstance justifies an extended Insert the clause at 552.236–6, demolition, or removal of improvements contractual relationship. is contemplated. Use the clause with its (6) Exercising the option is in Superintendence by the Contractor, in solicitations and contracts if Alternate I when a design-build project accordance with the terms of the option. delivery method will be followed. (7) The option price is fair and construction, dismantling, demolition, reasonable, unless already determined or removal of improvements is 536.573 Subcontracts. as such (e.g., at time of award). contemplated. (c) The contract modification, or other Insert the clause at 552.236–73, 536.511 Use and possession prior to Subcontracts, in solicitations and written document which notifies the completion. contractor of the exercise of the option, contracts if construction, dismantling, must cite the option clause as authority. Insert the clause at 552.236–11, Use demolition, or removal of improvements If exercising an unpriced or unevaluated and Possession Prior to Completion, in is contemplated. option, cite the statutory authority solicitations and contracts if construction, dismantling, demolition, PART 543—CONTRACT permitting the use of other than full and MODIFICATIONS open competition (see FAR 6.302). or removal of improvements is (d) When the contract provides for contemplated. ■ economic price adjustment and the 12. The authority citation for 48 CFR 536.515 Schedules for construction part 543 is revised to read as follows: contractor requests a revision of the contracts. price, the contracting officer shall Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c). determine the effect of the adjustment Insert the clause at 552.236–15, ■ on prices under the option before the Schedules for Construction Contracts, in 13. Revise section 543.205 to read as option is exercised. solicitations and contracts if follows: construction, dismantling, demolition, 536.270–5 Solicitation provisions and or removal of improvements is 543.205 Contract clauses. contract clauses. contemplated. Use the clause— The contracting officer shall insert (a) Insert a provision substantially the (a) With its Alternate I when the 552.243–71, Equitable Adjustments, in same as the provision at 552.236–74, contract amount is expected to be above solicitations and contracts containing Evaluation of Options, in solicitations the simplified acquisition threshold and FAR 52.243–4, Changes, FAR 52.243–5, for fixed-price construction contracts a design-bid-build project delivery Changes and Changed Conditions, or when the solicitation contains an option method will be followed; or FAR 52.236–2, Differing Site clause and options will be included in (b) With its Alternate II when the Conditions. the evaluation for award purposes. contract amount is expected to be above PART 546—QUALITY ASSURANCE (b) Insert a provision substantially the the simplified acquisition threshold and same as the provision at 552.236–75, a design-build project delivery method ■ Evaluation Exclusive of Options, in will be followed. 14. The authority citation for 48 CFR solicitations for fixed-price construction part 546 continues to read as follows: contracts when the solicitation includes 536.521 Specifications and drawings for Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c). an option clause and options will not be construction. included in the evaluation for award Insert the clause at 552.236–21, ■ 15. Add section 546.704 to read as purposes. Specifications and Drawings for follows: (c) Insert a provision substantially the Construction, in solicitations and 546.704 Authority for use of warranties. same as the provision at 552.236–76, contracts if construction, dismantling, Basis of Award-Sealed Bidding demolition, or removal of improvements FAR clause 52.246–21, Warranty of Construction, in solicitations for fixed- is contemplated. Use the clause with its Construction, is approved by the agency price construction contracts when Alternate I when a design-build project for use in solicitations and contracts contracting by sealed bidding. Use the delivery method will be followed. when a fixed-price construction contract provision with its Alternate I when the is contemplated. solicitation contains an option clause. 536.570 Authorities and limitations. (d) Insert a clause substantially the Insert the clause at 552.236–70, PART 552—SOLICITATION same as the clause at 552.236–77, Authorities and Limitations, in PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT Government’s Right to Exercise Options, solicitations and contracts if CLAUSES in solicitations and contracts for construction, dismantling, demolition, construction that include options. or removal of improvements is ■ 16. The authority citation for 48 CFR Subpart 536.5—Contract Clauses contemplated. part 552 continues to read as follows: Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c). Sec. 536.571 Contractor responsibilities. 536.506 Superintendence by the contractor. Insert the clause at 552.236–71, ■ 17. Add sections 552.211–10, 536.511 Use and possession prior to Contractor Responsibilities, in 552.211–12, 552.211–13 and 552.211–70 completion. solicitations and contracts if to read as follows: 536.515 Schedules for construction contracts. construction, dismantling, demolition, or removal of improvements is 552.211–10 Commencement, Prosecution, 536.521 Specifications and drawings for and Completion of Work. construction. contemplated. Use the clause with its 536.570 Authorities and limitations. Alternate I when a design-build project As prescribed in 511.404, insert the 536.571 Contractor responsibilities. delivery method will be followed. following clause:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3719

Commencement, Prosecution, and a new substantial completion date to account Contractor shall only be entitled to an Completion of Work (Mar 2019) for the impact. The Contractor shall submit extension of time to address such conditions a written request to the Contracting Officer if, and to the extent that, the Contracting FAR 52.211–10, Commencement, setting forth facts and analysis in sufficient Officer provides notice of such conditions Prosecution, and Completion of Work, is detail to enable the Contracting Officer to more than 30 calendar days after receipt of supplemented as follows: evaluate the Contractor’s entitlement to an the notice of substantial completion. (a) The Contractor shall not commence extension of time. (c) Acceptance of Substantial Completion. work until the Contracting Officer issues a (b) The Contractor shall only be entitled to (1) The Contracting Officer shall conduct notice to proceed. an extension of time to the extent that— inspections and make a determination of (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this (1) Substantial completion of the work is substantial completion within a reasonable clause, the Contractor must submit any delayed by causes for which the Contractor time. required safety plans before commencing any is not responsible under this contract; and (2) Substantial Completion shall be construction work. (2) The actual or projected substantial established by the Contracting Officer’s (c) The Contractor shall diligently completion date is later than the date issuance of a written determination prosecute the work so as to achieve required by this contract for substantial specifying the date upon which the work is substantial completion of the work within completion. substantially complete. the time specified in the contract. If the (c) The Contractor shall not be entitled to (d) Contract Completion. (1) The Contract contract specifies different completion dates an extension of time if the Contractor has not is complete if and only if the Contractor has for different phases or portions of the work, updated the project schedule in accordance completed all work and related contract the Contractor shall diligently prosecute the with the contract. obligations, corrected all deficiencies and all work so as to achieve substantial completion (d) The Government shall not be liable for punch list items, and complied with all of such phases or portions of the work within any costs to mitigate time impacts incurred conditions for final payment. the times specified. by the Contractor that occur less than 30 (2) The Contractor shall not be entitled to calendar days after the date the Contractor final payment or release of any retainage held (End of clause) submits a request for extension of time in by the Government until after contract 552.211–12 Liquidated Damages- compliance with this clause. completion. If the Contractor does not Construction. achieve contract completion within the time (End of clause) required by this contract, the Government As prescribed in 511.504, insert the shall be entitled, after providing notice to the 552.211–70 Substantial Completion. following clause: Contractor, to complete any work remaining As prescribed in 511.404, insert the unfinished. The Contractor shall be liable to Liquidated Damages (Mar 2019) following clause: the Government for all costs incurred by the Government to complete such work. FAR 52.211–12, Liquidated Damages- Substantial Completion (Mar 2019) Construction, is supplemented as follows: (a) If the Contractor fails to achieve (a) General. (1) For the purposes of FAR (End of clause) substantial completion of the work within 52.211–10, Commencement, Prosecution and ■ 18. Add section 552.232–5 to read as the time specified in the contract, the Completion of Work, and FAR 52.211–12, follows: Contractor shall be liable to the Government Liquidated Damages-Construction, the work for liquidated damages at the rate specified shall be deemed complete when it is 552.232–5 Payments under Fixed-Price for each calendar day following the required ‘‘substantially complete.’’ Construction Contracts. completion date that the work is not (2) There may be different completion As prescribed in 532.111, insert the substantially complete. dates required for different phases or following clause: (b) If the contract requires different portions of the work, as established in the completion dates for different phases or contract. However, the work shall be deemed Payments Under Fixed-Price portions of the work, the Contractor shall be ‘‘substantially complete’’ if and only if the Construction Contracts (Mar 2019) liable for liquidated damages at the specified Contractor has completed the work and FAR 52.232–5, Payments under Fixed- rate for each calendar day following the related contract obligations in accordance Price Construction Contracts, is required completion date that the phase or with the contract documents, such that the supplemented as follows: portion of work is not substantially complete. Government may enjoy the intended access, (a) Before submitting a request for If a single rate is specified, the specified rate occupancy, possession, and use of the entire payment, the Contractor shall, unless shall be apportioned between the different work without impairment due to incomplete directed otherwise by the Contracting Officer, phases or portions of the work. or deficient work, and without interference attend pre-invoice payment meetings, as (c) If the Government elects to accept any from the Contractor’s completion of scheduled, with the designated Government portion of the work not specifically remaining work or correction of deficiencies representative for the purpose of facilitating designated as a phase or portion of work with in completed work. review and approval of payment requests. its own required completion date, the (3) In no event shall the work be deemed Payment meetings will be conducted and liquidated damage rate shall be apportioned ‘‘substantially complete’’ if all fire and life may be in person. The Contractor shall between accepted work and uncompleted safety systems are not tested and accepted by provide documentation to support the work, and the Contractor’s liability for the authority having jurisdiction, where such prospective payment request. liquidated damages shall be computed acceptance is required under the contract. (b) The Contractor shall submit its invoices accordingly. (4) Unless otherwise specifically noted, or to the Contracting Officer, unless directed otherwise clear from context, all references in (End of clause) otherwise by the Contracting Officer. the contract to ‘‘acceptance’’ shall refer to Separate payment requests shall be submitted 552.211–13 Time Extensions. issuance of a written determination of for progress payments, payments of retainage, substantial completion by the Contracting and partial or final payments. As prescribed in 511.504, insert the Officer. (c) The Contractor shall use GSA Form following clause: (b) Notice of Substantial Completion. (1) 2419 Certification of Progress Payments Time Extensions (Mar 2019) With reasonable advance notice, the Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts to Contractor shall submit to the Contracting provide the certification required under FAR FAR 52.211–13, Time Extensions, is Officer a written proposal recommending a 52.232–5(c). supplemented as follows: substantial completion date. (d) The Contractor shall use GSA Form (a) If the Contractor requests an extension (2) If the Contracting Officer takes 1142 Release of Claims to provide the of the time for substantial completion, the exception to the notice of substantial certification required under FAR 52.232– Contractor shall base its request on an completion, the Contractor shall be entitled 5(h). analysis of time impact using the project to a written notice of conditions precluding (e) If an invoice does not meet the schedule as its baseline, and shall propose as determination of substantial completion. The requirements of FAR 52.232–27 and GSAM

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3720 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

552.232–27, the Contracting Officer may 552.236–11 Use and Possession Prior to (2) Within 30 calendar days of written return the invoice to the Contractor without Completion. notice, or such other time as may be payment for correction. If the Contracting As prescribed in 536.511, insert the specified, from the Contracting Officer, the Officer disputes the requested payment following clause: Contractor shall take one of the following amount, the Government may pay the portion actions: of the requested payment that is undisputed. Use and Possession Prior to Completion (i) Revise the project schedule. (f) GSA will not be obligated to issue final (Mar 2019) (ii) Adjust activity progress. payment unless the Contractor has furnished (iii) Provide sufficient information to the Contracting Officer a release of claims Exercise by the Government of the right demonstrating compliance. against the Government relating to the conferred by FAR 52.236–11 shall not relieve (3) If the Contractor fails to sufficiently contract, and submitted all required product the Contractor of responsibility for address the Contracting Officer’s exceptions warranties, as-built drawings, operating completing any unfinished components of to the project schedule, the Contracting manuals, and other items as specified in the the work. Officer may— contract. The Contractor may reserve from (End of clause) (i) Withhold retainage until the project is the release specific claims only if such claims substantially complete or until such time as are explicitly identified with stated claim 552.236–15 Schedules for Construction the Contractor has complied with project amounts. Contracts. schedule requirements; or (ii) Terminate the contract for default. (End of clause) As prescribed in 536.515, insert the following clause: (h) Revisions to the schedule. If the ■ 19. Add sections 552.236–6, 552.236– Contractor revises the project schedule after 11, 552.236–15, and 552.236–21 to read Schedules for Construction Contracts initial approved submission, the Contractor as follows: (Mar 2019) shall provide in writing a narrative describing the substance of the revision, the 552.236–6 Superintendence by the The requirements, of the clause entitled rationale for the revision, and the impact of Contractor. ‘‘Schedules for Construction Contracts’’ at the revision on the projected substantial As prescribed in 536.506, insert the FAR 52.236–15, are supplemented as follows: completion date and the available float for all following clause: (a) Purpose. The project schedule shall be activities. The addition of detail to a rational, reasonable, and realistic plan for prospective activities shall not be deemed a Superintendence by the Contractor completing the work, and conform to the revision if the overall duration of the detailed (Mar 2019) requirements specified in this clause and activity does not change. elsewhere in the contract. The Contractor (i) Updates. Unless a different period for The requirements of the clause entitled understands and acknowledges that the updates is specified elsewhere, the ‘‘Superintendence by the Contractor’’ at FAR preparation and proper management of the 52.236–6, are supplemented as follows: Contractor shall update the project schedule project schedule is a material component of weekly to reflect actual progress in (a) The Contractor shall employ sufficient the contract. management and contract administration completing the work, and submit the updated (b) Use of the schedule. The Contracting project schedule by the following Monday. resources, including personnel responsible Officer shall be entitled, but not required, to for project management, field rely upon the project schedule to evaluate the (End of clause) superintendence, change order Contractor’s progress, evaluate entitlement to administration, estimating, coordination, Alternate I (Mar 2019). As prescribed extensions of time, and determine the inspection, and quality control, to ensure the in 536.515(a), substitute the following criticality or float of any activities described proper execution and timely completion of paragraphs (c), (e), (h), and (i) for in such project schedule. the contract. The Contractor shall designate paragraphs (c), (e), (h), and (i) of the (c) Submission. Prior to notice to proceed, a principal of the firm or other senior or such other time as may be specified in the basic clause: management official to provide executive contract, the Contractor shall submit the (c) Submission. Within 30 calendar days of oversight and problem resolution resources project schedule. notice to proceed, or such other time as may to the project for the life of the contract. (d) Milestones. The project schedule shall be specified in the contract, the Contractor (b) The Contractor shall employ, and require its subcontractors to employ, incorporate milestone events specified in the shall submit the project schedule, together qualified personnel to perform the contract. contract, including, as applicable, notice to with a written narrative describing the major The Government reserves the right to proceed, substantial completion, and work activities, activities on the critical path, exclude, or remove from the site or building, milestones related to specified work phases and major constraints underlying the any personnel for reasons of incompetence, and site restrictions. The project schedule sequence and logic of the project schedule. carelessness, or insubordination, who violate shall also include Contractor-defined (e) Activities. (1) The Contractor shall use rules and regulations concerning conduct on milestones to identify target dates for critical a critical path method project schedule to federal property, or whose continued events, based upon the Contractor’s chosen plan, coordinate, and perform the work. employment on the site is otherwise deemed sequence of work. (2) The project schedule shall depict all by the Government to be contrary to the (e) Activities. The project schedule shall activities necessary to complete the work, public interest. depict all major activities necessary to including, as applicable, all submittal and (c) The Contractor shall be responsible for complete the work. submittal review activities, all procurement coordinating all activities of subcontractors, (f) Schedule of values. (1) The Contractor activities, and all field activities, including including all of the following activities: shall prepare and submit for approval a cost mobilization, construction, start-up, testing, (1) Preparation of shop drawings produced breakdown of the Contract price, to be balancing, commissioning, and punchlist. by different subcontractors where their work referred to as the ‘‘schedule of values’’, (3) Activities shall be sufficiently detailed interfaces or may potentially conflict or assigning values to each major activity and limited in duration to enable proper interfere. necessary to complete the work. planning and coordination of the work, (2) Scheduling of work by subcontractors. (2) Values must include all direct and effective evaluation of the reasonableness (3) Installation of work by subcontractors. indirect costs, although a separate value for and realism of the project schedule, accurate (4) Use of the project site for staging and bond costs may be established. monitoring of progress, and reliable analysis logistics. (3) The schedule of values must contain of schedule impacts. (d) Repeated failure or excessive delay to sufficient detail to enable the Contracting (4) Activity durations shall be based upon meet the superintendence requirements by Officer to evaluate applications for payment. reasonable and realistic allocation of the the Contractor may be deemed a default for (g) Conflicting terms. (1) If at any time the resources required to complete each activity, the purposes of the termination for default Contracting Officer finds that the project given physical and logistical constraints on clause. schedule does not comply with any contract the performance of the work. All logic shall requirement, the Contracting Officer will validly reflect physical or logistical (End of clause) provide written notice to the Contractor. constraints on relationships between

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3721

activities. Except for the first and last constraints on relationships between (h) For the purposes of this clause, activities in the project schedule, each activities. Except for the first and last specifications and drawings refer only to activity shall have at least one predecessor activities in the project schedule, each those included among the contract and one successor relationship to form a activity shall have at least one predecessor documents, and not to those produced by the logically connected network plan from notice and one successor relationship to form a Contractor pursuant to its responsibilities to proceed to the contract completion date. logically connected network plan from notice under the contract. (h) Revisions to the schedule. (1) The to proceed to the contract completion date. Contractor should anticipate that the initial (i) Updates. Unless a different period for 552.236–70 [Removed] submittal of the project schedule will be updates is specified elsewhere, the ■ 20. Remove section 552.236–70. subject to review and may require revision. Contractor shall update the project schedule The Contractor shall devote sufficient monthly to reflect actual progress in 552.236–71 [Redesignated as 552.236–70 resources for meetings, revisions, and completing the work, and submit the updated and Amended] project schedule within 5 working days of resubmissions of the project schedule to ■ address any exceptions taken to the initial the end of each month. 21. Redesignate section 552.236–71 as submittal. The Contractor understands and section 552.236–70 and revise newly acknowledges that the purpose of the initial 552.236–21 Specifications and Drawings redesignated section 552.236–70 to read review and resolution of exceptions is to for Construction. as follows: maximize the usefulness of the project As prescribed in 536.521, insert the schedule for contract performance. following clause: 552.236–70 Authorities and Limitations. (2) If the Contractor revises the project As prescribed in 536.570, insert the schedule after initial approved submission, Specifications and Drawings for following clause: the Contractor shall provide in writing a Construction (Mar 2019) Authorities and Limitations (Mar 2019) narrative describing the substance of the The requirements of the clause entitled revision, the rationale for the revision, and ‘‘Specifications and Drawings for (a) All work shall be performed under the the impact of the revision on the projected Construction’’ at FAR 52.236–21, are general direction of the Contracting Officer. substantial completion date and the available supplemented as follows: The Contracting Officer alone shall have the float for all activities. The addition of detail (a) In case of difference between small and power to bind the Government and to to prospective activities shall not be deemed large-scale drawings, the large-scale drawings exercise the rights, responsibilities, a revision if the overall duration of the shall govern. authorities and functions vested in him by detailed activity does not change. (b) Schedules on any contract drawing the contract documents. The Contracting (i) Updates. Unless a different period for shall take precedence over conflicting Officer may designate contracting officer’s updates is specified elsewhere, the information on that or any other contract representatives (CORs) to act for him. Contractor shall update the project schedule drawing. Wherever any provision in this contract monthly to reflect actual progress in (c) On any of the drawings where a portion specifies an individual (such as, but not completing the work, and submit the updated of the work is detailed or drawn out and the limited to, Construction Engineer, Resident project schedule within 5 working days of remainder is shown in outline, the parts Engineer, Inspector or Custodian) or the end of each month. detailed or drawn out shall apply also to all organization, whether Governmental or Alternate II (Mar 2019). As prescribed other like portions of the work. private, to perform any act on behalf of or in in 536–515(b), substitute the following (d) Where the word ‘‘similar’’ occurs on the the interests of the Government, that drawings, it shall have a general meaning and paragraphs (c), (e), and (i) for paragraphs individual or organization shall be deemed to not be interpreted as being identical, and all be the COR under this contract but only to (c), (e), and (i) of the basic clause: details shall be worked out in relation to the extent so specified. The Contracting (c) Submission. (1) Within 30 calendar their location and their connection with Officer may, at any time during the days of notice to proceed, or such other time other parts of the work. performance of this contract, vest in any such as may be specified in the contract, the (e) Standard details or specification COR additional power and authority to act Contractor shall submit the project schedule, drawings are applicable when listed, bound for him or designate additional CORs, together with a written narrative describing with the specifications, noted on the specifying the extent of their authority to act the major design and construction activities. drawings, or referenced elsewhere in the for him. A copy of each document vesting The project schedule may indicate specifications. additional authority in a COR or designating construction activities in summary form prior (1) Where notes on the specification an additional COR shall be furnished to the to completion of final design documents. drawings indicate alterations, such Contractor. (2) Within 30 calendar days of completion alterations shall govern. (b) The Contractor shall perform the of final design documents, the Contractor (2) In case of difference between standard contract in accordance with any order shall submit a revised project schedule details or specification drawings and the (including but not limited to instruction, depicting all activities necessary to complete specifications, the specifications shall direction, interpretation, or determination) construction work activities, together with a govern. issued by a COR in accordance with his written narrative describing the major work (3) In case of difference between the authority to act for the Contracting Officer; activities, activities on the critical path, and standard details or specification drawings but the Contractor assumes all the risk and major constraints underlying the sequence and the drawings prepared specifically for consequences of performing the contract in and logic of the project schedule. this contract, the drawings prepared accordance with any order (including but not (e) Activities. (1) The Contractor shall use specifically for this contract shall govern. limited to instruction, direction, a critical path method project schedule to (f) Different requirements within the interpretation, or determination) of anyone plan, coordinate, and perform the work. contract documents shall be deemed not authorized to issue such order. (2) Activities shall be sufficiently detailed inconsistent only if compliance with both (c) If the Contractor receives written notice and limited in duration to enable proper cannot be achieved. from the Contracting Officer of non- planning and coordination of the work, (g) Unless otherwise noted, the drawings compliance with any requirement of this effective evaluation of the reasonableness shall be interpreted to provide for a complete contract, the Contractor must initiate action and realism of the project schedule, accurate construction, assembly, or installation of the as may be appropriate to comply with the monitoring of progress, and reliable analysis work, without regard to the detail with which specified requirement as defined in the of schedule impacts. material components are shown in the notice. In the event the Contractor fails to (3) Activity durations shall be based upon drawings. initiate such action within a reasonable reasonable and realistic allocation of the (End of clause) period of time as defined in the notice, the resources required to complete each activity, Contracting Officer shall have the right to given physical and logistical constraints on Alternate I (Mar 2019). As prescribed order the Contractor to stop any or all work the performance of the work. All logic shall in 536.521, add the following paragraph under the contract until the Contractor has validly reflect physical or logistical to the basic clause: complied or has initiated such action as may

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3722 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

be appropriate to comply within a reasonable comply with applicable laws, statutes, scale drawings, wiring and control diagrams, period of time. The Contractor will not be building codes and regulations. If it comes to cuts or entire catalogs, pamphlets, entitled to any extension of contract time or the attention of the Contractor that any of the descriptive literature, and performance and payment for any costs incurred as a result of contract documents do not comply with such test data. being ordered to stop work for such cause. requirements, the Contractor shall promptly (b) Unless otherwise provided in this (End of clause) notify the Contracting Officer in writing. If contract, or otherwise directed by the the Contractor performs any of the work prior Contracting Officer, submittals shall be ■ 22. Add new section 552.236–71 to to notifying and receiving direction from the submitted to the Contracting Officer. read as follows: Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall (c) The Contractor shall be entitled to assume full responsibility for correction of receive notice of action on submittals within 552.236–71 Contractor Responsibilities. such work, and any fees or penalties that may a reasonable time, given the volume or As prescribed in 536.571, insert the be assessed for non-compliance. complexity of the submittals and the following clause: (End of clause) criticality of the affected activities to Contractor Responsibilities (Mar 2019) substantial completion as may be indicated Alternate I (Mar 2019). As prescribed in the project schedule. (a) The Contractor shall be responsible for in 536.571, delete paragraphs (d), (e), (f), (d) Review of submittals will be general compliance with applicable codes, standards and (g) of the basic clause, and insert and shall not be construed as permitting any and regulations pertaining to the health and paragraphs (d), (e), (f), and (g) as departure from the contract requirements. safety of personnel during performance of the follows: (e) The Contractor shall not proceed with contract. construction work or procure products or (b) Unless expressly stated otherwise in the (d) The Contractor shall be responsible for materials described or shown in submittals contract, the Contractor shall be responsible providing professional design services unless until the submittal is reviewed. Any work or for all means and methods employed in the this responsibility is expressly excluded from activity undertaken prior to review shall be performance of the contract. the contract. In the performance of such at the Contractor’s risk. Should the (c) The Contractor shall immediately bring work, the Contractor shall be responsible for Contracting Officer subsequently determine to the Contracting Officer’s attention any retaining licensed design professionals, who that the work or activity does not comply shall sign and seal all drawings, calculations, hazardous materials or conditions not with the contract, the Contractor shall be specifications and other submittals that the disclosed in the contract documents responsible for all cost and time required to licensed professional prepares. The discovered by or made known to the comply with the Contracting Officer’s Contractor shall be responsible for, and GSA Contractor during the performance of the determination. The Contracting Officer shall shall be entitled to rely upon, the adequacy contract. have the right to order the Contractor to cease and completeness of all professional design (d) The Contractor shall be responsible for execution of work for which submittals have services provided under the contract. providing professional design services in not been reviewed. The Government shall not (e) The Contractor’s responsibilities connection with performance of the work or be liable for any cost or delay incurred by the include the responsibilities of the Architect- portions of the work only if this Contractor attributable to the proper exercise responsibility is expressly stated in the Engineer Contractor, as specified in FAR 52.236–23. of this right. contract, and the contract documents provide (f) The Contractor shall identify, in writing, the performance and design criteria that such (f) The Contractor shall include in all all deviations or changes in resubmitted services will be required to satisfy. In the subcontracts that require professional design submittals. In the absence of such written performance of such work, the Contractor services express terms establishing GSA as a notice, review of a resubmission shall not shall be responsible for retaining licensed third party beneficiary. No other person shall include or apply to such deviations or design professionals, who shall sign and seal be deemed a third party beneficiary of the all drawings, calculations, specifications and contract. changes. other submittals that the licensed (g) The Contractor shall determine whether (End of clause) professional prepares. The Contractor shall the information contained in the contract be responsible for, and GSA shall be entitled documents complies with applicable laws, Alternate I (Mar 2019) As prescribed to rely upon, the adequacy and completeness statutes, building codes and regulations. If it in 536.572, add the following paragraph of all professional design services provided comes to the attention of the Contractor that to the basic clause: under the contract. any of the contract documents do not comply (g) The Contractor shall submit design (e) Where installation of separate work with such requirements, the Contractor shall documents for review in accordance with components as shown in the contract will promptly notify the Contracting Officer in PBS–P100. The Government shall review result in conflict or interference between writing. If the Contractor performs any of the submittals for the limited purpose of such components or with existing conditions, work prior to notifying and receiving verifying that the documents conform to the including allowable tolerances, it is the direction from the Contracting Officer, the design criteria expressed in the contract Contractor’s responsibility to bring such Contractor shall assume full responsibility documents. conflict or interference to the attention of the for correction of such work, and any fees or Contracting Officer and seek direction before penalties that may be assessed for non- 552.236–73 through 552.236–81 fabrication, construction, or installation of compliance. [Removed] any affected work. If the Contractor ■ 23. Add section 552.236–72 to read as fabricates, constructs, or installs any work ■ 24. Remove sections 552.236–73 follows: prior to receiving such direction, the through 552.236–81. Contractor shall be responsible for all cost 552.236–72 Submittals. and time incurred to resolve or mitigate such 552.236–82 [Redesignated as 552.236–73 conflict or interference. As prescribed in 536.572, insert the and Amended] (f) Where drawings show work without following clause: ■ 25. Redesignate section 552.236–82 as specific routing, dimensions, locations, or Submittals (Mar 2019) position relative to other work or existing section 552.236–73 and revise the conditions, and such information is not (a) The Contractor shall prepare and introductory text of newly redesignated specifically defined by reference to submit all submittals as specified in the section 552.236–73 to read as follows: specifications or other information supplied contract or requested by the Contracting in the contract, the Contractor is responsible Officer. 552.236–73 Subcontracts. for routing, dimensioning, and locating such (1) Submittals may include: safety plans, As prescribed in 536.573, insert the work in coordination with other work or schedules, shop drawings, coordination following clause: existing conditions in a manner consistent drawings, samples, calculations, product with contract requirements. information, or mockups. * * * * * (g) It is not the Contractor’s responsibility (2) Shop drawings may include fabrication, ■ 26. Add new sections 552.236–74 to ensure that the contract documents erection and setting drawings, manufacturers’ through 552.236–77 to read as follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3723

552.236–74 Evaluation of Options. (b) If the Government exercises the option, 8, 2019. This closure is necessary to As prescribed in 536.270–5(a), insert the contract shall be considered to include protect the Gulf king mackerel resource. this option clause. the following provision: DATES: The closure is effective from 12 p.m., eastern time, on February 8, 2019, Evaluation of Options (Mar 2019) (End of clause) ■ 27. Amend section 552.243–71 by— until 6 a.m., eastern time, on January 21, The Government will evaluate offers for ■ 2020. award purposes by adding the total price for a. Revising the date of the clause; ■ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: all options to the total price for the basic b. Removing from paragraph (a) ‘‘FAR requirement. Evaluation of options will not 52.243–4,’’ and adding ‘‘FAR 52.243–4, Kelli O’Donnell, NMFS Southeast obligate the Government to exercise the the ‘‘Changes and Changed Conditions’’ Regional Office, telephone: 727–824– option(s). clause prescribed by FAR 52.243–5,’’ in 5305, email: [email protected]. its place; and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The (End of provision) ■ c. Revising paragraph (c). fishery for coastal migratory pelagic fish 552.236–75 Evaluation Exclusive of The revisions read as follows: includes king mackerel, Spanish Options. mackerel, and cobia, and is managed 552.243–71 Equitable Adjustments. As prescribed in 536.270–5(b), insert under the Fishery Management Plan for the following provision: * * * * * the Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources Equitable Adjustments (Mar 2019) of the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Evaluation Exclusive of Options (Mar Region (FMP). The FMP was prepared 2019) * * * * * by the Gulf of Mexico and South (c) The proposal shall be submitted within The Government will evaluate offers for Atlantic Fishery Management Councils the time specified in the ‘‘Changes’’, and is implemented by NMFS under the award purposes by including only the price ‘‘Changes and Changed Conditions’’, or for the basic requirement. Options will not be ‘‘Differing Site Conditions’’ clause, as authority of the Magnuson-Stevens included in the evaluation for award applicable, or such other time as may Fishery Conservation and Management purposes. reasonably be required by the Contracting Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622. All (End of provision) Officer. * * * * * weights for Gulf migratory group king 552.236–76 Basis of Award—Sealed [FR Doc. 2019–01565 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] mackerel (Gulf king mackerel) below Bidding Construction BILLING CODE 6820–61–P apply as either round or gutted weight. As prescribed in 536.270–5(c), insert King mackerel in the Gulf is divided the following provision: into western, northern, and southern zones, which have separate commercial Basis of Award—Sealed Bidding DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE quotas. The southern zone for Gulf king Construction (Mar 2019) National Oceanic and Atmospheric mackerel encompasses an area of the A bid may be rejected as nonresponsive if Administration EEZ south of a line extending due west the bid is materially unbalanced as to bid from the boundary of Lee and Collier prices. A bid is unbalanced when the bid is 50 CFR Part 622 Counties on the Florida west coast, and based on prices significantly less than cost south of a line extending due east from for some work and significantly overstated [Docket No. 160426363–7275–02] the boundary of Monroe and Miami- for other work. Dade Counties on the Florida east coast, RIN 0648–XG769 (End of provision) which includes the EEZ off Collier and Alternate I (Mar 2019). As prescribed Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources Monroe Counties in south Florida (50 in 536.270–5(c), designate the basic of the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic CFR 622.369(a)(1)(iii)). The commercial quota for Gulf king provision as paragraph (a) and add the Region; 2018–2019 Commercial Run- mackerel in the southern zone is following paragraph to the basic Around Gillnet Closure for King 585,900 lb (265,760 kg) for vessels using provision: Mackerel run-around gillnet gear (50 CFR (b)(1) The low bidder for purposes of AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 622.384(b)(1)(iii)(B)), for the current award is the responsible bidder offering the Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and fishing year, July 1, 2018, through June lowest aggregate price for: Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 30, 2019. (i) The base requirement; plus (ii) All options designated to be evaluated. Commerce. Regulations at 50 CFR 622.8(b) and (2) The evaluation of options will not ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. 622.388(a)(1) require NMFS to close any obligate the Government to exercise the component of the king mackerel options. SUMMARY: NMFS implements an commercial sector when its quota has accountability measure (AM) through been reached, or is projected to be 552.236–77 Government’s Right to this temporary rule for commercial reached, by filing a notification with the Exercise Options. harvest of king mackerel in the southern Office of the Federal Register. NMFS has As prescribed in 536.270–5(d), insert zone of the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) determined that the Gulf king mackerel the following clause: exclusive economic zone (EEZ) using commercial quota for vessels using run- Government’s Right to Exercise Options run-around gillnet gear. NMFS has around gillnet gear in the southern zone (Mar 2019) determined that the commercial annual has been reached. Accordingly, catch limit (equivalent to the commercial fishing using such gear in (a) The Government may exercise any commercial quota) for king mackerel the southern zone is closed at 12 p.m., option in writing in accordance with the using run-around gillnet gear in the eastern time, on February 8, 2019, until terms and conditions of the contract within lll [insert the period of time within which southern zone of the Gulf EEZ has been 6 a.m., eastern time, on January 21, the Contracting Officer may exercise the reached. Therefore, NMFS closes the 2020, the beginning of the next fishing option]. Unless otherwise specified, options southern zone to commercial king season, i.e., the day after the 2020 may be exercised within 90 calendar days of mackerel fishing using run-around Martin Luther King, Jr. Federal holiday. contract award. gillnet gear in the Gulf EEZ on February Vessel operators that have been issued

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3724 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

a Federal commercial permit to harvest this temporary rule is unnecessary and (commercial) permitted vessels and Gulf king mackerel using run-around contrary to the public interest. Such Highly Migratory Species (HMS) gillnet gear in the southern zone must procedures are unnecessary because the Charter/Headboat category permitted have landed ashore and bartered, rule implementing the commercial vessels with a commercial sale traded, or sold such king mackerel prior quota and the associated AM has endorsement when fishing to 12 p.m., eastern time, on February 8, already been subject to notice and commercially for BFT. 2019. comment, and all that remains is to DATES: The quota transfer is effective Persons aboard a vessel for which a notify the public of the closure. Prior February 8, 2019, through March 31, Federal commercial permit for Gulf king notice and opportunity for public 2019. mackerel has been issued, except comment is contrary to the public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: persons who also possess a king interest, because any delay in the Uriah Forest-Bulley, 978–675–2154, or mackerel gillnet permit, may fish for or closure of the commercial harvest could Sarah McLaughlin, 978–281–9260. retain Gulf king mackerel harvested result in the commercial quota being SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: using hook-and-line gear in the southern exceeded. There is a need to Regulations implemented under the zone unless the commercial quota for immediately implement this action to authority of the Atlantic Tunas hook-and-line gear has been met and the protect the king mackerel resource, Convention Act (ATCA; 16 U.S.C. 971 et hook-and-line component of the because the capacity of the fishing fleet seq.) and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery commercial sector has been closed. In allows for rapid harvest of the quota. addition, as long as the recreational Conservation and Management Act Prior notice and opportunity for public (Magnuson-Stevens Act; 16 U.S.C. 1801 sector for Gulf king mackerel is open (50 comment on this action would require CFR 622.384(e)(1)), a person aboard a et seq.) governing the harvest of BFT by time and would potentially result in a persons and vessels subject to U.S. vessel that has a valid Federal harvest well in excess of the established commercial gillnet permit for king jurisdiction are found at 50 CFR part quota. 635. Section 635.27 subdivides the U.S. mackerel may continue to retain king For the aforementioned reasons, the BFT quota recommended by the mackerel under the bag and possession AA also finds good cause to waive the limits set forth in 50 CFR International Commission for the 30-day delay in effectiveness under 5 Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) 622.382(a)(1)(ii) and (a)(2). U.S.C. 553(d)(3). During the closure, Gulf king and as implemented by the United mackerel harvested using run-around Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. States among the various domestic gillnet gear in the southern zone may Dated: February 8, 2019. fishing categories, per the allocations not be purchased or sold. This Alan D. Risenhoover, established in the 2006 Consolidated prohibition does not apply to Gulf king Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Highly Migratory Species Fishery mackerel harvested using run-around National Marine Fisheries Service. Management Plan (2006 Consolidated gillnet gear in the southern zone that [FR Doc. 2019–02193 Filed 2–8–19; 4:15 pm] HMS FMP) (71 FR 58058, October 2, 2006), as amended by Amendment 7 to were harvested, landed ashore, and sold BILLING CODE 3510–22–P prior to the closure and were held in the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP cold storage by a dealer or processor (50 (Amendment 7) (79 FR 71510, December CFR 622.384(e)(2)). DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 2, 2014). NMFS is required under ATCA and the Magnuson-Stevens Act to Classification National Oceanic and Atmospheric provide U.S. fishing vessels with a The Regional Administrator for the Administration reasonable opportunity to harvest the NMFS Southeast Region has determined ICCAT-recommended quota. this temporary rule is necessary for the 50 CFR Part 635 NMFS published a final rule (i.e., the ‘‘quota rule’’ (83 FR 51391, October 11, conservation and management of Gulf [Docket No. 180117042–8884–02] king mackerel and is consistent with the 2018)) that increased the baseline U.S. Magnuson-Stevens Act and other RIN 0648–XG787 BFT quota from 1,058.79 mt to 1,247.86 applicable laws. mt consistent with a 2017 ICCAT Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; This action is taken under 50 CFR recommendation and accordingly Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Fisheries; 622.8(b) and 622.388(a)(1) and is increased the domestic category quotas General Category Fishery exempt from review under Executive for 2018, until changed via a subsequent Order 12866. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries ICCAT recommendation. Within the These measures are exempt from the Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and General category quota, each time procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), period (January, June through August, Act because the temporary rule is issued Commerce. September, October through November, without prior notice and opportunity for ACTION: Temporary rule; inseason quota and December) is further allocated a public comment. transfer. subquota or portion of the annual This action responds to the best General category quota. Although it is scientific information available. The SUMMARY: NMFS transfers 26 metric called the ‘‘January’’ subquota, the NOAA Assistant Administrator for tons (mt) of Atlantic bluefin tuna (BFT) regulations allow the General category Fisheries (AA) finds that the need to quota from the Reserve category to the fishery under this quota to continue immediately implement this action to General category January 2019 period until the subquota is reached or March close the commercial fishery component (from January 1 through March 31, 2019, 31, whichever comes first. The baseline that uses run-around gillnet gear or until the available subquota for this subquotas for each time period are as constitutes good cause to waive the period is reached, whichever comes follows: 29.5 mt for January; 277.9 mt requirements to provide prior notice first). This action is based on for June through August; 147.3 mt for and opportunity for public comment consideration of the regulatory September; 72.2 mt for October through pursuant to the authority set forth in 5 determination criteria regarding November; and 28.9 mt for December. U.S.C. 553(b)(B), because prior notice inseason adjustments and applies to Any unused General category quota and opportunity for public comment on Atlantic tunas General category rolls forward from one time period to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3725

the next and is available for use in depend on access to commercial-sized quota allocations (related to subsequent time periods within the BFT and fishing conditions, among § 635.27(a)(8)(x)). fishing year, which coincides with the other factors. NMFS anticipates that all NMFS also anticipates that some calendar year. Effective January 1, 2019, 26 mt of quota will be used by March underharvest of the 2018 adjusted U.S. NMFS transferred 19.5 mt of the 28.9- 31. In the unlikely event that any of this BFT quota will be carried forward to mt General category quota allocated for quota is unused by March 31, the 2019 and placed in the Reserve the December 2019 period to the unused quota will roll forward to the category, in accordance with the January 2019 period, resulting in an next subperiod within the calendar year regulations, later this year. This, in adjusted subquota of 49 mt for the (i.e., the June through August time addition to the fact that any unused January period and a subquota of 9.4 mt period), and NMFS anticipates that it General category quota will roll forward for the December 2018 period (83 FR would be used by the subquota category to the next subperiod within the 67140, December 28, 2018). before the end of the fishing year. calendar year and NMFS’ plan to NMFS also considered the estimated actively manage the subquotas to avoid Transfer of 26 mt From the Reserve amounts by which quotas for other gear any exceedances, makes it likely that Category to the General Category categories of the fishery might be General category quota will remain Under § 635.27(a)(9), NMFS has the exceeded (§ 635.27(a)(8)(iv)) and the available through the end of 2019 for authority to transfer quota among ability to account for all 2019 landings December fishery participants. NMFS fishing categories or subcategories, after and dead discards. In the last several also may transfer unused quota from the considering regulatory determination years, total U.S. BFT landings have been Reserve or other categories, inseason, criteria at § 635.27(a)(8). NMFS has below the total available U.S. quota based on consideration of the considered all of the relevant such that the United States has carried determination criteria, as it did in 2018 determination criteria and their forward the maximum amount of (i.e., transferred 60 mt from the Reserve applicability to the General category underharvest allowed by ICCAT from category effective September 18, 2018 fishery. These considerations include, one year to the next. NMFS will need (83 FR 47843, September 21, 2018); 40 but are not limited to, the following: to account for 2019 landings and dead mt form the Harpoon category and 15 mt Regarding the usefulness of discards within the adjusted U.S. quota, from the Reserve category effective information obtained from catches in consistent with ICCAT October 4, 2018 (83 FR 50857, October the particular category for biological recommendations, and NMFS 10, 2018); and 9.9 mt from the Harpoon sampling and monitoring of the status of anticipates having sufficient quota to do category and 129.2 mt from the General the stock (§ 635.27(a)(8)(i)), biological that, even with this 26-mt transfer to the category effective November 29, 2018 samples collected from BFT landed by General category. (83 FR 62512, December 4, 2018). NMFS General category fishermen and This transfer would be consistent anticipates that General category provided by BFT dealers continue to with the current U.S. quota, which was participants in all areas and time provide NMFS with valuable data for established and analyzed in the 2018 periods will have opportunities to ongoing scientific studies of BFT age BFT quota final rule, and with harvest the General category quota in and growth, migration, and reproductive objectives of the 2006 Consolidated 2019, through active inseason status. Additional opportunity to land HMS FMP and amendments management measures, such as BFT over the longest time-period (§ 635.27(a)(8)(v) and (vi)). At this time, retention limit adjustments and/or the allowable would support the collection there is a relatively small amount of timing of quota transfers, as practicable. of a broad range of data for these studies quota in the Reserve category available Thus, this quota transfer would allow and for stock monitoring purposes. to transfer to other categories or use for fishermen to take advantage of the NMFS considered the catches of the scientific research and for prudent availability of fish on the fishing General category quota to date responsive management. In the past, grounds to the extent consistent with (including during the winter fishery in NMFS has conducted the annual the available amount of transferrable the last several years), and the reallocation of unused Purse Seine quota and other management objectives, likelihood of closure of that segment of category quota to the Reserve category while avoiding quota exceedance. the fishery if no adjustment is made early in the calendar year, which Based on the considerations above, (§ 635.27(a)(8)(ii) and (ix)). As of resulted in more Reserve category quota NMFS is transferring 26 mt from the February 5, 2019, the General category available at this time of year. However, Reserve category to the General category landed 37 mt (76 percent) of its adjusted a government shutdown occurred due to for the January 2019 fishery, resulting in January 2019 subquota of 49 mt. a lack of appropriations during a subquota of 75 mt for the January 2019 Without a quota transfer, NMFS would December 2018-January 2019, which fishery and 3.5 mt in the Reserve have to close the January 2019 General resulted in an administrative backlog category. category fishery, while unused quota that will delay that action for 2019. remains in the Reserve category and Given that consideration, current catch Monitoring and Reporting while commercial-sized BFT remain rates, and the availability of fish on the NMFS will continue to monitor the available in the areas where General fishing grounds, NMFS is moving BFT fishery closely. Dealers are required category permitted vessels operate at forward with this inseason transfer to submit landing reports within 24 this time of year. based on the immediate needs of the hours of a dealer receiving BFT. Late Regarding the projected ability of the General category fishery. Another reporting by dealers compromises vessels fishing under the particular principal consideration is the objective NMFS’ ability to timely implement category quota (here, the General of providing opportunities to harvest the actions such as quota and retention category) to harvest the additional full annual U.S. BFT quota equitably limit adjustment, as well as closures, amount of BFT quota transferred before without exceeding it based on the goals and may result in enforcement actions. the end of the fishing year of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and Additionally, and separate from the (§ 635.27(a)(8)(iii)), NMFS considered amendments, including to achieve dealer reporting requirement, General General category landings over the last optimum yield on a continuing basis and HMS Charter/Headboat category several years and landings to date this and to optimize the ability of all permit vessel owners are required to report the year. Landings are highly variable and categories to harvest their full BFT catch of all BFT retained or discarded

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3726 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

dead within 24 hours of the landing(s) Dated: February 8, 2019. determined that the A season allowance or end of each trip, by accessing Alan D. Risenhoover, of the 2019 TAC of pollock in Statistical hmspermits.noaa.gov or by using the Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Area 620 of the GOA is necessary to HMS Catch Reporting app, or calling National Marine Fisheries Service. account for the incidental catch in other (888) 872–8862 (Monday through Friday [FR Doc. 2019–02190 Filed 2–8–19; 4:15 pm] anticipated fisheries. Therefore, the from 8 a.m. until 4:30 p.m.). BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Regional Administrator is establishing a Depending on the level of fishing directed fishing allowance of 23,000 mt effort and catch rates of BFT, NMFS and is setting aside the remaining 236 may determine that additional action DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE mt as bycatch to support other (e.g., quota adjustment or closure) is anticipated groundfish fisheries. In National Oceanic and Atmospheric accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the necessary to ensure available subquotas Administration are not exceeded or to enhance Regional Administrator finds that this directed fishing allowance has been scientific data collection from, and 50 CFR Part 679 fishing opportunities in, all geographic reached. Consequently, NMFS is areas. If needed, subsequent [Docket No. 170816769–8162–02] prohibiting directed fishing for pollock adjustments will be published in the in Statistical Area 620 of the GOA. RIN 0648–XG973 Federal Register. In addition, fishermen While this closure is effective the may call the Atlantic Tunas Information Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic maximum retainable amounts at Line at (978) 281–9260, or access Zone Off Alaska; Pollock in Statistical § 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time hmspermits.noaa.gov, for updates on Area 620 in the Gulf of Alaska during a trip. quota monitoring and inseason adjustments. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Classification Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Classification This action responds to the best Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), available information recently obtained The Assistant Administrator for Commerce. from the fishery. The Assistant NMFS (AA) finds that it is impracticable ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA and contrary to the public interest to (AA), finds good cause to waive the SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed provide prior notice of, and an requirement to provide prior notice and fishing for pollock in Statistical Area opportunity for public comment on, this opportunity for public comment action for the following reasons: 620 in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This action is necessary to prevent exceeding pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 The regulations implementing the the A season allowance of the 2019 total U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and allowable catch of pollock for Statistical impracticable and contrary to the public amendments provide for inseason quota Area 620 in the GOA. interest. This requirement is transfers to respond to the unpredictable impracticable and contrary to the public DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local nature of BFT availability on the fishing interest as it would prevent NMFS from time (A.l.t.), February 8, 2019, through responding to the most recent fisheries grounds, the migratory nature of this 1200 hrs, A.l.t., March 10, 2019. species, and the regional variations in data in a timely fashion and would FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the BFT fishery. These fisheries are Josh delay the closure of directed fishing for currently underway and the currently Keaton, 907–586–7228. pollock in Statistical Area 620 of the available quota for the subcategory is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS GOA. NMFS was unable to publish a projected to be reached shortly. manages the groundfish fishery in the notice providing time for public Affording prior notice and opportunity GOA exclusive economic zone comment because the most recent, for public comment to implement the according to the Fishery Management relevant data only became available as quota transfer is impracticable and Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of of February 7, 2019. Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North contrary to the public interest as such a The AA also finds good cause to Pacific Fishery Management Council delay would result in would likely waive the 30-day delay in the effective under authority of the Magnuson- result in exceedance of the General date of this action under 5 U.S.C. Stevens Fishery Conservation and category January fishery subquota or 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon Management Act. Regulations governing earlier closure of the fishery while fish the reasons provided above for waiver of fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance are available on the fishing grounds. prior notice and opportunity for public with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 Therefore, the AA finds good cause comment. under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive prior CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. This action is required by § 679.20 notice and the opportunity for public The A season allowance of the 2019 and is exempt from review under comment. For these reasons, there also total allowable catch (TAC) of pollock in Executive Order 12866. is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) to Statistical Area 620 of the GOA is waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness. 23,236 metric tons (mt) as established Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. by the final 2018 and 2019 harvest This action is being taken under specifications for groundfish in the GOA Dated: February 8, 2019. § 635.27(a)(9) (Inseason adjustments) (83 FR 8768, March 1, 2018) and Alan D. Risenhoover, and is exempt from review under inseason adjustment (84 FR 33, January Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Executive Order 12866. 4, 2019). National Marine Fisheries Service. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. and 1801 In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), [FR Doc. 2019–02148 Filed 2–8–19; 4:15 pm] et seq. the Regional Administrator has BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 3727

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE catcher vessels less than 60 feet (18.3 m) Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), LOA using jig or hook-and-line gear in Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric the Bogoslof Pacific cod exemption area. ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. Administration While this closure is effective the maximum retainable amounts at SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed 50 CFR Part 679 § 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time fishing for pollock in Statistical Area 630 in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This [Docket No. 170817779–8161–02] during a trip. action is necessary to prevent exceeding RIN 0648–AKR–A001 Classification the A season allowance of the 2019 total This action responds to the best allowable catch of pollock for Statistical Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic available information recently obtained Area 630 in the GOA. Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by from the fishery. The Assistant DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local Catcher Vessels Less Than 60 Feet Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA time (A.l.t.), February 10, 2019, through (18.3 Meters) Length Overall Using Jig (AA), finds good cause to waive the 1200 hrs, A.l.t., March 10, 2019. or Hook-and-Line Gear in the Bogoslof requirement to provide prior notice and Pacific Cod Exemption Area in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh opportunity for public comment Keaton, 907–586–7228. Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS Management Area U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is manages the groundfish fishery in the impracticable and contrary to the public AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries GOA exclusive economic zone interest. This requirement is Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and according to the Fishery Management impracticable and contrary to the public Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of interest as it would prevent NMFS from Commerce. Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North responding to the most recent fisheries ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. Pacific Fishery Management Council data in a timely fashion and would under authority of the Magnuson- SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed delay the directed fishery closure of Stevens Fishery Conservation and fishing for Pacific cod by catcher vessels Pacific cod by catcher vessels less than Management Act. Regulations governing less than 60 feet (18.3 meters (m)) length 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA using jig or hook- fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance overall (LOA) using jig or hook-and-line and-line gear in the Bogoslof Pacific cod with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 gear in the Bogoslof Pacific cod exemption area. NMFS was unable to CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. exemption area of the Bering Sea and publish a notice providing time for The A season allowance of the 2019 Aleutian Islands management area public comment because the most total allowable catch (TAC) of pollock in (BSAI). This action is necessary to recent, relevant data only became Statistical Area 630 of the GOA is 7,593 prevent exceeding the limit of Pacific available as of February 7, 2019. metric tons (mt) as established by the cod for catcher vessels less than 60 feet The AA also finds good cause to final 2018 and 2019 harvest (18.3 m) LOA using jig or hook-and-line waive the 30-day delay in the effective specifications for groundfish in the GOA gear in the Bogoslof Pacific cod date of this action under 5 U.S.C. (83 FR 8768, March 1, 2018) and exemption area in the BSAI. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon inseason adjustment (84 FR 33, January the reasons provided above for waiver of DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local 4, 2019). time (A.l.t.), February 10, 2019, through prior notice and opportunity for public In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2019. comment. the Regional Administrator has FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh This action is required by § 679.22 determined that the A season allowance Keaton, 907–586–7228. and is exempt from review under of the 2019 TAC of pollock in Statistical Executive Order 12866. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS Area 630 of the GOA is necessary to manages the groundfish fishery in the Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. account for the incidental catch in other BSAI according to the Fishery Dated: February 8, 2019. anticipated fisheries. Therefore, the Management Plan for Groundfish of the Alan D. Risenhoover, Regional Administrator is establishing a Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, directed fishing allowance of 7,300 mt Management Area (FMP) prepared by National Marine Fisheries Service. and is setting aside the remaining 293 the North Pacific Fishery Management [FR Doc. 2019–02195 Filed 2–8–19; 4:15 pm] mt as bycatch to support other Council under authority of the anticipated groundfish fisheries. In BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Magnuson-Stevens Fishery accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Conservation and Management Act. Regional Administrator finds that this Regulations governing fishing by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE directed fishing allowance has been vessels in accordance with the FMP reached. Consequently, NMFS is appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 National Oceanic and Atmospheric prohibiting directed fishing for pollock and 50 CFR part 679. Administration in Statistical Area 630 of the GOA. In accordance with While this closure is effective the § 679.22(a)(7)(i)(C)(2), the 50 CFR Part 679 maximum retainable amounts at Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS § 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time (Regional Administrator), has [Docket No. 170816769–8162–02] during a trip. determined that 113 metric tons of Pacific cod have been caught by catcher RIN 0648–XG776 Classification vessels less than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic This action responds to the best using jig or hook-and-line gear in the Zone Off Alaska; Pollock in Statistical available information recently obtained Bogoslof exemption area described at Area 630 in the Gulf of Alaska from the fishery. The Assistant § 679.22(a)(7)(i)(C)(1). Consequently, the Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA Regional Administrator is prohibiting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries (AA), finds good cause to waive the directed fishing for Pacific cod by Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and requirement to provide prior notice and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3728 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

opportunity for public comment GOA. NMFS was unable to publish a This action is required by § 679.20 pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 notice providing time for public and is exempt from review under U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is comment because the most recent, Executive Order 12866. relevant data only became available as impracticable and contrary to the public Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. interest. This requirement is of February 7, 2019. impracticable and contrary to the public The AA also finds good cause to Dated: February 8, 2019. interest as it would prevent NMFS from waive the 30-day delay in the effective Alan D. Risenhoover, responding to the most recent fisheries date of this action under 5 U.S.C. Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon data in a timely fashion and would National Marine Fisheries Service. the reasons provided above for waiver of delay the closure of directed fishing for [FR Doc. 2019–02171 Filed 2–8–19; 4:15 pm] prior notice and opportunity for public pollock in Statistical Area 630 of the BILLING CODE 3510–22–P comment.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 3729

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 30

Wednesday, February 13, 2019

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER section 532.259(a) of title 5, Code of the first day of the first applicable pay contains notices to the public of the proposed Federal Regulations. This section period beginning on or after 30 days issuance of rules and regulations. The provides that lead agencies establish following publication of the final purpose of these notices is to give interested and issue special wage schedules for regulations. persons an opportunity to participate in the U.S. civil service wage employees in rule making prior to the adoption of the final Regulatory Impact Analysis rules. certain U.S. insular areas. When the Federal Wage System This action is not a ‘‘significant (FWS) was established in 1972, certain regulatory action’’ under the terms of OFFICE OF PERSONNEL agency policies and practices, including Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (58 FR MANAGEMENT the special wage schedules for U.S. civil 51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore service wage employees in certain U.S. not subject to review under E.O. 12866 5 CFR Part 532 insular areas, were continued as special and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011) RIN 3206–AN76 schedules under the FWS. These U.S. insular areas special schedules are Reducing Regulation and Controlling Prevailing Rate Systems; Special currently codified in 5 CFR 532.259. Regulatory Costs Appropriated Fund Wage Schedules Section 532.259(a) lists DOD as the lead This proposed rule is not expected to for U.S. Insular Areas agency for Guam, Midway, and the U.S. Virgin Islands; the Department of be subject to the requirements of E.O. AGENCY: Office of Personnel Transportation (DOT) as the lead agency 13771 because this proposed rule is not Management. for American Samoa; and the significant under E.O. 12866. ACTION: Proposed rule with request for Department of the Interior (DOI) as the Regulatory Flexibility Act comments. lead agency for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. DOT was OPM certifies that this proposed rule SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel given lead agency responsibility for will not have a significant economic Management (OPM) is issuing a American Samoa and DOI was given impact on a substantial number of small proposed rule that would amend the lead agency responsibility for the entities because they will affect only special appropriated fund wage Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Federal agencies and employees. schedules for U.S. insular areas, to Islands because they were the only designate the Department of Defense Federalism agencies with wage employees in those (DOD) as the sole lead agency for We have examined this rulemaking in duty locations at the time the original American Samoa, the Commonwealth of accordance with Executive Order 13132, lead agency determinations were made. the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Federalism, and have determined that The Department of the Army now has Midway, and the U.S. Virgin Island. The this proposed rule will not have any five wage employees in American Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory negative impact on the rights, roles and Samoa. DOI has two wage employees in Committee (FPRAC) approved this responsibilities of State, local, or tribal American Samoa and four wage change by consensus. governments. employees in the Commonwealth of the DATES: We must receive comments on or Northern Mariana Islands. DOT no Civil Justice Reform before March 15, 2019. longer has wage employees in American This proposed regulation meets the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Samoa. identified by docket number and/or applicable standard set forth in Under 5 CFR 532.259(b), the special Executive Order 12988. Regulatory Information Number (RIN) schedules for U.S. insular areas must be and title, by the following method: established at the same time and with Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995 • Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// rates identical to the foreign area This proposed rule will not result in www.regulations.gov. Follow the appropriated fund wage schedules the expenditure by State, local, and instructions for submitting comments. established under section 532.255. DOD All submissions received must tribal governments, in the aggregate, or is the lead agency for the foreign area by the private sector, of $100 million or include the agency name and docket appropriated fund wage schedules. number or RIN for this document. The more in any year and it will not Since these U.S. insular areas special significantly or uniquely affect small general policy for comments and other schedules must be identical to the submissions from members of the public governments. Therefore, no actions were foreign wage schedule issued by DOD, deemed necessary under the provisions is to make these submissions available the administration of the U.S. insular for public viewing at http:// of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act areas wage schedules would be of 1995. www.regulations.gov as they are streamlined if DOD becomes the sole received without change, including any lead agency issuing these special Congressional Review Act personal identifiers or contact schedules. DOT and DOI agree with this This action pertains to agency information. determination. management, personnel, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FPRAC, the national labor- organization and does not substantially Madeline Gonzalez, by telephone at management committee responsible for affect the rights or obligations of (202) 606–2838 or by email at pay-leave- advising OPM on matters concerning nonagency parties and, accordingly, is [email protected]. the pay of FWS employees, reviewed not a ‘‘rule’’ as that term is used by the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OPM is and concurred by consensus with these Congressional Review Act (Subtitle E of issuing a proposed rule to amend changes. These changes would apply on the Small Business Regulatory

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS 3730 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking section, the FAA is charged with (SBREFA)). Therefore, the reporting (NPRM). prescribing regulations to assign the use requirement of 5 U.S.C. 801 does not of the airspace necessary to ensure the apply. SUMMARY: This action proposes to safety of aircraft and the efficient use of modify VHF Omnidirectional Range airspace. This regulation is within the Paperwork Reduction Act (VOR) Federal airways V–8, V–92, V– scope of that authority as it would This proposed rule does not impose 214, and V–438 due to planned modify the VOR Federal airway route any new reporting or record-keeping decommissioning of the Grantsville, structure in the eastern United States to requirements subject to the Paperwork MD, VOR/DME navigation aid which maintain the efficient flow of air traffic. Reduction Act. provides navigation guidance for segments of the routes. Comments Invited List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 532 DATES: Comments must be received on Interested parties are invited to Administrative practice and or before April 1, 2019. participate in this proposed rulemaking procedure, Freedom of information, ADDRESSES: Send comments on this by submitting such written data, views, Government employees, Reporting and proposal to the U.S. Department of or arguments as they may desire. recordkeeping requirements, Wages. Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 Comments that provide the factual basis Office of Personnel Management. New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in Alexys Stanley, Ground Floor, Room W12–140, developing reasoned regulatory Regulatory Affairs Analyst. Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1 (800) 647–5527 or (202) 366–9826. You decisions on the proposal. Comments Accordingly, OPM is proposing to must identify FAA Docket No. FAA– are specifically invited on the overall amend 5 CFR part 532 as follows: 2018–1073; Airspace Docket No. 18– regulatory, aeronautical, economic, AEA–17 at the beginning of your environmental, and energy-related PART 532—PREVAILING RATE aspects of the proposal. SYSTEMS comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at http:// Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA– ■ www.regulations.gov. 1. The authority citation for part 532 2018–1073; Airspace Docket No. 18– continues to read as follows: FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and AEA–17 and be submitted in triplicate Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5343, 5346; § 532.707 to the Docket Management Facility (see also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/ ADDRESSES section for address and ■ 2. Section 532.259 is amended by publications/. For further information, phone number). You may also submit revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: you can contact the Airspace Policy comments through the internet at http:// Group, Federal Aviation www.regulations.gov. § 532.259 Special appropriated fund wage Commenters wishing the FAA to schedules for U.S. insular areas Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; acknowledge receipt of their comments (a) The lead agency shall establish telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is on this action must submit with those and issue special wage schedules for also available for inspection at the comments a self-addressed, stamped U.S. civil service wage employees in National Archives and Records postcard on which the following certain U.S. insular areas. The Administration (NARA). For statement is made: ‘‘Comments to FAA Department of Defense is the lead information on the availability of FAA Docket No. FAA–2018–1073; Airspace agency for American Samoa, the Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202) Docket No. 18–AEA–17’’. The postcard Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 741–6030, or go to http:// will be date/time stamped and returned Islands, Guam, Midway, and the U.S. www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ to the commenter. Virgin Islands. These schedules shall All communications received on or ibr-locations.html. provide rates of pay for nonsupervisory, before the specified comment closing FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace leader, supervisory, and production date will be considered before taking Designations and Reporting Points, is facilitating employees. action on the proposed rule. The published yearly and effective on proposal contained in this action may * * * * * September 15. [FR Doc. 2019–02113 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] be changed in light of comments FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul BILLING CODE 6325–39–P received. A report summarizing each Gallant, Airspace Policy Group, Office substantive public contact with FAA of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation personnel concerned with this Administration, 800 Independence rulemaking will be filed in the docket. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267–8783. Availability of NPRM’s Federal Aviation Administration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Authority for This Rulemaking 14 CFR Part 71 internet at http://www.regulations.gov. The FAA’s authority to issue rules Recently published rulemaking [Docket No. FAA–2018–1073; Airspace regarding aviation safety is found in documents can also be accessed through Docket No. 18–AEA–17] Title 49 of the United States Code. the FAA’s web page at http:// Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ RIN 2120–AA66 authority of the FAA Administrator. airspace_amendments/. Proposed Amendment of VOR Federal Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, You may review the public docket Airways V–8, V–92, V–214, and V–438 describes in more detail the scope of the containing the proposal, any comments in the Vicinity of Grantsville, MD agency’s authority. This rulemaking is received and any final disposition in promulgated under the authority person in the Dockets Office (see AGENCY: Federal Aviation described in Subtitle VII, Part A, ADDRESSES section for address and Administration (FAA), DOT. Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3731

5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, V–214: V–214 currently extends, in Environmental Review except federal holidays. An informal two sections, between the Kokomo, IN, docket may also be examined during VORTAC and the Muncie, IN, VOR/ This proposal will be subject to an normal business hours at the office of DME; and between the intersection of environmental analysis in accordance the Eastern Service Center, Federal radials from the Appleton, OH, with FAA Order 1050.1F, Aviation Administration, Room 210, VORTAC and the Zanesville, OH, VOR/ ‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 1701 Columbia Ave., College Park, GA DME (i.e., the charted GLOOM, OH, fix) Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final 30337. and the Teterboro, NJ, VOR/DME. This regulatory action. proposal would remove the segments List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Availability and Summary of between the Bellaire, OH, VOR/DME Documents for Incorporation by and the Martinsburg, WV, VORTAC. As Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Reference amended, V–214 would consists of three Navigation (air). This document proposes to amend separate sections: The Proposed Amendment FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace The first section would extend Designations and Reporting Points, between Kokomo, IN and Goshen, IN In consideration of the foregoing, the dated August 13, 2018 and effective (no change from current configuration). Federal Aviation Administration September 15, 2018. FAA Order The second section would extend proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as 7400.11C is publicly available as listed between the intersection of radials from follows: in the ADDRESSES section of this the Appleton, OH, VORTAC and the proposed rule. FAA Order 7400.11C Zanesville, OH, VOR/DME, and the PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace Bellaire, OH, VOR/DME. The third B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR areas, air traffic service routes, and section would extend between the TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND reporting points. Martinsburg, WV, VORTAC and the REPORTING POINTS Teterboro, NJ, VOR/DME. The Proposal V–438: V–438 currently extends ■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 The FAA is proposing an amendment between the Grantsville, MD, VOR/DME continues to read as follows: to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations and the intersection of radials from the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, (14 CFR) part 71 to modify the Hagerstown, MD, VOR, and the 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, descriptions of VOR Federal airways V– Martinsburg, WV, VORTAC (i.e., the 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. charted LUCKE, VA, fix). This proposal 8, V–92, V–214, and V–438, due to the § 71.1 [Amended] planned decommissioning of the would remove the airway segment between the Grantsville, MD, VOR/DME ■ Grantsville, MD, VOR/DME. The 2. The incorporation by reference in and the Hagerstown, MD, VOR. The proposed route changes are described 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, amended V–438 would extend between below. Airspace Designations and Reporting the Hagerstown, MD, VOR, and the Points, dated August 13, 2018, and V–8: V–8 currently consists of two LUCKE, VA, fix. sections with a gap in between. The first effective September 15, 2018, is Domestic VOR Federal airways are amended as follows: section extends between the intersection published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA of radials from the Seal Beach, CA, Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal VORTAC and the Ventura, CA, VOR/ and effective September 15, 2018, which Airways. DME (i.e., the charted DOYLE, CA, fix) is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR * * * * * and the Flag City, OH, VORTAC. The 71.1. The VOR Federal airways listed in second section extends between the this document would be subsequently V–8 [Amended] Briggs, OH, VOR/DME and the published in the Order. From INT Seal Beach, CA, 266° and Washington, DC, VOR/DME. The FAA Ventura, CA, 144° radials; Seal Beach; proposes to remove the airway segments Regulatory Notices and Analyses Paradise, CA; 35 miles, 7 miles wide (3 miles that extend between the Briggs, OH, The FAA has determined that this SE and 4 miles NW of centerline) Hector, CA; Goffs, CA; INT Goffs 033° and Morman Mesa, VOR/DME and the Martinsburg, WV, proposed regulation only involves an ° VORTAC. As amended, that portion of NV, 196 radials; Morman Mesa; Bryce established body of technical Canyon, UT; Hanksville, UT; Grand Junction, V–8 between the DOYLE, CA, fix and regulations for which frequent and CO; Rifle, CO; Kremmling, CO; Mile High, the Flag City, OH, VORTAC would routine amendments are necessary to CO; Akron, CO; Hayes Center, NE; Grand remain unchanged. The second section keep them operationally current. It, Island, NE; Omaha, NE; Des Moines, IA; Iowa of the airway would extend between the therefore: (1) Is not a ‘‘significant City, IA; Moline, IL; Joliet, IL; Chicago Martinsburg, WV, VORTAC and the regulatory action’’ under Executive Heights, IL; Goshen, IN; to Flag City, OH. Washington, DC, VOR/DME. Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant From Martinsburg, WV; to Washington, DC. V–92: V–92 currently consists of two rule’’ under Department of The portion outside the United States has no sections. The first section extends Transportation (DOT) Regulatory upper limit. between the Chicago Heights, IL, Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; V–92 [Amended] VORTAC and the Goshen, IN, VORTAC. February 26, 1979); and (3) does not From Chicago Heights, IL; to Goshen, IN. The second section extends between the warrant preparation of a regulatory From Newcomerstown, OH; to Bellaire, OH. Newcomerstown, OH, VOR/DME and evaluation as the anticipated impact is V–214 [Amended] the Armel, VA, VOR/DME. This so minimal. Since this is a routine From Kokomo IN, Marion, IN; to Muncie, proposal would remove the airway matter that will only affect air traffic ° segments between the Bellaire, OH, procedures and air navigation, it is IN. From INT Appleton, OH, 236 and Zanesville, OH, 274° radials; Zanesville; to VOR/DME and the Armel, VA, VOR/ certified that this proposed rule, when Bellaire, OH. From Martinsburg, WV; INT DME. As amended, V–92 would extend promulgated, will not have a significant Martinsburg 094° and Baltimore, MD, 300° between Chicago Heights, IL, and economic impact on a substantial radials; Baltimore; INT Baltimore 093° and Goshen, IN; and between number of small entities under the Dupont, DE, 223° radials; Dupont; Yardley, Newcomerstown, OH and Bellaire, OH. criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. PA; to Teterboro, NJ.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS 3732 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

V–438 [Amended] Room W12–140 of the West Building proposed rulemaking (NPRM) or other From Hagerstown, MD, to the INT of Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey future rulemakings. Some proposals for Hagerstown 157° and the Martinsburg, WV, Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 addressing national security and other 130° radials. a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through concerns may exceed the FAA’s * * * * * Friday, except Federal holidays. authority to regulate independently and • Fax: Fax comments to Docket Issued in Washington, DC, on February 5, may necessitate a broader Federal 2019. Operations at 202–493–2251. Executive or Legislative action. Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. Rodger A. Dean, Jr., Comments, including proposals for 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the Manager, Airspace Policy Group. rulemaking, will be considered within public to better inform its rulemaking the context of the FAA’s existing [FR Doc. 2019–02067 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] process. DOT posts these comments, statutory authority. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to I. Authority for This Rulemaking http://www.regulations.gov, as This ANPRM is promulgated pursuant DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION described in the system of records to 49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(1) and (2), which Federal Aviation Administration notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at http://www.dot.gov/ charge the FAA with issuing regulations: (1) To ensure the safety of 14 CFR Part 107 privacy. Docket: Background documents or aircraft and the efficient use of airspace; [Docket No.: 2018–1086; Notice No. 18–08] comments received may be read at and (2) to govern the flight of aircraft for http://www.regulations.gov at any time. purposes of navigating, protecting and RIN 2120–AL26 Follow the online instructions for identifying aircraft, and protecting accessing the docket or go to the Docket individuals and property on the ground. Safe and Secure Operations of Small In addition, 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5) Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations in Room W12–140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 charges the FAA with prescribing AGENCY: Federal Aviation New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, regulations that the FAA finds necessary Administration (FAA). DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday for safety in air commerce and national security. ACTION: Advance notice of proposed through Friday, except Federal holidays. rulemaking (ANPRM). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For The primary authority for this small UAS policy questions concerning ANPRM is 49 U.S.C. 44807, which SUMMARY: The FAA is considering this ANPRM, contact Ben Walsh, Flight directs the Secretary of Transportation additional rulemaking in response to Technologies and Procedures Division, to determine whether ‘‘certain public safety and national security Federal Aviation Administration, 470 unmanned aircraft systems may operate concerns associated with the ongoing L’Enfant Plaza SW, Suite 4102, safely in the national airspace system integration of unmanned aircraft Washington, DC 20024; telephone 1– [NAS].’’ Section 44807 directs the systems (UAS) into the National 844–FLY–MY–UA; email UAS- Secretary to use a risk-based approach Airspace System (NAS). The FAA is [email protected]. in making such determinations and seeking information from the public in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: provides such determinations may response to the questions contained in Tips for Preparing Your Comments. occur notwithstanding the completion this ANPRM. Specifically, the FAA The FAA seeks public comment on the of the comprehensive plan and seeks comment on whether and in what areas outlined within this ANPRM. The rulemaking required in other sections of circumstances the FAA should FAA also seeks comments on how this the statute. Section 44807(b) directs the promulgate new rulemaking to require rulemaking could be implemented to Secretary to consider a specific list of stand-off distances, additional operating meet the objective of the proposal in a factors in determining which types of and performance restrictions, the use of manner that maximizes benefits without UAS may operate safely: The Secretary UAS Traffic Management (UTM), and imposing excessive, unjustified, or must consider size, weight, speed, additional payload restrictions. The unnecessary costs. operational capability, proximity to FAA also seeks comment on whether it Specific questions are included in this airports and populated areas, operation should prescribe design requirements ANPRM immediately following the over people, and operation within or and require that unmanned aircraft be discussion of the relevant issues. The beyond the visual line of sight, or equipped with critical safety systems. FAA asks that commenters provide as operation during the day or night. The DATES: Send comments on or before much information as possible on any Secretary must determine, based on April 15, 2019. questions of interest to the commenter. these factors, whether operations of the ADDRESSES: Send comments identified In some areas, the FAA requests very UAS do not create a hazard to users of by docket number FAA–2018–1086 specific information. Whenever the NAS or the public. using any of the following methods: possible, please provide citations and This action also relies on other DOT • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to copies of any relevant studies or reports and FAA statutory authorities. http://www.regulations.gov and follow on which you rely, including cost data the online instructions for sending your as well as any additional data which II. Executive Summary comments electronically. supports your comment. It is also • Mail: Send comments to Docket helpful to explain the basis and The purpose of this advance notice of Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of reasoning underlying your comment. proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) is to Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Each commenting party should include seek comment regarding proposals for Avenue SE, Room W12–140, West the identifying number of the specific FAA rulemaking to reduce risks to Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC question(s) to which it is responding. public safety and national security as 20590–0001. The FAA will use comments to make UAS are integrated into the NAS. • Hand Delivery or Courier: Take decisions regarding the content and Consistent with its statutory comments to Docket Operations in direction of potential notices of authority, the FAA seeks to ensure that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3733

small UAS 1 operations will not create a step in integrating civil small UAS operators. The rule proposes three hazard to users of the NAS or the public operations that were not model aircraft operational categories.7 Category 1 or pose a threat to national security. under the statute in effect at the time of would limit the weight of the small This ANPRM is intended to gather publication.5 unmanned aircraft. Categories 2 and 3 information from the public to help As the next step, the FAA’s regulatory would limit the severity of potential inform the FAA’s efforts to assess plan calls for the agency to issue an injuries based on impact kinetic energy options for reducing risks to public NPRM that would propose to allow thresholds and exposed rotating parts safety and national security associated small UAS operations at night and over limitations. For operations of small UAS with further integration of UAS into the people without a waiver issued under at night, the rule would require the NAS. The FAA may consider initiating § 107.200. During the development remote pilot in command to complete a one or more rulemaking efforts based on process, the FAA heard from a number knowledge test or the appropriate the comments received in response to of government and industry training prior to operating at night and this ANPRM. stakeholders expressing support for the would require that the small UAS be In a separate but related rulemaking potential increase in commercial equipped with anti-collision lighting action published elsewhere in this issue viability of UAS operations, but also visible for at least 3 statute miles. of the Federal Register, the Operation of concerns over the potential impacts on Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems over public safety, national security, and law 2. Remote Identification and Tracking People NPRM, the FAA is proposing to enforcement. Aviation Rulemaking Committee amend part 107 to allow small UAS B. Public Safety and National Security Section 2202 of the FAA Extension, operations at night and over people. Concerns Safety, and Security Act of 2016 Because these operations have a (FESSA) required the FAA potential impact on public safety and As technology continues to improve Administrator, in consultation with the national security, the FAA does not and new uses for small UAS are Secretary of Transportation, the intend to promulgate a final rule to identified, the FAA anticipates an President of RTCA, Inc., and the allow these operations until a regulation increased demand for flexibility in Director of the National Institute of finalizes the requirements regarding operational restrictions under part 107. Standards and Technology, to convene remote identification of small UAS, as These new types of operations may have industry stakeholders to facilitate the discussed further in Related Agency public safety and national security risks development of consensus standards for Actions. that were not anticipated or envisioned. This ANPRM seeks public comment on remotely identifying operators and III. Background existing and future operational owners of unmanned aircraft systems A. Integration of UAS Into the NAS requirements and limitations in part 107 and associated unmanned aircraft. The FAA is working to safely that may be necessary to reduce risks to FESSA required that, as part of any integrate small UAS operations into the the public and users of the NAS in standards developed, the Administrator NAS using a phased, incremental, and accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44807. shall consider requirements for remote risk-based approach to rulemaking In addition, public safety and national identification of unmanned aircraft within the FAA’s existing statutory security entities have expressed a need systems; appropriate requirements for authority.2 In 2012, Congress passed the to distinguish between small UAS that different classifications of unmanned FAA Modernization and Reform Act of may pose a threat and those that do not, aircraft systems operations, including 2012 (Pub. L. 112–95). Section 333 of especially when operating in close public and civil; and the feasibility of Public Law 112–95 3 directed the proximity to large public gatherings, the development and operation of a Secretary to determine which types of critical infrastructure or certain other publicly accessible online database of 6 UAS do not create a hazard to users of facilities and assets. In light of this, the unmanned aircraft and the operators the NAS or the public or pose a threat FAA is constantly assessing the ability thereof, and any criteria for exclusion to national security. Based on such of the regulations to ensure that small from the database. findings, Congress directed the UAS operations do not pose a threat to The FAA convened the UAS Secretary to establish requirements for public safety or national security. Identification and Tracking Aviation the safe operation of UAS. On June 28, C. Related Agency Actions Rulemaking Committee (ARC) to make 2016, the FAA published the final rule recommendations for the identification for Operation and Certification of Small 1. Operation of Small Unmanned and tracking of small UAS. The FAA Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS Aircraft Systems Over People NPRM has reviewed the ARC recommendations Operation and Certification final rule) The Operations of Small UAS over and initiated a separate rulemaking (RIN (part 107 final rule),4 which was a first People rulemaking would promulgate 2120–AL31) to propose remote performance-based standards applicable identification requirements for UAS, but 1 A small UAS is defined as a small unmanned to manufacturers of small UAS, as well has not yet published any proposals in aircraft and its associated elements (including as some requirements applicable to 8 communication links and the components that the Federal Register. As previously control the small unmanned aircraft) that are explained, the FAA does not intend to required for the safe and efficient operation of the 5 Public Law 112–95, section 336 (Feb. 14, 2012). promulgate the Operations of Small small unmanned aircraft in the national airspace Section 336 was repealed by Section 349 of Public UAS over People final rule until the system (NAS). A small unmanned aircraft is defined Law 115–254 (Oct. 5, 2018) and replaced with 49 as an unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 U.S.C. 44809. Section 44809 provides an exception pounds on takeoff, including everything that is on for limited recreational UAS operations, provided 7 The 3 categories proposed for civil small UAS board or otherwise attached to the aircraft. 14 CFR the operations satisfy eight specific conditions. See operations over people are unrelated to the 107.3. 49 U.S.C. 44809(a)(1)–(8). Department of Defense UAS categories which are 2 For more information regarding the operation of 6 The Departments of Defense, Energy, Homeland divided into 5 groups that distinguish UAS by small unmanned aircraft, see http://www.faa.gov/ Security, and Justice have authority to address weight and other characteristics. uas. threats posed by UAS under certain circumstances 8 A copy of the report is available at https:// 3 Section 347 of Public Law 115–254 repealed to certain facilities and assets identified by statute. www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/ Section 333, but replaced the relevant substantive 10 U.S.C. 130i; 50 U.S.C. 2661; and section 1602 of committees/documents/media/UAS%20ID% provisions, codified at 49 U.S.C. 44807. Public Law 115–254 (to be codified at 6 U.S.C. 20ARC%20Final%20Report%20with 4 81 FR 42063. 124n). %20Appendices.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS 3734 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

remote identification rulemaking is Stand-off distances are the amount of UAS regulations from other countries finalized. space between a small UAS and the that include stand-off distances. For closest person or object. They can have example, in the United Kingdom, small 3. Section 2209 Process for UAS- a horizontal component, a vertical UAS must be operated at least 150 feet Specific Airspace Restrictions component, or be measured directly away from people and property and 500 Section 2209 of FESSA requires the using a slant range. Stand-off distances feet away from large crowds and built- Secretary of Transportation to establish are sometimes referred to as minimums, up areas, unless given special a process to allow certain fixed-site such as in a minimum separation or permission.10 In addition, proposed facility owners or operators to petition minimum stand-off distance, and are rules from Canada and EASA both the FAA to prohibit or restrict the typically measured in feet. They may include prescriptive stand-off distances operation of unmanned aircraft in close help to ensure a small UAS does not for small UAS operations. proximity to certain facilities, such as pose a hazard to people on the ground Questions for the Public: The FAA is national security sites, critical or assess whether a UAS poses a threat considering rulemaking to address infrastructure, amusement parks and to national security. public safety and national security other locations that warrant such a Currently, small UAS operated under concerns associated with small UAS restriction. That process is currently part 107 do not have any prescriptive and invites input from the public as under development.9 horizontal or vertical stand-off distances follows— A1. If the FAA were to establish IV. Discussion and Questions from people or structures. Rather, specific horizontal or vertical stand-off Concerning Proposal Under remote pilots must comply with distances for all small UAS operations, Consideration performance-based rules that reduce risk by ensuring that small UAS will what should those stand-off distances be This ANPRM is intended to gather pose no undue hazard to people, and why? information from the public to help aircraft, or property in the event of a A2. If the FAA were to establish inform the FAA’s efforts to assess loss of control of the small unmanned horizontal or vertical stand-off distances options for reducing risks to public aircraft for any reason (§ 107.19(c)) and for only certain types of small UAS safety and national security associated avoiding operations over any person operations, what types of operations with further integration of UAS into the who is not directly involved in the flight should require a stand-off distance, NAS, including options for additional operation unless that person is under an what should the stand-off distance be, rulemaking. Examples of subjects for appropriate covered structure or inside and why? Examples of types of additional rulemaking may include a vehicle (§ 107.39). operations include, but are not limited operating limitations, such as stand-off In a separate rulemaking action, to, night operations, operations in distances, payload restrictions, altitude, specifically the Operation of Small controlled airspace under an ATC airspeed and performance limitations. Unmanned Aircraft Systems over People authorization, and beyond-visual-line- A. Stand-Off Distances NPRM, the FAA is proposing to amend of-sight operations. § 107.39 to allow certain small UAS to A3. What types of operations, if any, Small UAS have the capability to operate over people under specific should be excluded from a proposed operate in locations that are inaccessible conditions. Those small UAS would be stand-off distance requirement and to manned aircraft as well as operate at required to meet safety thresholds that why? reduced horizontal and vertical stand- ensure the small UAS will not cause a A4. How would a horizontal or off distances from people and structures serious injury to people if an impact vertical stand-off distance requirement compared to manned aircraft. This occurs, and while the subject of stand- help reduce hazards to public safety and capability is a major benefit of small off distances is addressed, the rule does national security? UAS operations to both the public and not propose to establish any specific A5. What are the incremental costs 11 private sectors, but also presents unique stand-off requirements. of introducing a stand-off distance safety and security concerns. Because As discussed in the part 107 final requirement compared to how small UAS can operate in places that rule, the FAA considered requiring operations are conducted today? manned aircraft cannot, such as in minimum stand-off distances, but A6. Does requiring a minimum stand- confined locations, under bridges, or ultimately determined that, due to the off distance necessitate additional close to buildings, they are capable of wide range of possible small unmanned instrumentation? If yes, provide costs capturing useful information for aircraft and small UAS operations, a and other relevant information. inspection, investigation, and other prescriptive numerical stand-off A7. If minimum stand-off distances purposes. In certain cases, small UAS distance requirement would be more are required, would training or testing may be able to observe people, burdensome than necessary for some be necessary? If yes, provide estimate of structures, and areas on the ground from operations while not being stringent time and cost. a vantage point that cannot be achieved enough for other operations. This B. Altitude, Airspeed, and Other by manned aircraft or by persons on the decision by the FAA provided flexibility Performance Limitations ground. On the other hand, when small to small UAS operators to determine the UAS are operated too close to sensitive appropriate stand-off distance, if any, Due to their potential small size, light locations; critical infrastructure; certain for low-risk operations, but the FAA weight, and propulsion capabilities, mobile assets, including vessels and notes that as UAS operations continue small UAS can have relative ground vehicle convoys; government to expand and the FAA works to performance that far exceeds that of activities, such as firefighting, search integrate them into the NAS, stand-off conventional manned aircraft. These and rescue operations; certain law distances may be considered to reduce capabilities allow for operations that enforcement activities; over large public safety and national security manned aircraft are not capable of or gatherings of people; or near manned hazards presented by higher-risk UAS 10 aircraft, it raises safety and security operations. https://www.caa.co.uk/Consumers/Unmanned- aircraft-and-drones/. concerns within the NAS. While part 107 currently does not 11 For the purposes of this ANPRM, the FAA is contain any prescriptive stand-off requesting incremental costs, which is the 9 See RIN 2120–AL33. distances, there are examples of small difference between current and future operations.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3735

cannot conduct safely. Some small UAS continues to assess possible especially beyond visual line of sight are capable of speeds in excess of 150 performance limitations, such as (BVLOS), there may be opportunities to knots (172 mph), altitudes of 10,000 feet airspeed and altitude, to mitigate mitigate public safety and national or more, and climb rates in excess of potential hazards. security risks at the same time. 6,000 feet per minute. Some can Questions for the Public: The FAA is Section 2208 of the FESSA directed accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in less than considering rulemaking to address the FAA to conduct research and 1 second. They can have extreme public safety and national security establish a pilot program with NASA maneuverability and the capability to concerns associated with small UAS regarding UTM, both of which are hover for extended periods of time. and invites input from the public as currently underway with the ultimate These performance capabilities provide follows— goal of informing future rulemaking. considerable benefits and advantages to B1. If the FAA were to establish Further, in conjunction with completing UAS operations but also create unique additional operating or performance the pilot program required by FESSA, safety and security concerns. limitations for small UAS, what should Section 376 of Public Law 115–254 Because of their performance those operating or performance requires the FAA, in coordination with capabilities, small UAS can operate in limitations be and why? NASA and industry stakeholders, to confined areas with speed and agility B2. If the FAA were to establish develop an implementation plan for and, with their maneuverability, are additional operating or performance UTM services that expand operations capable of operating in close proximity limitations for only certain types of beyond visual line of sight, have full to buildings, vehicles, and people, small UAS operations, what types of operational capability, and ensure the which allows for the gathering of small UAS operations should require safety and security of all aircraft. The imagery and data that cannot otherwise additional operating or performance UTM implementation plan, which must be obtained from the air or ground. limitations, what should they be, and address safety standards among other However, with their capability for why? matters and delineate the roles and speed, maneuverability, and extreme B3. How would additional operating responsibilities of public and private acceleration, both horizontally and or performance limitations help to actors, is to be completed within one vertically, they can pose a hazard to reduce risks to public safety or national year of the conclusion of the UTM pilot other aircraft or persons on the ground. security? program. B4. What types of current small UAS Also, those performance capabilities In the part 107 rulemaking, the FAA operations would be impacted by could lead to risks when operating in found the risk to public safety and establishing additional operating or close proximity to sensitive government national security acceptable without locations, large gatherings of people, performance limitations? B5. What are the incremental costs of requiring any type of UTM law enforcement activities, search and coordination, even considering the rescue operations, and other aircraft. altitude, airspeed, and other inherent structure it would provide. Currently, small UAS operated under performance limitations? Because operations under part 107 part 107 are limited to a maximum C. Unmanned Traffic Management (conducted without a waiver) are groundspeed of 87 knots (100 mph) and (UTM) Operations a maximum altitude of 400 feet above limited to visual line of sight and small ground level, unless operated within a Small UAS pose a unique public UAS must yield the right-of-way to all 400-foot radius of a structure, in which safety and security risk to other aircraft other aircraft, the FAA determined that case the limit is 400 feet above the and persons and property on the ground a certificated remote pilot can operate a structure’s uppermost limit. As because they can operate more readily small UAS safely without the need to discussed in the part 107 final rule, a in sensitive areas and it can be difficult coordinate its flight path with other small UAS travelling at high speed to identify non-compliant operations. operators. Consistent with the direction poses a higher risk to persons, property, Applying more structure to the airspace in Section 376, however, as UAS and other aircraft than one traveling at and operations may reduce public safety operations in the NAS continue to a lower speed. The rule also noted that or national security risks in the NAS by evolve and increase in number, the FAA a speed limit would have safety benefits removing the anonymity of the anticipates there will be a need for outside of a loss-of-positive-control operations and establishing operating additional airspace coordination and scenario because a small unmanned norms, which can then be used to management to ensure those operations aircraft traveling at a lower speed is highlight anomalous activity that may do not pose a risk to public safety or generally easier to control. Also, the rule indicate malicious intent. national security. states that the speed and altitude Many entities in both the public and Questions for the Public: The FAA is limitations reduce the risk of collision private sector are developing a considering rulemaking to address with other aircraft. As stated in the part decentralized communication public safety and national security 107 final rule, a maximum speed limit architecture identified as UAS Traffic concerns associated with small UAS of 87 knots is appropriate because the Management (UTM), which could and invites input from the public as remote pilot in command will have to support more structured airspace and follows— implement mitigations commensurate operations for small UAS without active C1. How can additional information with the risk posed by his or her control from the FAA’s Air Traffic sharing (e.g., intended flight path, specific small UAS operation, such as Organization. Increased communication operational boundary) via UTM help operating at a speed less than 87 knots. between operators on planned and reduce risks to public safety and Section 107.51 also includes limitations actual flight paths, deconfliction national security? What suite of on flight visibility and cloud clearances, capability, additional information capabilities should UTM have? but does not have any operating sources, and new service suppliers are C2. What types of small UAS limitations for vertical climb or descent intended to allow for optimized flight operations should be subject to UTM rates or rates of acceleration. paths with increased safety. While UTM requirements? Should any be excluded? As new uses for small UAS are is focused on managing the safe and Should the requirement be based on identified and new types of operations efficient operation of an increasing geographical location, the type of are introduced into the NAS, the FAA number of UAS operating in the NAS, operation, or other factors? Please

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS 3736 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

provide data or explanations to justify disrupt critical infrastructure, including restricted? Should there be exceptions your response. communications networks; and to or special provisions applicable to C3. For small UAS subject to UTM conduct malicious cyber activity. There certain conditions or other factors such requirements, what type of information have been instances in which small as location, time, population density, or should be available to the general UAS were used in ways that interfere purpose? Please provide data or public? What type of information with law enforcement, firefighting, and explanations to justify your response. should be available to security aviation operations. D3. What types of operations would personnel? Recently, Congress enacted section be affected if additional restrictions are C4. What are the initial nonrecurring 363 of Public Law 115–254, responding placed on the type of payloads and investment costs associated with to several payload and installed equipment that can be installed on a establishing a UTM architecture? Once equipment concerns. Unless authorized small UAS? Would there be any costs or implemented, what are the annual by the Administrator, section 363 lost revenues associated with those recurring operation and maintenance prohibits a person from operating a UAS restrictions? costs? equipped or armed with a dangerous E. Small UAS Critical System Design C5. For questions C.1., C.2., and C.3., weapon as defined in 18 U.S.C. Requirements please include information in your 930(g)(2).12 response identifying the costs that Further, § 107.36 prohibits the Public safety and national security would be necessary to equip small UAS carriage of hazardous materials as concerns have been raised regarding the to comply with UTM requirements. defined in 49 CFR 171.8. This definition potential failure of critical systems on C6. Would additional testing or includes many types of hazardous small UAS, which could result in the training be required for a remote pilot to substances, such as chemicals or loss of control of the aircraft and safely operate a small unmanned aircraft hazardous waste, but does not address increase the risk to persons and subject to UTM requirements? Please all types of payloads or sensors that property on the ground and other users explain. could pose a threat to public safety or of the airspace. One way of designing C7. What would be the costs for national security. Part 107 does allow critical systems on small UAS that has information sharing if UAS operations for the transportation of property for the potential to address these concerns are subject to UTM requirements? compensation or hire, but only if the from both a public safety and national security perspective is the use of D. Payload Restrictions aircraft, including its attached systems, payload, and cargo weigh less than 55 redundancy. From a safety standpoint, Small UAS are readily available for pounds total; the flight is conducted redundancy helps to mitigate the risk of purchase in home electronic and general within visual line of sight and not from critical single-point system failures. For merchandise stores by individuals who a moving vehicle or aircraft; and the example, a battery failure on a UA with may have little or no familiarity with flight occurs wholly within the bounds only one battery might result in a crash the civil aviation regulations that are of a State and does not involve transport landing. If the UA was built with a applicable to them. Some of these small between (1) Hawaii and another place in redundant power system (multiple UAS have very small visual, radar, and Hawaii through airspace outside batteries or a backup), the UA could acoustic signatures, which may make Hawaii; (2) the District of Columbia and switch to the alternate power source and them more difficult to detect, identify, another place in the District of maintain safe flight. Another approach and track compared to manned aircraft. Columbia; or (3) a territory or to increase safety is the use of fail-safe On the other hand, small UAS that possession of the United States and design features. A small UAS that has a weigh close to 55 pounds could carry a another place in the same territory or fail-safe command and control (C2) link significant amount of internal or possession. would improve the safety of the small external payload. If a small UAS is Questions for the Public: The FAA is UAS if a lost-link event occurs. determined to present a threat to public considering rulemaking to address From a national security standpoint, safety or national security, currently public safety and national security redundancy of critical systems plays a there are limited ways to mitigate the concerns associated with small UAS more indirect role. Failure of some threat. As a result, the increased and invites input from the public as functions on an unmanned aircraft may integration of UAS operations in the follows— lead to unplanned airspace or security NAS poses unique public safety and D1. Should the prohibition from violations. For example, a loss of national security concerns. carrying hazardous materials in § 107.36 navigation or lost-link could lead to an Given their size, propulsion systems, be expanded to include other types of unmanned aircraft entering and navigational capabilities, small payloads or installed equipment that unauthorized airspace. Having a UAS can operate in close proximity to could pose a threat to public safety or redundant navigation system or a fail- buildings, persons, vehicles and other national security? If yes, what types of safe C2 system could reduce the risk of objects without anyone’s awareness. payloads should be prohibited and this happening. Additionally, critical With the current and expected why? systems could be a piece of a larger improvements in technical capabilities D2. Should the FAA consider security strategy ensuring a robust available on small UAS, they can rulemaking to restrict the use of certain capability to strengthen the overall circumvent measures used to protect types of small UAS payloads or security of the system. An example security-sensitive sites and operations, installed equipment? If yes, what types would be having redundant positioning which, if accessed or damaged, could of payloads should be restricted, under solutions (e.g., GPS, inertial) to ensure threaten national security or introduce what conditions should they be a high availability to broadcast the hazards to public safety. The FAA is unmanned aircraft’s position, if aware of situations where small UAS 12 The term ‘‘dangerous weapon’’ as defined in 18 required. have been used to conduct illegal U.S.C. 930(g)(2) means a weapon, device, Currently, small UAS operated under surveillance and industrial espionage; to instrument, material, or substance, animate or 14 CFR part 107 are not required to have inanimate, that is used for, or is readily capable of, deliver contraband to prison inmates; to causing death or serious bodily injury, except that an airworthiness certificate. deliver incendiary, explosive, chemical such term does not include a pocket knife with a Furthermore, they do not have any and radiological payloads; to damage or blade of less than 21⁄2 inches in length. prescribed design standards or required

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3737

system redundancies. As a result, many E4. What are the costs and benefits to executive department or agency small UAS operating today, especially incorporate redundant systems critical publicly proposes for notice and those with relatively small size, do not to safety of flight for BVLOS operations comment or otherwise promulgates a have redundancies in their design. or operations over people that exceed new regulation, it must identify at least However, the FAA, through policy, may the NPRM safety thresholds indicated two existing regulations to be repealed condition the grant of waiver from above? and offset any new incremental costs certain operational limitations in part associated with new regulations by the V. Regulatory Requirements and 107 on equipage with redundant elimination of existing costs associated Executive Order Determinations systems. For example, § 107.31—Visual with at least two prior regulations. FAA line of sight aircraft operations and The FAA will address the following will need to determine if a future § 107.39—Operation over people, are requirements in future small UAS safety rulemaking is an E.O. 13771 regulatory both subject to waiver as prescribed in and security rulemakings. Please or deregulatory action. §§ 107.200 and 107.205. In evaluating provide comments that would assist the C. Executive Order 13132 waiver requests for §§ 107.31 and FAA in its consideration and analyses of 107.39, the FAA may consider the need these requirements. Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999), requires for design requirements, including A. Executive Order 12866, Executive redundancy, for critical UAS systems agencies to assure meaningful and Order 13563, and DOT Regulatory timely input by State and local officials based upon the nature of the request Policies and Procedures and the need to mitigate any risks in the development of regulatory associated with the proposed operation. This ANPRM is considered a policies that may have ‘‘substantial In a related rulemaking action, significant regulatory action under direct effects on the States, on the specifically the Operation of Small section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 relationship between the national Unmanned Aircraft Systems over People and was reviewed by the Office of government and the States, or on the NPRM, the FAA is proposing to amend Management and Budget (OMB). It is distribution of power and § 107.39 to allow small UAS to operate considered a significant regulatory responsibilities among the various over people if they are tested and shown action under the Regulatory Policies and levels of government.’’ FAA invites to fulfill certain safety standards Procedures order issued by the State and local governments with an intended to limit the severity of injuries Department of Transportation. 44 FR interest in this rulemaking to comment to people on the ground. While 11034 (Feb. 26, 1979). on any effect that may result. Executive Orders 12866, ‘‘Regulatory manufacturers of small UAS qualified to D. Executive Order 13175 operate over people may choose to have Planning and Review,’’ 58 FR 51735 redundancy for critical systems in their (Oct. 4, 1993), and 13563, ‘‘Improving Consistent with Executive Order designs, it is not required by the Regulation and Regulatory Review,’’ 76 13175, ‘‘Consultation and Coordination proposed rule. FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011), require agencies with Indian Tribal Governments,’’ and Questions for the Public: The FAA is to regulate in the ‘‘most cost-effective FAA Order 1210.20, ‘‘American Indian considering rulemaking to address manner,’’ to make a ‘‘reasoned and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation public safety and national security determination that the benefits of the Policy and Procedures,’’ the FAA concerns associated with small UAS intended regulation justify its costs,’’ ensures that Federally Recognized and invites input from the public as and to develop regulations that ‘‘impose Tribes (Tribes) are given the opportunity follows— the least burden on society.’’ Executive to provide meaningful and timely input E1. For small UAS operations beyond Order 13610, ‘‘Identifying and reducing regarding proposed Federal actions that the visual line of sight of the remote Regulatory Burdens,’’ 77 FR 28469 (May have the potential to uniquely or pilot, should the FAA establish design 14, 2012), urges agencies to conduct significantly affect their respective requirements, such as redundancy, for retrospective analyses of existing rules Tribes. At this point, the FAA has not systems critical to safety of flight? If yes, to examine whether they remain identified any unique or significant what should these requirements be and justified and whether they should be effects, environmental or otherwise, on why? Are there other means the FAA modified or streamlined in light of tribes resulting from this advance notice should consider to address public safety changed circumstances, including the of proposed rulemaking. As it and national security risk for BVLOS rise of new technologies. contemplated in the sUAS Operation operations? Additionally, Executive Orders 12866, and Certification final rule, the FAA has E2. For small UAS operations over 13563, and 13610 require agencies to conducted outreach to tribes and people that exceed the NPRM safety provide a meaningful opportunity for responded to those tribes seeking thresholds indicated above and public participation. Accordingly, FAA information about small UAS operations therefore still must seek a waiver to invites comments on these conducted within their territory to see § 107.39 to operate over people, should considerations, including any cost or how their concerns can be addressed the FAA establish design requirements, benefit figures or factors, alternative within the broader UAS integration such as redundancy, for systems critical approaches, and relevant scientific, effort.13 to safety of flight? If yes, what should technical and economic data. These Since publication of the sUAS these requirements be and why? Are comments will help FAA evaluate Operation and Certification final rule, there other means the FAA should whether regulatory action is warranted the FAA has conducted outreach to consider to address public safety and and appropriate. tribes to ensure that they are familiar national security risk for operations over with the rules’ provisions and how they people? B. Executive Order 13771 might apply in Indian country, and that E3. Are there other types of small On January 30, 2017, President Trump they are aware of FAA’s plans for UAS operations besides BVLOS and signed Executive Order 13771 (E.O. additional rulemakings to integrate UAS operations over people that the FAA 13771), ‘‘Reducing Regulation and into the NAS. As part of that outreach should establish design requirements Controlling Regulatory Costs.’’ Under the FAA has: for, such as redundancy, to address Section 2 of this Executive Order, unless public safety and national security risk? prohibited by law, whenever an 13 81 FR 42063 at 42189.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS 3738 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

• Provided material on the sUAS 5 CFR 1320.8(d) requires that FAA J. Executive Order 13609 and Operation and Certification final rule to provide interested members of the International Trade Analysis participants at the mid-year conference public and affected agencies an of the National Congress of American opportunity to comment on information Under Executive Order 13609, Indians (Spokane, WA, June 27–30, collection and recordkeeping requests. ‘‘Promoting International Regulatory 2016); This ANPRM does not impose new Cooperation,’’ 77 FR 26413 (May 4, • Presented at a workshop at the information collection requirements. 2012), agencies must consider whether National Tribal Transportation FAA would have to consider the impacts associated with significant Conference (Anaheim, CA October 4, information collection requirements for variations between domestic and 2016); future rulemakings. international regulatory approaches are • Responded to inquiries from the unnecessary or may impair the ability of Shoshone-Bannock Tribes and G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of American businesses to export and Muscogee (Creek) Nation regarding use 1995 compete internationally. In meeting of UAS; shared challenges involving health, • Presented information on UAS at a The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act safety, labor, security, environmental, meeting of the Tribal Transportation of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governs and other issues, regulatory approaches Self-Governance Program Negotiated the issuance of Federal regulations that developed through international Rulemaking Meeting (Shawnee, OK require unfunded mandates. An cooperation can provide equivalent October 18, 2016); and unfunded mandate is a regulation that protection to standards developed • Provided information to The requires a state, local, or tribal independently while also minimizing Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, which is government or the private sector to unnecessary differences. participating in the UAS Integration incur direct costs without the Federal 14 Similarly, the Trade Agreements Act Pilot Program. Through this program, government’s having first provided the of 1979, Public Law 96–39, as amended the FAA will work with The Choctaw funds to pay those costs. The FAA will by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, Nation to ensure safe UAS operations need to determine if this rulemaking Public Law 103–465, prohibits Federal for the purposes of agriculture, public would result in costs of $155 million or agencies from establishing any safety, and infrastructure inspections. more, adjusted for inflation, to either Such operations may include operations standards or engaging in related state, local, or tribal governments, in the over people and operations at night. activities that create unnecessary aggregate, or to the private sector in any The FAA will continue to respond to obstacles to the foreign commerce of the one year. tribes expressing interest in or concerns United States. For purposes of these about UAS operations, and will engage H. National Environmental Policy Act requirements, Federal agencies may in government-to-government participate in the establishment of consultation with tribes as appropriate, The National Environmental Policy international standards, so long as the in accordance with Executive Orders Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321–4375, standards have a legitimate domestic and FAA guidance. requires that Federal agencies analyze objective, such as providing for safety, proposed actions to determine whether E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive and do not operate to exclude imports the action will have a significant impact Order 13272, and DOT Policies and that meet this objective. The statute also Procedures on the human environment. The requires consideration of international Council on Environmental Quality standards and, where appropriate, that Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (CEQ) regulations require Federal they be the basis for U.S. standards. of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., FAA must agencies to conduct an environmental FAA welcomes any data or information consider whether a rulemaking would review considering (1) the need for the related to international impacts that have a ‘‘significant economic impact on proposed action, (2) alternatives to the may result from future rulemaking. a substantial number of small entities.’’ proposed action, (3) probable ‘‘Small entities’’ include small environmental impacts of the proposed K. Executive Order 13211 businesses, not-for-profit organizations action and alternatives, and (4) the that are independently owned and Executive Order 13211, 66 FR 28355 agencies and persons consulted during (May 22, 2001), requires Federal operated and are not dominant in their the consideration process. See 40 CFR fields, and governmental jurisdictions agencies to prepare a Statement of 1508.9(b). FAA welcomes any data or with populations under 50,000. Energy Effects for any ‘‘significant Any future rulemaking would be information related to environmental energy action.’’ Under the executive developed in accordance with Executive impacts that may result from any future order, a ‘‘significant energy action’’ is Order 13272, ‘‘Proper Consideration of rulemaking. defined as any action by an agency Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,’’ I. Privacy Act (normally published in the Federal 68 FR 7990 (Feb. 19, 2003), and DOT’s Register) that promulgates, or is procedures and policies to promote Anyone is able to search the expected to lead to the promulgation of, compliance with the Regulatory electronic form of any written a final rule or regulation (including a Flexibility Act to ensure that potential communications and comments notice of inquiry, ANPRM, and NPRM) impacts on small entities of a regulatory received into any of our dockets by the that (1)(i) is a significant regulatory action are properly considered. name of the individual submitting the action under Executive Order 12866 or document (or signing the document, if F. Paperwork Reduction Act any successor order and (ii) is likely to submitted on behalf of an association, have a significant adverse effect on the In accordance with the Paperwork business, labor union, etc.). You may supply, distribution, or use of energy; or Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., review DOT’s complete Privacy Act (2) is designated by the Administrator of Statement in the Federal Register the Office of Information and Regulatory 14 Federal Aviation Administration UAS published on April 11, 2000, see 65 FR Affairs as a significant energy action. Integration Pilot Program (May 7, 2018), available at https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnership/ 19477, or you may visit http:// The FAA would have to consider this uas_integration_pilot_program/. www.regulations.gov. executive order for future rulemaking.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3739

Issued under the authority provided by 49 Hand Delivery/Courier: Due to Army Appropriations Act of 1919 (40 U.S.C. 106(f), 40101 note, and 44807, in security requirements, we cannot Stat. 892; 33 U.S.C. 3), the Corps of Washington, DC, on January 28, 2019. receive comments by hand delivery or Engineers is proposing amendments to Daniel K. Elwell, courier. regulations in 33 CFR part 334 for the Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation Instructions: Direct your comments to amendment of an existing danger zone, Administration. docket number COE–2018–0007. All in the waters of the Atlantic Ocean [FR Doc. 2019–00758 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] comments received will be included in south of the entrance to the Chesapeake BILLING CODE 4910–13–P the public docket without change and Bay off of the coast of Virginia. In a may be made available on-line at http:// memorandum dated July 23, 2018, the www.regulations.gov, including any Department of the Navy requested that personal information provided, unless DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE the Corps modify 33 CFR 334.390 to the commenter indicates that the amend the existing danger zone. The Department of the Army, Corps of comment includes information claimed proposed danger zone amendment is Engineers to be Confidential Business Information necessary to protect the public from (CBI) or other information whose hazards associated with training and 33 CFR Part 334 disclosure is restricted by statute. Do mission operations, and to improve not submit information that you vessel traffic throughput and maritime Atlantic Ocean South of Entrance to consider to be CBI, or otherwise safety in the northeast region of the Chesapeake Bay; Firing Range protected, through regulations.gov or SDZ. The proposed modification email. The regulations.gov website is an identifies an area within the current of AGENCY: United States Army Corps of anonymous access system, which means the danger zone where live fire exercises Engineers, Department of Defense. we will not know your identity or are no longer conducted and no ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking contact information unless you provide restriction to surface navigation exists. and request for comments. it in the body of your comment. If you send an email directly to the Corps Procedural Requirements SUMMARY: The Corps of Engineers is without going through regulations.gov, a. Review Under Executive Orders proposing to amend an existing your email address will be 12866 and 13563 permanent danger zone in the waters of automatically captured and included as Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 the Atlantic Ocean south of the entrance part of the comment that is placed in the direct agencies to assess the costs and to the Chesapeake Bay off of the coast public docket and made available on the benefits of available regulatory of Virginia. For decades, the Dam Neck internet. If you submit an electronic alternatives and, if regulation is Surface Danger Zone (SDZ) served as a comment, we recommend that you necessary, to select regulatory firing range for gunnery training at what include your name and other contact approaches that maximize net benefits. is now Naval Air Station Oceana’s Dam information in the body of your Executive Order 13771 directs agencies Neck Annex. While the Navy continues comment and with compact disc you to control regulatory costs through a to use the SDZ for training, fixed-mount may submit. If we cannot read your budgeting process. This proposed rule gunnery operations have not been comment because of technical has not been designated a ‘‘significant conducted there for over 30 years. The difficulties and cannot contact you for regulatory action,’’ under Executive proposed amendment is necessary to clarification, we may not be able to Order 12866. Accordingly, this accurately identify the hazards consider your comment. Electronic proposed rule has not been reviewed by associated with training and mission comments should avoid the use of any the Office of Management and Budget operations to protect the public. The special characters, any form of (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance proposed amendment will identify the encryption, and be free of any defects or it is exempt from the requirements of area within the current danger zone viruses. boundary where live fire exercises are Docket: For access to the docket to Executive Order 13771. no longer conducted and no restriction read background documents or The Corps determined this proposed to surface navigation exists. In addition, comments received, go to rule is not a significant regulatory the proposed amendment will remove www.regulations.gov. All documents in action. This regulatory action references to live fire range conditions the docket are listed. Although listed in determination is based on the proposed and safety procedures as shore-to-sea the index, some information is not rule governing the danger zone, which gunnery operations are no longer publicly available, such as CBI or other allow any vessel that needs to transit the conducted. information whose disclosure is danger zone to expeditiously transit restricted by statute. Certain other through the danger zone when the small DATES: Written comments must be arms range is in use. When the range is submitted on or before March 15, 2019. material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be not in use, the danger zone will be open ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, to normal maritime traffic and to all identified by docket number COE– publicly available only in hard copy form. activities, include anchoring and 2018–0007, by any of the following loitering. The proposed rule is issued methods: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. with respect to a military function of the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// David Olson, Headquarters, Operations Department of Defense and the www.regulations.gov. Follow the and Regulatory Community of Practice, provisions of Executive Order 12866 do instructions for submitting comments. Washington, DC at 202–761–4922, or not apply. Email: [email protected]. Ms. Nicole Woodward, Corps of Include the docket number, COE–2018– Engineers, Norfolk District, Regulatory b. Review Under the Regulatory 0007, in the subject line of the message. Branch, at 757–201–7122. Flexibility Act Mail: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant This proposed rule has been reviewed Attn: CECW–CO–R (David B. Olson), to its authorities in Section 7 of the under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 441 G Street NW, Washington, DC Rivers and Harbors Act of 1917 (40 Stat. (Pub. L. 96–354). The Regulatory 20314–1000. 266; 33 U.S.C. 1) and Chapter XIX of the Flexibility Act generally requires an

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS 3740 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility § 334.390 Atlantic Ocean south of entrance (c) Enforcement. The regulation in analysis of any rule subject to notice- to Chesapeake Bay; firing range. this section shall be enforced by the and-comment rulemaking requirements (a) The danger zone. (1) A section Commander, Naval Air Force Atlantic, under the Administrative Procedure Act extending seaward for a distance of U.S. Fleet Forces Command, Norfolk, or any other statute unless the agency 12,000 yards between two radial lines Virginia, and such agencies as he or she certifies that the rule will not have a bearing 030° True and 083° True, may designate. significant economic impact on a respectively, from a point on shore at Dated: February 7, 2019. Approved: ° ′ ″ substantial number of small entities latitude 36 46 48 N, longitude Thomas P. Smith, (i.e., small businesses and small ° ′ ″ 75 57 24 W; and an adjacent sector Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division, governments). The danger zone is extending seaward for a distance of 15 Directorate of Civil Works. necessary to protect public safety during nautical miles between two radial lines [FR Doc. 2019–02157 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] use of the small arms range. Unless bearing 083° True and 150° True, BILLING CODE 3720–58–P information is obtained to the contrary respectively, from the same shore during the comment period, the Corps position. The datum for these certifies that the proposed rule would coordinates is WGS–1984. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION have no significant economic impact on (b) The regulations. (1) To AGENCY the public. After considering the accommodate ingress and egress within economic impacts of this proposed the southern approach to the 40 CFR Part 52 danger zone regulation on small entities, Chesapeake Bay Federal navigation I certify that this action will not have a channels, no live fire exercise will take [EPA–R05–OAR–2018–0126; FRL–9989–32– significant impact on a substantial place within the area northeast of, and Region 5] number of small entities. defined by a line intersecting points ° ′ ″ Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Proposed c. Review Under the National latitude 36 47 59 N, longitude Approval of a Revision to the Sulfur 75°46′05″ W and latitude 36°44′25″ N, Environmental Policy Act ° ′ ″ Dioxide State Implementation Plan for longitude 75 38 57 W, and this area is United States Steel-Gary Works Due to the administrative nature of open to unrestricted surface navigation. this action and because there is no (2) Within the remainder of the AGENCY: Environmental Protection intended change in the use of the area, danger zone vessels shall proceed Agency (EPA). the Corps expects that this regulation, if through the area with caution and shall ACTION: Proposed rule. adopted, will not have a significant remain therein no longer than necessary impact to the quality of the human for the purpose of transit. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection environment and, therefore, preparation (3) When firing is in progress during Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a of an environmental impact statement daylight hours, red flags will be March 6, 2018 request by the Indiana will not be required. An environmental displayed at conspicuous locations on Department of Environmental assessment will be prepared after the the beach. When firing is in progress Management (IDEM) to revise its State comment period is closed and all during periods of darkness, red flashing Implementation Plan (SIP) for the comments have been received and lights will be displayed from United States Steel-Gary Works (US considered. conspicuous locations on the beach Steel-Gary Works). The proposed SIP revision pertains to the removal of all d. Unfunded Mandates Act which are visible from the water a minimum distance of four (4) nautical sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission This proposed rule does not impose miles. limitations for the facility’s coke plant, an enforceable duty among the private (4) Firing on the ranges will be which permanently ceased operation on sector and, therefore, it is not a Federal suspended as long as any vessel is March 30, 2015, and other private sector mandate and it is not within the danger zone. administrative changes. The SIP subject to the requirements of either (5) Lookout posts will be manned by revision provides for an overall Section 202 or Section 205 of the the activity or agency operating the reduction in SO2 emissions at the Unfunded Mandates Act. We have also firing range at the Naval Air Station facility. found under Section 203 of the Act, that Oceana, Dam Neck Annex, in Virginia DATES: Comments must be received on small governments will not be Beach, Virginia. After darkness, night or before March 15, 2019. significantly and uniquely affected by vision systems will be utilized by ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, this rulemaking. lookouts to aid in locating vessels identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 334 transiting the area. OAR–2018–0126 at http:// (6) There shall be no firing on the www.regulations.gov, or via email to Danger zones, Marine safety, range during periods of low visibility [email protected]. For comments Navigation (water), Restricted areas, which would prevent the recognition of submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the Waterways. a vessel (to a distance of 7,500 yards) online instructions for submitting For the reasons set out in the which is properly displaying navigation comments. Once submitted, comments preamble, the Corps proposes to amend lights, or which would preclude a vessel cannot be edited or removed from 33 CFR part 334 as follows: from observing the red range flags or Regulations.gov. For either manner of lights. submission, EPA may publish any PART 334—DANGER ZONE AND (7) Throughout the entire danger zone comment received to its public docket. RESTRICTED AREA REGULATIONS anchoring, dredging, trawling and any Do not submit electronically any ■ 1. The authority citation for 33 CFR bottom disturbing activities should be information you consider to be part 334 continues to read as follows: conducted with caution due to the Confidential Business Information (CBI) potential of unexploded ordnance or other information whose disclosure is Authority: 40 Stat. 266 (33 U.S.C. 1) and (UXO) and other munitions and restricted by statute. Multimedia 40 Stat. 892 (33 U.S.C. 3). explosives of concern (MEC) on the submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be ■ 2. Revise § 334.390 to read as follows: bottom. accompanied by a written comment.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3741

The written comment is considered the for various emission units at US Steel- EPA’s role is to approve state choices, official comment and should include Gary Works, depending on the operation provided that they meet the criteria of discussion of all points you wish to status of the coke oven gas the CAA. Accordingly, this action make. EPA will generally not consider desulfurization unit. The sole purpose merely approves state law as meeting comments or comment contents located of the coke oven gas desulfurization unit Federal requirements and does not outside of the primary submission (i.e. was to control coke oven gas emissions impose additional requirements beyond on the web, cloud, or other file sharing from the coke plant. IDEM revised 326 those imposed by state law. For that system). For additional submission IAC 7–4.1–20 to remove all SO2 sources reason, this action: methods, please contact the person and emission limits associated with the • Is not a significant regulatory action identified in the ‘‘For Further coke plant. IDEM renumbered and subject to review by the Office of Information Contact’’ section. For the retained the remainder of the rule which Management and Budget under full EPA public comment policy, contains SO2 emission limitations for Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, information about CBI or multimedia other operating units at the facility such October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, submissions, and general guidance on as the turboblower boiler house units, January 21, 2011); making effective comments, please visit number 4 boiler house units, blast • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ furnace stove stacks, 84-inch hot strip FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory commenting-epa-dockets. mill units, number 3 sinter plant action because SIP approvals are FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: windbox gas cleaning systems, and exempted under Executive Order 12866; Emily Crispell, Environmental Scientist, baghouses. • Does not impose an information Control Strategies Section, Air Programs III. Summary of 110(l) Analysis collection burden under the provisions Branch (AR–18J), Environmental of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West According to Clean Air Act (CAA) U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois Section 110(l), EPA cannot approve a • Is certified as not having a 60604, (312) 353–8512, crispell.emily@ revision of a SIP if the revision would significant economic impact on a epa.gov. interfere with any applicable substantial number of small entities SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: requirement concerning attainment of under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Throughout this document whenever the National Ambient Air Quality U.S.C. 601 et seq.); ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean Standards and Reasonable Further • Does not contain any unfunded EPA. This supplementary information Progress (as defined in Section 171 of mandate or significantly or uniquely section is arranged as follows: the CAA). Indiana’s submission is affect small governments, as described consistent with CAA Section 110(l) in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act I. Background because the changes to the facility will II. Summary of Changes to Existing Rule of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); III. Summary of 110(l) Analysis result in a decrease in SO2 emissions in • Does not have Federalism IV. What action is EPA taking? excess of 3792.2 tons per year. implications as specified in Executive V. Incorporation by Reference IV. What action is EPA taking? Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 1999); EPA is proposing to approve IDEM’s • Is not an economically significant I. Background March 6, 2018 submittal as a revision to regulatory action based on health or US Steel-Gary Works is an integrated its existing SIP for US Steel-Gary Works. safety risks subject to Executive Order steel mill located in Gary, Indiana. On EPA is requesting comments on the 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); March 30, 2015, the facility proposed approval. • Is not a significant regulatory action permanently ceased the operation of its V. Incorporation by Reference subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR entire coke plant. The coke plant In this document, EPA is proposing to 28355, May 22, 2001); consisted of the coal handling facilities, • coke oven batteries, coke byproducts include in a final EPA rule regulatory Is not subject to requirements of recovery plant, coke oven text that includes incorporation by section 12(d) of the National desulfurization facility, and #2 coke reference. In accordance with Technology Transfer and Advancement plant boiler house. requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because IDEM amended 326 Indiana proposing to incorporate by reference application of those requirements would Administrative Code (326 IAC) 7–4.1–20 revisions to Indiana rule 326 IAC 7–4.1– be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; to remove SO emission limitations 20 U.S. Steel-Gary Works Sulfur Dioxide and 2 • applicable to the coke plant. IDEM held Emission Limitations, effective on Does not provide EPA with the a public hearing on October 11, 2017 February 21, 2018. EPA has made, and discretionary authority to address, as and received one question regarding will continue to make, these documents appropriate, disproportionate human whether US Steel-Gary Works would be generally available through health or environmental effects, using required to reapply for permits if they www.regulations.gov and at the EPA practicable and legally permissible chose to reopen the coke plant facility. Region 5 Office (please contact the methods, under Executive Order 12898 IDEM confirmed that US Steel-Gary person identified in the ‘‘For Further (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Works would have to reapply for Information Contact’’ section of this In addition, the SIP is not approved permits if they chose to reopen the coke preamble for more information). to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an plant. VI. Statutory and Executive Order IDEM adopted the revised rule on Indian tribe has demonstrated that a Reviews October 11, 2017, which became tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of effective on February 21, 2018. Under the CAA, the Administrator is Indian country, the rule does not have required to approve a SIP submission tribal implications and will not impose II. Summary of Changes to Existing that complies with the provisions of the substantial direct costs on tribal Rule CAA and applicable Federal regulations. governments or preempt tribal law as The existing rule 326 IAC 7–4.1–20 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 contained the SO2 emission limitations Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS 3742 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 The written comment is considered the the ozone nonattainment classification Environmental protection, Air official comment and should include of the area: Marginal, Moderate, Serious, pollution control, Incorporation by discussion of all points you wish to or Severe. See ‘‘major stationary source’’ reference, Intergovernmental relations, make. EPA will generally not consider in CAA sections 182(b), 184(b) and 302. Reporting and recordkeeping comments or comment contents located CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f)(1) of requirements, Sulfur oxides. outside of the primary submission (i.e. the CAA require states with moderate on the web, cloud, or other file sharing (or worse) ozone nonattainment areas to Dated: December 21, 2018. system). For additional submission implement RACT controls on all James O. Payne methods, please contact the person stationary sources and source categories Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. identified in the FOR FURTHER covered by a CTG document issued by [FR Doc. 2019–02215 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the EPA and on all major sources of VOC BILLING CODE 6560–50–P full EPA public comment policy, and NOX emissions located in the area. information about CBI or multimedia EPA’s CTGs establish presumptive submissions, and general guidance on RACT control requirements for various ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION making effective comments, please visit VOC source categories. The CTGs AGENCY http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ typically identify a particular control commenting-epa-dockets. level that EPA recommends as being 40 CFR Part 52 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RACT. In some cases, EPA has issued [EPA–R03–OAR–2018–0764; FRL–9989–45– Megan Goold, (215) 814–2027, or by Alternative Control Techniques Region 3] email at [email protected]. guidelines (ACTs) primarily for NOX SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July source categories, which in contrast to Approval and Promulgation of Air 24, 2018, PADEP submitted, on behalf of the CTGs, only present a range for Quality Implementation Plans; ACHD, a SIP revision addressing the possible control options but do not Pennsylvania; Allegheny County VOC CTG RACT requirements set forth identify any particular option as the Reasonable Available Control by the CAA for the 2008 8-hour ozone presumptive norm for what is RACT. Technology for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS for Allegheny County (the 2018 CAA section 183(c) requires EPA to National Ambient Air Quality Standard VOC CTG RACT Submission for revise and update CTGs and ACTs as the Administrator determines necessary. AGENCY: Environmental Protection Allegheny County). EPA issued eleven new CTGs from 2006 Agency (EPA). I. Background through 2008. A list of CTGs issued by ACTION: Proposed rule. A. General EPA can be found at https:// SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone- Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by pollution/control-techniques-guidelines- Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a photochemical reactions between VOCs state implementation plan (SIP) revision and-alternative-control-techniques. and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) in the submitted by the Pennsylvania States are required to implement RACT presence of sunlight. In order to reduce for the source categories covered by Department of Environmental Protection ozone concentrations, the CAA requires (PADEP) on behalf of the Allegheny CTGs through the SIP. Source categories control of VOC and NOX emission County Health Department (ACHD) for that are not covered by the CTGs are sources to achieve emission reductions termed non-CTG sources (non-CTG the purpose of satisfying the volatile in moderate or more serious ozone organic compound (VOC) reasonably sources are not covered by this SIP nonattainment areas. Among effective revision). available control technology (RACT) control measures, RACT controls requirements for source categories CAA section 184(a) of the CAA significantly reduce VOC and NOX covered by control technique guidelines established a single ozone transport emissions from major stationary region (OTR), comprising all or part of (CTGs) under the 2008 8-hour ozone sources. 12 eastern states and the District of national ambient air quality standard RACT is defined as the lowest Columbia.2 The entire Commonwealth (NAAQS). This action is being taken emission limitation that a particular of Pennsylvania is part of the OTR and, under the Clean Air Act (CAA). source is capable of meeting by the therefore, must comply with the RACT DATES: Written comments must be application of control technology that is requirements in CAA section received on or before March 15, 2019. reasonably available considering 184(b)(1)(B) and (2). Specifically, ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, technological and economic feasibility.1 section 184(b)(1)(B) requires the identified by Docket ID Number EPA– CAA section 172(c)(1) provides that implementation of RACT in OTR states R03–OAR–2018–0764 at http:// SIPs for nonattainment areas must with respect to all sources of VOC www.regulations.gov, or via email to include reasonably available control covered by a CTG. Additionally, section [email protected]. For measures (RACM) for attainment of the 184(b)(2) states that any stationary comments submitted at Regulations.gov, NAAQS, including emissions source with the potential to emit 50 tons follow the online instructions for reductions from existing sources per year (tpy) of VOCs shall be submitting comments. Once submitted, through adoption of RACT. A major considered a major source and requires comments cannot be edited or removed source in a nonattainment area is the implementation of major stationary from Regulations.gov. For either manner defined as any stationary source that source requirements in the OTR states of submission, EPA may publish any emits or has the potential to emit NOX as if the area were a moderate comment received to its public docket. or VOC emissions above a certain nonattainment area. A major source in Do not submit electronically any applicability threshold that is based on a nonattainment area is defined as any information you consider to be stationary source that emits or has the 1 See December 9, 1976 memorandum from Roger confidential business information (CBI) potential to emit NOX or VOC emissions or other information whose disclosure is Strelow, Assistant Administrator for Air and Waste Management, to Regional Administrators, above a certain applicability threshold restricted by statute. Multimedia ‘‘Guidance for Determining Acceptability of SIP submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be Regulations in Non-Attainment Areas.’’ See also 44 2 Only a portion of the Commonwealth of Virginia accompanied by a written comment. FR 53761, 53762 (September 17, 1979). is included in the OTR.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3743

that is based on the ozone implementation rules for each ozone sources for Allegheny County in another nonattainment classification of the area: NAAQS, as well as guidance. On March SIP submission. Marginal, Moderate, Serious, or Severe. 6, 2015, EPA issued its final rule for Allegheny County’s Regulations and See ‘‘major stationary source’’ in CAA implementing the 2008 8-hour ozone Statutes, under Allegheny County sections 182(b) and 184(b). NAAQS (the 2008 Ozone Article XXI 2105.10, 2105.11, 2105.12, Implementation Rule). See 80 FR 12264. 2105.13, 2105.15, 2105.16, 2105.19, B. Allegheny County, Pennsylvania’s This rule addressed, among other 2105.70, 2105.71, 2105.72., 2105.74, Ozone RACT History things, control and planning obligations 2105.76, 2105.77, 2105.78, 2105.79, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania has as they apply to nonattainment areas 2105.80, 2105.81, 2105.82, 2105.83, been subject to the CAA RACT under the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 2015.84, 2105.85, and 2105.86 contain requirements because of previous ozone including RACT and RACM. In this the VOC CTG RACT controls that were nonattainment designations. The rule, EPA specifically required that implemented and approved into Pittsburgh-Beaver Area (which included states meet the RACT requirements Pennsylvania’s SIP under the 1-hour Allegheny County) was designated as a either (1) through a certification that and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. PADEP moderate 1-hour ozone nonattainment previously adopted RACT controls in is certifying that these regulations, all area. Allegheny County has their SIP revisions approved by EPA previously approved by EPA into the implemented numerous RACT controls under a prior ozone NAAQS continue to SIP, continue to meet the RACT throughout the County to meet the represent adequate RACT control levels requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone CAA’s RACT requirements under the 1- for attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for CTG-covered sources of hour ozone standard. NAAQS, or (2) through the adoption of VOCs in Allegheny County, PA. PADEP Under the 1997 8-hour ozone new or more stringent regulations or also submitted a negative declaration for NAAQS, the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley controls that represent RACT control the CTGs that have not been adopted area (which included Allegheny levels. A certification must be due to no affected facilities in Allegheny County) was designated as a moderate accompanied by appropriate supporting County. More detailed information on nonattainment area. As a result, information such as consideration of these provisions as well as a detailed Allegheny County continued to be information received during the public summary of EPA’s review can be found subject to the CAA RACT requirements. comment period and consideration of in the Technical Support Document See 69 FR 23858, 23931 (April 30, new data. Adoption of new RACT (TSD) for this action which is available 2004). Allegheny County revised and regulations will occur when states have on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket promulgated its RACT regulations and new stationary sources not covered by number EPA–R03–OAR–2018–0764. demonstrated that it complied with the existing RACT regulations, or when new III. Proposed Action 1997 CAA RACT requirements in a SIP data or technical information indicates revision approved by EPA on June 10, that a previously adopted RACT EPA has reviewed Pennsylvania’s 2013 (78 FR 34584). measure does not represent a newly 2018 VOC CTG RACT Submission for Under CAA section 109(d), EPA is available RACT control level. Allegheny County and is proposing to required to periodically review and Additionally, states are required to approve Pennsylvania’s SIP revision to promulgate, as necessary, revisions to submit a negative declaration if there the Allegheny County portion of the SIP the NAAQS to continue to protect are no CTG sources of VOC emissions on the basis that Allegheny County, PA human health and the environment. On within the nonattainment area in lieu of, has met the VOC RACT requirements for March 27, 2008, EPA revised the 1997 or in addition to, a certification. all sources of CTGs (issued prior to July 8-hour ozone standard by lowering the 20, 2014) for the 2008 8-hour ozone 8-hour standard to 0.075 ppm (73 FR II. Summary of SIP Revision NAAQS as set forth by CAA sections 16436). On May 21, 2012, EPA finalized On July 24, 2018, PADEP submitted a 182(b) and 184(b)(2). EPA is proposing attainment/nonattainment designations SIP revision for Allegheny County to to find that Pennsylvania’s SIP revision for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (77 address the VOC CTG RACT satisfies the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS FR 30087). Under the 2008 8-hour ozone requirements set forth by the CAA for VOC RACT requirements for CTGs for standard, EPA designated 17 counties in the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (the Allegheny County, PA through (1) Pennsylvania as marginal 2018 VOC CTG RACT Submission for certification that previously adopted nonattainment including Allegheny Allegheny County). Specifically, the RACT controls in the Allegheny County County. The entire Commonwealth of 2018 VOC CTG RACT Submission for portion of the Pennsylvania SIP that Pennsylvania is in the OTR, and Allegheny County includes: (1) A were approved by EPA under the 1979 pursuant to CAA section 184(b)(1)(B), it certification that for certain categories of 1-hour ozone and 1997 8-hour ozone is required to address the CAA RACT sources, previously-adopted VOC RACT NAAQS continue to be based on the requirements by submitting to EPA a controls in the Allegheny County currently available technically and SIP revision that demonstrates how it portion of Pennsylvania’s SIP that were economically feasible controls, and that meets RACT requirements under the approved by EPA under the 1979 1-hour they continue to represent RACT; and revised 2008 ozone standard. and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (2) a negative declaration demonstrating Pennsylvania is required to implement continue to be based on the currently that no facilities exist in Allegheny RACT for the 2008 ozone NAAQS on all available technically and economically County for certain applicable VOC CTG VOC sources covered by a CTG issued feasible controls, and continue to categories. by EPA, see CAA sections 182(b)(2)(A), represent RACT for implementation of EPA is proposing to find that (B), 184(b)(1)(B), as well as all other the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS; and (2) Pennsylvania’s 2018 VOC CTG RACT major stationary sources located within a negative declaration that certain CTG Submission for Allegheny County the state boundaries, see CAA section sources of VOC do not exist in demonstrates that Allegheny County has 182(b)(2)(C). Allegheny County, PA. This SIP adopted air pollution control strategies revision does not cover non-CTG that represent RACT for the purposes of C. EPA Guidance and Requirements sources in Allegheny County. PADEP compliance with the 2008 8-hour ozone EPA has provided more substantive will address RACT for major sources of standard for all stationary sources of RACT requirements through final NOX and for major non-CTG VOC VOCs covered by a CTG issued prior to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS 3744 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

July 20, 2014. EPA is soliciting public health or environmental effects, using Business Information (CBI) or other comments on the issues discussed in practicable and legally permissible information whose disclosure is this document relevant to VOC CTG methods, under Executive Order 12898 restricted by statute. Multimedia RACT requirements for the Allegheny (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be County portion of the Pennsylvania SIP In addition, this proposed rule, accompanied by a written comment. for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. These Pennsylvania’s 2018 VOC CTG RACT The written comment is considered the comments will be considered before submission for Allegheny County does official comment and should include taking final action. not have tribal implications as specified discussion of all points you wish to by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, make. EPA will generally not consider IV. Statutory and Executive Order November 9, 2000), because the SIP is comments or comment contents located Reviews not approved to apply in Indian country outside of the primary submission (i.e. Under the CAA, the Administrator is located in the state, and EPA notes that on the web, cloud, or other file sharing required to approve a SIP submission it will not impose substantial direct system). For additional submission that complies with the provisions of the costs on tribal governments or preempt methods, the full EPA public comment CAA and applicable Federal regulations. tribal law. policy, information about CBI or 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). multimedia submissions, and general List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, guidance on making effective EPA’s role is to approve state choices, Environmental protection, Air comments, please visit http:// provided that they meet the criteria of pollution control, Incorporation by www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting- the CAA. Accordingly, this action reference, Ozone, Reporting and epa-dockets. merely approves state law as meeting recordkeeping requirements, Volatile FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federal requirements and does not organic compounds. Randall Ruddick at (206) 553–1999, or impose additional requirements beyond Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. [email protected]. those imposed by state law. For that Dated: January 30, 2019. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: reason, this proposed action: Throughout this document, wherever • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Cecil Rodrigues, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is action’’ subject to review by the Office intended to refer to EPA. of Management and Budget under [FR Doc. 2019–02213 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Table of Contents October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, I. Background January 21, 2011); II. EPA Evaluation of Idaho’s SIP Revisions • is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION III. Proposed Action FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory AGENCY IV. Incorporation by Reference action because SIP approvals are V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review 40 CFR Part 52 exempted under Executive Order 12866. I. Background • does not impose an information [EPA–R10–OAR–2018–0769, FRL–9989–50– collection burden under the provisions Region 10] Section 110 of the Clean Air Act of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 (CAA) specifies the general U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Air Plan Approval; ID, Kraft Pulp Mill requirements for states to submit State • is certified as not having a Rule Revisions Implementation Plans (SIPs) and the significant economic impact on a EPA’s actions regarding approval of AGENCY: Environmental Protection those SIPs. SIPs are states’ plans to substantial number of small entities Agency. under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 implement, maintain, and enforce ACTION: U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Proposed rule. National Ambient Air Quality Standards • (NAAQS) set by EPA. Idaho regularly does not contain any unfunded SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection submits parts of IDAPA 58.01.01 to the mandate or significantly or uniquely Agency (EPA) proposes to approve state EPA for approval into the Federally affect small governments, as described implementation plan (SIP) revisions approved Idaho SIP (generally those in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act submitted by the Idaho Department of provisions that relate to the criteria of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Environmental Quality (IDEQ) on • pollutants regulated under section 110 does not have Federalism November 2, 2018. The submitted of the CAA for which the EPA has implications as specified in Executive revisions update Idaho’s rules by promulgated NAAQS or other specific Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, removing obsolete and duplicative requirements of section 110). 1999); requirements as well as requirements • is not an economically significant Idaho’s SIP includes Idaho’s Rules for less stringent than applicable Federal Control of Kraft Pulping Mills air regulatory action based on health or regulations. safety risks subject to Executive Order emissions, IDAPA 58.01.01.815 through 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); DATES: Comments must be received on 817 and 58.01.01.821 through 826, • is not a significant regulatory action or before March 15, 2019. effective as a matter of state law in 1994. subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Since 1994, there have been numerous 28355, May 22, 2001); identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– revisions to Federal regulations related • is not subject to requirements of OAR–2018–0769, at http:// to air emissions from kraft pulping Section 12(d) of the National www.regulations.gov. Follow the online mills, specifically, EPA’s promulgation Technology Transfer and Advancement instructions for submitting comments. of NSPS (40 CFR 60, subparts BB and Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Once submitted, comments cannot be BBa) and NESHAP (40 CFR 63, subparts application of those requirements would edited or removed from Regulations.gov. S and MM) specific to kraft pulping mill be inconsistent with the CAA; and EPA may publish any comment received air emissions. Idaho underwent state • does not provide EPA with the to its public docket. Do not rulemaking to streamline their state discretionary authority to address, as electronically submit any information kraft pulping mill rules by removing appropriate, disproportionate human you consider to be Confidential requirements that were obsolete, less

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3745

stringent than, or otherwise covered by Idaho’s current SIP also required SIP submission that complies with the existing Federal rules, and by clarifying special studies to be completed of kraft provisions of the Act and applicable reporting requirements. Those changes pulping mills by December 1972. This Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); became effective as a matter of state law requirement is obsolete, and its removal 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP in 2012. On November 2, 2018, Idaho will therefore have no effect on NAAQS submissions, the EPA’s role is to submitted a SIP revision to EPA compliance. approve state choices, provided that requesting the Federally approved SIP The only two remaining requirements they meet the criteria of the Clean Air be changed to reflect Idaho’s current in Idaho’s rules for kraft pulping mills Act. Accordingly, this proposed action (2012) kraft pulping mill rules. that do not relate solely to TRS are merely approves state law as meeting revised IDAPA 58.01.01.815 and 818. II. EPA Evaluation of Idaho’s SIP Federal requirements and does not IDAPA 58.01.01.815 which contain the Revisions impose additional requirements beyond revised ‘‘Statement of Purpose’’ for those imposed by state law. For that Idaho’s November 2, 2018, SIP Idaho’s rules for kraft pulping mills and reason, this proposed action: submittal requests that EPA remove reflects the changes made in IDAPA • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Idaho’s 1994 version of IDAPA 58.01.01.816 through 826 and the much action’’ subject to review by the Office 58.01.01.815 through 816 and 819 narrower scope of Idaho’s current of Management and Budget under through 826 from the SIP and approve regulations for kraft pulping mills. Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, the State’s current (2012) version of IDAPA 58.01.01.818 is a new October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, IDAPA 58.01.01.815 and 818 into the requirement for notification and January 21, 2011); SIP. reporting of emissions from gas venting • is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 Idaho’s 1994 regulations included regulated under 40 CFR part 63, subpart FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory emission limits at kraft pulping mills for S. IDAPA 58.01.01.818 implements a action because SIP approvals are total reduced sulfur (TRS) and reporting requirement in the SIP and exempted under Executive Order 12866; particulate matter. The current SIP does does not in any way affect • does not impose an information not include kraft pulping mill implementation of the NESHAP. Both collection burden under the provisions requirements for TRS because TRS is IDAPA 58.01.01.815 and .818 are of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 not a criteria pollutant or precursor. consistent with requirements for SIPs U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Although Idaho’s November 2, 2018 SIP under CAA Section 110 and we • is certified as not having a submittal included IDAPA 58.01.01.816 therefore propose approval. significant economic impact on a and .817, which contain revised substantial number of small entities requirements for TRS, Idaho specifically III. Proposed Action under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 requested that EPA not approve the TRS EPA is proposing to approve, and U.S.C. 601 et seq.); requirements into the SIP.1 The TRS incorporate by reference, in Idaho’s SIP • does not contain any unfunded requirements were submitted for IDAPA 58.01.01.815 and .818 (state mandate or significantly or uniquely informational purposes only, to provide effective March 29, 2012) as requested affect small governments, as described a complete record of the rulemaking. by Idaho on November 2, 2018, and as in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act With respect to particulate matter described in Section II above. of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); standards for kraft pulping mills, EPA is also proposing, as requested by • does not have Federalism Idaho’s 2012 regulations repealed these Idaho on November 2, 2018, to remove implications as specified in Executive standards and the related monitoring, IDAPA 58.01.01.816, .817, and .821 Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, recordkeeping, and reporting through .826 from the Idaho SIP because 1999); requirements. Idaho explained in its they are outdated and, in many cases, • is not an economically significant November 2018 submittal that the less stringent than existing Federal CAA regulatory action based on health or particulate matter requirements in the emissions limits, performance testing, safety risks subject to Executive Order SIP are now duplicative of and less monitoring, and reporting requirements, 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); stringent than Federal NSPS and and Idaho has repealed them as a matter • is not a significant regulatory action NESHAP standards applicable to kraft of state law (state effective March 29, subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR pulping mills. Idaho’s SIP submittal 2012). See Section II above. 28355, May 22, 2001); includes a comparison, in the same • is not subject to requirements of units of measurement, of the particulate IV. Incorporation by Reference Section 12(d) of the National matter standards approved in the In this rule, EPA is proposing to Technology Transfer and Advancement current SIP with the Federal standards include in a final rule, regulatory text Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because that apply to kraft pulping mills. In each that includes incorporation by it does not involve technical standards; case, the more recent Federal standards reference. In accordance with and are more stringent than the particulate requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is • does not provide the EPA with the matter standards currently in the Idaho proposing to incorporate by reference discretionary authority to address, as SIP and that Idaho requests be removed the provisions described above in appropriate, disproportionate human from the SIP. We note that Idaho has Section III. EPA has made, and will health or environmental effects, using incorporated by reference the Federal continue to make, these documents practicable and legally permissible NSPS and NESHAP applicable to kraft generally available electronically methods, under Executive Order 12898 pulping mills into its regulations as of through www.regulations.gov and in (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). July 1, 2017 and has received delegation hard copy at the appropriate EPA office The proposed SIP would not be to implement and enforce these Federal (see the ADDRESSES section of this approved to apply on any Indian standards. preamble for more information). reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has 1 The table in the cover letter to Idaho’s submittal V. Statutory and Executive Orders demonstrated that a tribe has identifies the citations of the rules currently Review approved in the SIP, which they are requesting be jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian updated to reflect the 2012 revisions, not the Under the Clean Air Act, the country, the proposed rule does not citations of the 2012 revisions. Administrator is required to approve a have tribal implications and will not

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS 3746 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

impose substantial direct costs on tribal List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. governments or preempt tribal law as Dated: January 30, 2019. specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by Michelle L. Pirzadeh, FR 67249, November 9, 2000). reference, Particulate matter, Reporting Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur [FR Doc. 2019–02217 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] oxides. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS 3747

Notices Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 30

Wednesday, February 13, 2019

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER number and the agency informs COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS contains documents other than rules or potential persons who are to respond to proposed rules that are applicable to the the collection of information that such Notice of Public Meetings of the public. Notices of hearings and investigations, persons are not required to respond to Nebraska Advisory Committee to the committee meetings, agency decisions and U.S. Commission on Civil Rights rulings, delegations of authority, filing of the collection of information unless it petitions and applications and agency displays a currently valid OMB control AGENCY: U.S. Commission on Civil statements of organization and functions are number. Rights. examples of documents appearing in this ACTION: section. Rural Utilities Service Announcement of meeting. Title: 7 CFR 1717 Subpart D, Mergers SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE and Consolidations of Electric Borrowers. and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Submission for OMB Review; OMB Control Number: 0572–0114. Comment Request Federal Advisory Committee Act that Summary of Collection: The Rural the Nebraska Advisory Committee February 7, 2019. Utilities Service (RUS) is a credit agency (Committee) will hold a meeting on The Department of Agriculture has of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. It Friday February 22, 2019 at 11 a.m. submitted the following information makes mortgage loans and loan Central time. The Committee will collection requirement(s) to Office of guarantees to finance electric, review and discuss a project proposal to Management and Budget (OMB) for telecommunications, water and waste study civil rights in the state as they review and clearance under the and water facilities in rural areas. Loan related to prison conditions for Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, programs are managed in accordance incarcerated individuals who are also Public Law 104–13. Comments are with the Rural Electrification Act (RE living with mental illness. requested regarding (1) whether the Act) of 1936, 7 U.S.C. 901 et seq., as DATES: The meeting will take place on collection of information is necessary amended and as prescribed by the Friday February 22, 2019 at 11 a.m. for the proper performance of the Office of Management and Budget Central. functions of the agency, including (OMB) Circular A–129, Policies for Public Call Information: Dial: 855– whether the information will have Federal Credit Programs and Non-tax 710–4181, Conference ID: 1929060. practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the Receivable, states that agencies must FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: agency’s estimate of burden including Melissa Wojnaroski, DFO, at the validity of the methodology and base on a review of a loan application determine that an applicant complies [email protected] or (312) 353– assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance 8311. the quality, utility and clarity of the with statutory, regulatory, and information to be collected; (4) ways to administrative eligibility requirements SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Members minimize the burden of the collection of for loan assistance. of the public may listen to this information on those who are to Need and Use of the Information: discussion through the above call in respond, including through the use of RUS will collect information to number. An open comment period will appropriate automated, electronic, streamline procedures and allow be provided to allow members of the mechanical, or other technological borrowers the flexibility to meet new public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator collection techniques or other forms of business challenges and opportunities. will ask callers to identify themselves, information technology. The information is necessary for RUS to Comments regarding this information the organization they are affiliated with conduct business with successor entity collection received by March 15, 2019 (if any), and an email address prior to while protecting the security of will be considered. Written comments placing callers into the conference should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Government loans and avoiding defaults room. Callers can expect to incur regular Agriculture, Office of Information and and to grant merger approval when charges for calls they initiate over Regulatory Affairs, Office of required. wireless lines, according to their Management and Budget (OMB), New Description of Respondents: Business wireless plan. The Commission will not Executive Office Building, 725 17th or other for-profit. refund any incurred charges. Callers Street NW, Washington, DC 20502. Number of Respondents: 10. will incur no charge for calls they Commenters are encouraged to submit initiate over land-line connections to their comments to OMB via email to: Frequency of Responses: Reporting: the toll-free telephone number. Persons [email protected] or On occasion. with hearing impairments may also fax (202) 395–5806 and to Departmental Total Burden Hours: 140. follow the proceedings by first calling Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail the Federal Relay Service at 1–800–877– Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250– Kimble Brown, 8339 and providing the Service with the 7602. Copies of the submission(s) may Departmental Information Collection conference call number and conference be obtained by calling (202) 720–8958. Clearance Officer. ID number. An agency may not conduct or [FR Doc. 2019–02104 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Members of the public are entitled to sponsor a collection of information BILLING CODE 3410–15–P submit written comments; the unless the collection of information comments must be received in the displays a currently valid OMB control regional office within 30 days following

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3748 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

the meeting. Written comments may be Dated: February 7, 2019. comment period; the full census mailed to the Regional Programs Unit, David Mussatt, description will be considered as a U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit. substantive change to the approved Dearborn, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL [FR Doc. 2019–02108 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] OMB materials. This notice was 60604. They may also be faxed to the BILLING CODE P previously posted on December 28, Commission at (312) 353–8324, or 2018, (Volume 83, No. 248, pp 67213– emailed to Corrine Sanders at csanders@ 67222, FR Doc No.: 2018–28164) for a usccr.gov. Persons who desire DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 30-day comment period, but public additional information may contact the comments could not be received during Regional Programs Unit at (312) 353– Census Bureau the partial government shutdown. In 8311. addition, this document has been Records generated from this meeting Submission for OMB Review; updated to reflect pending litigation may be inspected and reproduced at the Comment Request regarding the reinstatement of the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they The Department of Commerce will citizenship question as well as some become available, both before and after submit to the Office of Management and minor edits. the meeting. Records of the meeting will Budget (OMB) for clearance the OMB Control Number: 0607–1006. be available via www.facadatabase.gov following proposal for collection of Form Number(s): D–CN(E/S) under the Commission on Civil Rights, information under the provisions of the (included with Address Canvassing Nebraska Advisory Committee link. Paperwork Reduction Act. approval), D–Q, D–Q(E/S), D–Q–GE, D– Persons interested in the work of this Agency: U.S. Census Bureau. Q–GE(S), D–Q–UL, D–Q–UL(E/S), D–Q– Committee are directed to the Title: 2020 Census TL, D–Q–TL(S), D–Q–UE, D–Q–RA, D– Commission’s website, http:// The initial Federal Register Notice Q–TLRA, D–Q–GERA, D–Q–MV, D–CQ– www.usccr.gov, or may contact the (‘‘2020 Census,’’ June 8, 2018, Vol. 83, TL, D–CQ–TL(S), D–CQ–UE, D–CQ–RA, Regional Programs Unit at the above Number 111, pp. 26643–26653, FR Doc D–CQ–TLRA, D–Q–AS, D–Q–MI, D–Q– email or street address. No.: 2018–12365) described the 2020 GU, D–Q–VI, D–Q–VI(S), D–CQ–AS, D– Census in full. Approval for the 2020 CQ–MI, D–CQ–GU, D–CQ–VI, D–CQ– Agenda Census is being sought from OMB in VI(S), D–Q–GE–AS, D–Q–GE–MI, D–Q– Welcome and Roll Call phases. The first phase of approval was GE–GU, D–Q–GE–VI, D–Q–GE–VI(S), Civil Rights in Nebraska: Prisons and for the 2020 Census Address Canvassing D–Q–ULPR(E/S), D–Q–GEPR, D–Q– Mental Health operation only, which was described in GEPR(S), D–Q–PR(E/S), D–Q–TLPR, D– Q–TLPR(S), D–CQ–TLPR, D–CQ– Future Plans and Actions Federal Register Notice ‘‘2020 Census,’’ October 2, 2018 (Vol. 83, No. 191, pp. TLPR(S). Public Comment 49535–49539, FR Doc No.: 2018–21386). Type of Request: Revision of a Adjournment Address Canvassing creates the address currently approved collection. Exceptional Circumstance: Pursuant list for the census and precedes census Number of Respondents: 180,962,929 to 41 CFR 102–3.150, the notice for this enumeration data collection. The for all operations in the 2020 Census. meeting is given less than 15 calendar remaining operations scoped for the Average Hours per Response: 10 days prior to the meeting because of the 2020 Census data collection will be minutes for census enumeration. exceptional circumstances of the federal described below in this Federal Register Burden Hours: 26,531,594 for 2020 government shutdown. Notice for an additional 30-day Census.

2020 CENSUS

Estimated Estimated time per Total burden Operation or category number of response hours respondents (minutes)

Address Canvassing ...... 15,786,734 5 1,315,561 Address Canvassing Listing QC ...... 1,578,673 5 131,556

Address Canvassing Subtotal ...... 17,365,407 ...... 1,447,117

Geographic Areas Focused on Self-Response (this includes Mailout and Update Leave)

Internet/Telephone/Paper ...... 80,700,000 10 13,450,000 Update Leave ...... 11,900,000 5 991,667 Update Leave QC ...... 1,190,000 5 99,167 Nonresponse Followup ...... 52,700,000 10 8,783,333 Nonresponse Followup Reinterview ...... 2,760,000 5 230,000 Self-Response Quality Assurance ...... 250,000 10 41,667 Field Verification ...... 400,000 2 13,333 Field Verification QC ...... 40,000 2 1,333 Coverage Improvement ...... 3,200,000 7 373,333 Non-ID Processing Phone Followup ...... 750,000 5 62,500

Self-Response Areas Subtotal ...... 153,890,000 ...... 24,046,333

Geographic Area Focused on Update Enumerate

Update Enumerate Production ...... 506,000 12 101,200 Update Enumerate Listing QC ...... 50,600 5 4,217

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3749

2020 CENSUS—Continued

Estimated Estimated time per Total burden Operation or category number of response hours respondents (minutes)

Update Enumerate Reinterview ...... 25,300 10 4,217

Update Enumerate Subtotal ...... 581,900 ...... 109,634

Group Quarters

GQ Update Program ...... 7,168 10 1,195 GQ Advance Contact (facility) ...... 297,000 10 49,500 GQ Enumeration—eResponse (facility) ...... 14,300 20 4,767 GQ Enumeration—person contact ...... 8,000,000 5 666,667 Group Quarters QC ...... 8,500 5 708

Group Quarters Subtotal ...... 8,326,968 ...... 722,837

Enumeration at Transitory Locations—Advance Contact ...... 50,000 10 8,333 Enumeration at Transitory Locations—Units ...... 600,000 10 100,000 Federally Affiliated Count Overseas ...... 82 5 7 Island Areas Censuses—Housing Units ...... 138,281 40 92,187 Island Areas Censuses—Group Quarters ...... 10,291 30 5,146

Totals ...... 180,962,929 ...... 26,531,594

Overview of 2020 Census Operations (4) The use of technology to reduce address list and spatial database for Below is a summary of the needs and the manual effort and improve the enumeration and tabulation, and (2) to uses of the 2020 Census, followed by a productivity of field operations, while determine the type and address more detailed overview of data decreasing the amount of physical space characteristics for each living quarter. collection operations. The geographic required to perform the field operations. Prior to a field Address Canvassing data areas discussed in this notice refer only (1) Reengineering Address Canvassing collection, the Census Bureau will delineate the entire land area of the to the 50 states, the District of Columbia, An accurate address list is the and Puerto Rico, unless otherwise United States, Puerto Rico, and Island cornerstone of a successful census. In Areas into Type of Enumeration Areas noted. The 2020 Census also includes order to manage the work for the the Island Areas (U.S. Virgin Islands, (TEAs). Most stateside United States decennial census, the Census Bureau living quarters will be delineated into Guam, American Samoa, and the uses the address and physical location Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana the self-response area, where the census of each place where someone is, or address list will be created before the Islands). could be, living. The Census Bureau Needs and Uses: Article 1, Section 2 census, census materials will be maintains this address list and spatial provided in the mail, and self-response of the United States Constitution data for the United States and Puerto mandates that the U.S. House of modes will be supported and promoted. Rico in its Master Address File (MAF)/ Other areas will be designated for Representatives be reapportioned every Topologically Integrated Geographic ten years by conducting a national Update Leave, Update Enumerate Encoding and Referencing (TIGER) (including Remote Alaska), Military census of all residents. In addition to System database. the reapportionment of the U.S. Enumeration, or Island Areas This database was created using the Enumeration. Congress, census data are used to draw address files from the 1990 Census and legislative district boundaries within has been subsequently and regularly For the 2020 Census, there will be a states. Census data are also used by updated using: full Address Canvassing of the country numerous agencies to determine • Information collected from that will consist of In-Office Address funding allocations for the distribution decennial census operation updates, Canvassing complemented with In-Field of an estimated $675 billion of federal including address and spatial updates. Address Canvassing. In-Office Address funds each year. • The Delivery Sequence File of Canvassing is the process of using The Census Bureau plans to conduct addresses from the United States Postal empirical geographic evidence (e.g., the most automated, modern, and Service (USPS). imagery, comparison of the Census dynamic decennial census in history. • Input from tribal, state, and local Bureau’s address list to address lists The 2020 Census includes design governments and third parties, provided by the United States Postal changes in four key areas, discussed including address and boundary Service and governmental units that below: updates from various programs partner with the Census Bureau) to (1) New methodologies to conduct the conducted over the decade, such as the assess the current address list and make Address Canvassing operation. Local Update of Census Addresses changes where necessary. This (2) Innovative ways of optimizing self- operation. component also detects and captures response. • Information collected in other areas of change from high-quality (3) The use of administrative records Census Bureau programs, such as the administrative records and third-party and third-party data to reduce the American Community Survey. data. Advancements in technology have Nonresponse Followup (NRFU) The purpose of Address Canvassing is enabled continual address and spatial operation workload. (1) to deliver a complete and accurate updates to occur throughout the decade

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3750 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

as part of the In-Office Address data for statistical purposes. For the high quality, and can be accurately Canvassing effort. Since 2015, satellite 2020 Census, the Census Bureau intends applied to the addresses and households imagery has been used for the to use administrative records from both in question. The Census Bureau plans to identification of areas where there are internal sources, such as data from prior enumerate households utilizing changes in living quarters. Where the decennial censuses and the American administrative records only from federal necessary updates can be captured from Community Survey, and from a range of government agencies, such as the IRS. electronic sources and are deemed to be other federal agencies, including the Use of administrative records for sufficiently accurate, In-Office Address Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the nonresponding addresses will be Canvassing will complete the update Social Security Administration, the evaluated under a strict set of Census process prior to the census. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Bureau rules throughout the process to remaining blocks will become eligible to Services, the Department of Housing ensure completeness and accuracy. be sent to In-Field Address Canvassing and Urban Development, the Indian Based on the research and tests for updating on the ground by field staff. Health Service, the Selective Service, conducted, the Census Bureau estimates and the U.S. Postal Service. The Census that under the current operational plan, (2) Optimizing Self-Response Bureau is also working to acquire state federal administrative records will be The goal of this innovation area is to government administrative records from used to enumerate up to 6.2 million make it as easy and efficient as possible enrollment in federal block grant households of the projected total of for people to respond to the 2020 programs, such as the U.S. Department approximately 62 million addresses that Census by offering new response of Agriculture’s Supplemental Nutrition are expected to be in the NRFU options through the internet and Assistance Program and the Special workload for the 2020 Census. These 6.2 telephone, in addition to the traditional Supplemental Nutrition Program for million households represent less than mailback paper questionnaire option. Women, Infants, and Children. five percent of the approximately 147 Self-response reduces the need to Throughout the decade, the Census million addresses in the Census master conduct in-person follow-up operations Bureau continuously conducted address file. Where the Census Bureau to complete the enumeration, by far the analyses and assessments to verify that does not have confidence in the data, most expensive method of data the proposed uses of administrative such as when the data are inconsistent collection. To that end, the Census records and third-party data sources in or missing in the federal administrative Bureau will motivate people to respond, the 2020 Census were appropriate in records, the household will remain in as well as make it easy for people to each instance. Based on this research, the NRFU workload to be enumerated in respond, from any location at any time, testing, and analyses, the Census Bureau person. even if they don’t have the Census announced its plans in November 2015 (4) Reengineering Field Operations Bureau’s preassigned ID for the address. to utilize administrative records and The importance of responding to the third-party data in the 2020 Census. The The final innovation area, 2020 Census will be communicated in a 2020 Census Operational Plan calls for ‘‘Reengineering Field Operations,’’ has a variety of ways, including through employing this information for the goal of using technology to manage the mailings, questionnaire delivery, following purposes: 2020 Census fieldwork efficiently and advertising, and partnership efforts. In I. Consistent with previous decennial effectively, and as a result, reduce the particular, the Integrated Partnership censuses, the Census Bureau will utilize staffing, infrastructure, and brick and and Communications operation is administrative records from federal and mortar footprint for the 2020 Census. responsible for communicating the state government agencies and third- The Census Bureau plans to provide importance of responding to the 2020 party data to refine contact strategies most listers and enumerators with the Census. and build and update the residential capability to work completely remotely Internet response represents a address list. and perform all administrative and data substantial innovation for the Census II. Also consistent with previous collection tasks directly from a mobile Bureau. The internet was not a response decennial censuses, the Census Bureau device. option in the 2010 Census. The internet will utilize federal and state Supporting Documents About the 2020 response option has been included in administrative records to edit or impute Census Design and the 2020 Census multiple tests leading up to the 2020 invalid, inconsistent, or missing Objectives Census: the 2014 Census Test; all three responses. census tests performed in 2015; the III. The new use of administrative Multiple Census Bureau publications 2016 Census Test; the 2017 Census Test; records for the 2020 Census is to use provide background on the plans for the and the 2018 End-to-End Census Test. It data exclusively from federal 2020 Census. The 2020 Census has also been used in the American administrative records to improve the Operational Plan describes each of the Community Survey since 2013. accuracy and efficiency of the NRFU 35 operations scoped and defined for the census. Every task performed for the (3) Utilizing Administrative Records and operation by: a. Reducing follow-up on vacant 2020 Census must be assigned to one of Third-Party Data housing units and nonresidential the 35 operations. The operational plan For the 2020 Census, ‘‘administrative addresses, as designated by also summarizes the major findings of records’’ and ‘‘third-party data’’ are administrative records. the census tests performed this decade. terms used to describe microdata b. Enumerating households that do Moreover, this document shows the records contained in files collected and not self-respond and whom we were planned design of the 2020 Census as of maintained by federal, state, and local unable to contact after six mailings and December 2018 and identifies design government agencies (‘‘administrative one in-person field visit. decisions made, as well as remaining records’’) and commercial entities For each of the purposes listed in decisions to be made using census test (‘‘third-party data’’) for administering items II, IIIa, and IIIb, the Census results. Key design components for the programs and providing services. For Bureau will use or plans to use 2020 Census for every operation are many decades, the Census Bureau has administrative data only when it can discussed in Chapter 5 of the 2020 successfully and securely used confirm empirically across multiple Census Operational Plan. In addition, administrative records and third-party sources that the data are consistent, of for most of the 2020 Census operations,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3751

the Census Bureau is developing a related to the presence of ice. Military the following languages: Albanian, detailed operational plan to document areas require special procedures due to Amharic, Arabic, Armenian, Bengali, objectives and procedures of the security restrictions. Update Leave is an Bosnian, Bulgarian, Burmese, Chinese, operation, major tasks involved in update of the address list at the same Croatian, Czech, Dutch, Farsi, French, implementation, the overall workflow, time that a questionnaire is left at each German, Gujarati, Greek, Haitian Creole, and the overall resources required. The individual housing unit and the Hebrew, Hindi, Hmong, Hungarian, 2020 Census operational plan and enumeration data is expected to be Igbo, Ilocano, Indonesian, Italian, detailed operational plans are available returned or submitted by a respondent. Japanese, Khmer, Korean, Lao, at https://www.census.gov/programs- Puerto Rico is designated as entirely Lithuanian, Malayalam, Marathi, surveys/decennial-census/2020-census/ Update Leave (except for military Navajo, Nepali, Polish, Portuguese, planning-management/memo- locations) in order to create a current Punjabi, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, series.html can be referenced for more address list at the time of the census, in Sinhala, Slovak, Somali, Spanish, details about the tasks performed for response to changes that may have Swahili, Tagalog, Tamil, Telugu, Thai, each operation. occurred due to natural disasters. Tigrinya, Turkish, Twi, Ukrainian, Urdu, Vietnamese, Yiddish, and Yoruba. Type of Enumeration Areas A. Content and Forms Design Prior to the census, it is necessary to The Content and Forms Design (CFD) C. Address Canvassing delineate all geographic areas into Type operation is responsible for identifying Address Canvassing, as described of Enumeration Areas (TEAs). These and finalizing the content and design of above, consists of two major TEAs describe what methodology will questionnaires and associated components: In-Office Address be used for census material delivery and nonquestionnaire materials. To support Canvassing and In-Field Address household enumeration in order to use the 2020 Census, the CFD operation Canvassing. In-Office Address the most cost-effective enumeration ensures content consistency across data Canvassing is the process of using approach for achieving maximum collection modes and operations, as empirical geographic evidence (e.g., accuracy and completeness. TEAs also question wording varies depending on imagery, comparison of the Census describe what methodology will be used mode of data collection. The CFD Bureau’s address list to partner- for updating the address frame. For the operation is responsible for creating, provided lists) to assess the current United States and Puerto Rico, TEAs are refining, and finalizing instrument address list and make changes where delineated at the block level based on specifications for all data collection necessary. This component detects and the address and spatial data in the modes—internet, phone, paper, and captures areas of change from high- MAF/TIGER database. field enumeration. This is a significant quality administrative records and departure from the 2010 Census, which The MAF/TIGER does not contain third-party data. Advancements in relied on paper for virtually all data data for the Island Areas, so a separate technology have enabled continual TEA is designated for these areas. The collection. As required by law (Title 13, United address and spatial updates to occur TEAs designated for the 2020 Census States Code), the subjects planned for throughout the decade as part of the In- are: the 2020 Census were submitted to Office Address Canvassing effort. * TEA 1 = Self-Response. Congress on March 29, 2017, and the Areas not resolved by In-Office * TEA 2 = Update Enumerate. questions planned for the 2020 Census Address Canvassing become the * TEA 3 = Island Areas. were submitted to Congress on March universe of geographic areas worked * TEA 4 = Remote Alaska. 29, 2018. The questions proposed for during In-Field Address Canvassing. * TEA 5 = Military. the 2020 Census questionnaire in the Only the In-Field component of Address * TEA 6 = Update Leave. March 29, 2018 submission included Canvassing involves in-person The most common enumeration age, citizenship, Hispanic origin, race, collection of information from residents method by percentage of households is relationship, sex and tenure. Should the at their living quarters. self-response (TEA 1), where materials government prevail in pending litigation For In-Field Address Canvassing, an will be delivered to each address regarding the reinstatement of the extract of addresses from the MAF is through the mail, and self-response will citizenship question, the Census Bureau created, and this address list is verified be supported and promoted. After the will include the citizenship question on and updated in the field, as needed. initial self-response phase, the 2020 Census questionnaire. Updates can include adding units nonresponding households will be missing from the address list and enumerated in the NRFU operation. B. Language Services removing nonexistent or nonresidential Update Enumerate uses the The Language Services operation units from the list. In addition, living methodology of updating the address provides questionnaires and related quarters are classified as housing units list and attempting household materials in non-English materials for or group quarters. Group quarters are enumeration at the same time. This will respondents of Limited English living quarters where people who are be used for a very small portion of the Proficiency. For the 2020 Census, the typically unrelated have group living addresses in the country, such as those internet instrument and Census arrangements and frequently are with access problems or minimal mail Questionnaire Assistance will be receiving some type of service. College/ service. The Island Areas are not available in Spanish, Chinese, university student housing and nursing/ included in MAF/TIGER. For these Vietnamese, Korean, Russian, Arabic, skilled-nursing facilities are examples of areas, the address list will be created Tagalog, Polish, French, Haitian Creole, group quarters. and enumeration will be attempted at Portuguese, and Japanese, in addition to The MAF also has geographic data for the same time. Remote Alaska uses the English. The bilingual paper transitory locations, which include Update Enumerate methodology but in questionnaire, enumerator instrument, recreational vehicle parks, remote areas of Alaska that require a and field enumeration materials will be campgrounds, racetracks, circuses, different schedule for enumeration due available in Spanish. In addition, carnivals, marinas, hotels, and motels. to changes in transportation language guides and language People residing at transitory locations accessibility and living situations identification cards will be available in during the census are recorded as living

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3752 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

in housing units located at transitory the printing and distribution of mailed Census Bureau to make direct contact locations. internet invitations, reminder cards or with individual households by mail. During In-Field Address Canvassing, letters, and questionnaire mail packages Types of contact strategies include listers knock on doors at every structure where materials are mailed, in multiple invitation letters, postcards, and in the assignment in an attempt to locate languages as determined by the questionnaires mailed to households. living quarters and classify each living Language Services operation. The A primary objective of the 2020 quarter as a housing unit, group quarter, letters, reminder cards, and Census is for a majority of self- or transitory location. If someone questionnaires are delivered according respondents to complete their census answers, the lister will provide a to the mailing contact strategy, which is questionnaire online. An approach Confidentiality Notice and ask about the part of the internet Self-Response called ‘‘internet First,’’ in which the first address in order to verify or update the operation (discussed below). information, as appropriate. The listers Every address record will be mailing includes an invitation to will then ask if there are any additional identified by an ID, which will be respond to the census online, has been living quarters in the structure or on the printed on questionnaires and letters developed for TEA 1 areas to encourage property. If there are additional living and used for tracking responses. Paper respondents to use the internet. quarters, the listers will collect or questionnaires and responses from field Subsequent mailings will be reminders update that information, as appropriate. operations will be linked to the ID in to respond to the census online, until all In addition, there will be a check on the data capture. Internet and telephone remaining nonresponding households in quality of the address listing work on respondents will be requested but not the internet First areas receive a paper approximately 10 percent of the address required to provide the ID. When an ID questionnaire in the fourth mailing. In listing workload. is not provided, the response will be TEA 1 areas with low internet coverage The results of Address Canvassing are considered a Non-ID response. The Non- or connectivity or other characteristics processed with MAF/TIGER and then ID operation is discussed below. that may make it less likely the used as input into the creation of the respondents will complete the census census address list for enumeration. E. Internet Self-Response questionnaire online, the ‘‘internet This address list in turn, is used in The internet Self-Response (ISR) Choice’’ contact strategy will be conjunction with the TEA delineation to operation performs the following designated for use instead. This strategy determine which materials should be functions: includes both an invitation to complete • printed for use in the operation(s) Maximize online response to the the census online and a paper designated for each area of the country. 2020 Census through contact strategies questionnaire as part of the first mailing. D. Forms Printing and Distribution and improved access for respondents. The Census Bureau anticipates about 20 • Collect response data via the The Forms Printing and Distribution percent of the households in the self- internet to reduce paper and the NRFU response TEA will receive the internet operation prints and distributes paper universe. forms to support the 2020 Census Choice treatment. mailing strategy and enumeration of the Contact Strategies for Mailing Materials In summary, the contact strategies for population. The Forms Printing and ‘‘Contact strategies for mailing mailing materials including mailing Distribution operation is responsible for materials’’ refers to all attempts by the date are outlined in the table below:

Internet Self-Response Instrument while completing the survey or F. Census Questionnaire Assistance unavailability of the application. In The Census Questionnaire Assistance The internet application and all addition, the internet application and (CQA) operation has three primary related support systems are designed to other associated systems were functions: handle the volume of responses that are developed to adhere to the highest expected to be received by internet in • Provide questionnaire assistance by standards of data security in order to the 2020 Census. It is imperative that answering questions about specific ensure that all respondent data are the application and systems service the items on the census questionnaire or secure and confidential. scale of the operation in order to ensure other frequently asked questions about that users do not experience delays the census.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES EN13FE19.011 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3753

• Provide an option for respondents household to use in order to respond Census address frame. This processing to complete a census interview over the online. As in TEA 1, where all materials can occur through automated or clerical telephone. are mailed to housing units, any procedures. With the ISR instrument • Provide outbound calling in households that do not self-respond will collecting the response and address support of Coverage Improvement be contacted during the NRFU data, it will be possible to perform (discussed in the NRFU section below). operation. Finally, the UL operation automated processing to determine Respondents using the internet performs a check on the quality of the whether the address was already instrument will have the ability to address listing work (quality control included on the address frame and contact CQA by telephone when web- [QC]) on approximately 10 percent of extracted from the MAF. For those Non- based self-service help tools cannot the production workload. ID responses not matched during answer their questions. Each of the 13 automated processing, a clerical H. Update Enumerate supported languages, including English, operation will make a further attempt to will have its own toll-free number for The Update Enumerate (UE) operation match the address to the 2020 Census callers. Respondents calling the English is designated for areas where the initial address frame and validate nonmatching and Spanish language lines will initially visit requires enumerating at the living addresses. Some of the clerical work be presented with a self-service quarters while updating the address list. may require contacting the respondent Interactive Voice Response system, The majority of the operation will occur to help determine a match or to verify offering an assortment of automated in remote geographic areas that have the existence and location of the responses to Frequently Asked unique challenges associated with address; this is known as Non-ID Questions. At any time, respondents accessibility. UE can occur in the Processing Phone Followup. Any may opt to transfer to a customer service following geographic areas: nonmatching address whose existence representative, who is prepared to • Remote Alaska. • and location cannot be verified by the further assist and enumerate them. All Areas that were a part of the 2010 clerical Non-ID operation will become a callers who need assistance in other Census Remote UE operation, such as Field Verification assignment, handled languages will be connected directly to northern parts of Maine and southeast as a component of the NRFU operation. an appropriately skilled customer Alaska. • Notably, Field Verification is only an service representative fluent in the Select American Indian areas that address verification effort and does not language, based on the toll-free number request to be enumerated in person include collection of the census called. during the initial visit. questionnaire data. Note that the areas included in the G. Update Leave 2010 Census Remote Update Enumerate J. Nonresponse Followup The Update Leave (UL) operation is operation might be delineated into TEA The NRFU operation serves two designed for areas where the majority of 1 or TEA 6 for the 2020 Census, based primary purposes: housing units either do not have mail on changes in address type or • Determines or resolves housing unit delivered to the physical location of the mailability. status for addresses included in the housing unit or the mail delivery In the UE operation, field staff update NRFU workload. information for the housing unit cannot the address and feature data and • Enumerates housing units that are be verified. Designated during TEA enumerate respondents in person. The determined to have a housing unit delineation, UL can occur in geographic address and feature data are updated on status of occupied. areas that: paper address registers and paper maps. The NRFU workload is comprised of • Do not have city-style addresses. The enumeration is collected on paper addresses from a number of sources, • Do not receive mail through city- questionnaires. Field staff conducting including: style addresses. UE follow a specific contact strategy for • Nonresponding addresses in TEAs 1 • Receive mail at post office boxes. the remote locations and conduct any and 6. • Have been affected by major needed follow-up. The UE operation • Blank mail returns or mail returns disasters. will promote the quality of the address otherwise deemed to be too incomplete. The purpose of the UL operation is to work and of the enumeration data by • Addresses considered to represent update the address and feature data for having staff work in pairs and by new or recently completed housing. the area assigned and to leave an supervisors reviewing all data collected These addresses are identified by the internet Choice questionnaire package at for completion and any anomalies. spring 2020 USPS Delivery Sequence every housing unit identified to allow Supervisors will rework an area to File and other special efforts undertaken the household to self-respond. collect geographic and/or enumeration to identify new housing around the time Enumerators do not attempt to data when necessary to improve the of the census—New Construction and enumerate the household in person at quality of the collected data. Rework is Housing Unit Count Review; addresses this point. expected on no more than 10 percent of upheld in the Local Update of Census Occupants can respond online, using the total workload of cases. Addresses appeals process; and the ID printed on the questionnaire, or I. Non-ID Processing potentially other addresses determined they can fill out and mail back the paper to require follow-up after the initial questionnaire. If they have questions or For the 2020 Census, respondents will enumeration universe is established. wish to respond on the telephone, they be encouraged, but not required, to use • Addresses with a vacant status can call the CQA number, which is the Census Bureau’s preassigned ID for (reported as 0 occupants) from internet provided in the package. the living quarters. Within the internet Self-Response. The UL operation includes mailing a instrument, and, consequently, within • Field Verification cases. reminder letter and a reminder postcard CQA, it will be possible for respondents • Coverage Improvement cases. to addresses that are capable of to submit their census response without • Self-Response Quality Assurance receiving mail within the areas the preassigned ID. Non-ID Processing is cases. designated for UL. These mailed the effort to associate census responses The 2020 Census NRFU operation materials include the ID for the given that lack a Census ID with records will be different from the NRFU address and the website address for the included on the Census Bureau’s 2020 operation conducted in the 2010

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3754 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

Census. The Census Bureau will high-quality administrative records from (MV) allows enumerators to identify implement a NRFU operational design trusted sources. Undeliverable-As- several units as vacant or delete without that utilizes a combination of the Addressed information from the USPS having to attempt each unit following: will serve as the primary administrative individually. Enumerators have a • Automation to facilitate data records source for the identification of maximum of two unique contact days to collection. vacant addresses and addresses that do complete the MV cases. The MV • Administrative records and third- not exist. Examples of sources of Reinterview program will check the party data usage to reduce the workload. administrative records and third-party quality of work done by enumerators • Reengineering of staffing and data used to enumerate occupied during the MV and will target MVs with management of field operations. housing units include IRS Individual high numbers of vacant and delete unit • A best-time-to-contact model to Tax Returns, IRS Information Returns, statuses. During the MV Reinterview, increase the likelihood of making and the Center for Medicare and the enumerator will ask to speak to the contact attempts when an enumerator Medicaid Statistics Medicare manager from the original MV will find people at home. Enrollment Database. Addresses will interview. If the respondent confirms After giving the population in the also be removed from the workload that he/she was contacted and an United States and Puerto Rico an throughout the course of the NRFU enumerator conducted the original opportunity to self-respond to the 2020 operation as self-responses continue to interview, the MV RI enumerator asks Census, the Census Bureau will use the be received. about a subset of the list checked during most cost-effective strategy for the MV. If the respondent was not Early NRFU contacting and counting people to contacted or does not know if an ensure an accurate count. Early NRFU occurs in areas where enumerator conducted the original MV During the NRFU operation, there are high concentrations of college interview, the MV Reinterview enumerators will visit each housing unit students living in off-campus housing enumerator conducts a full interview designated for follow-up and determine who are unlikely to be present during and asks about the entire list during the whether the unit exists and then the the scheduled dates for regular NRFU. MV. occupancy status of the unit on April 1, The enumeration procedures for early The NRFU universe also includes 2020. If the unit exists, they complete an NRFU are the same as regular NRFU, cases from Non-ID Processing that were interview using an automated but just conducted at an earlier time to not able to be matched to the address application on a smartphone. The accommodate the schedules of select frame. As discussed in the Non-ID devices will use a secure Census colleges and universities. Any early section, these are Field Verification (FV) Bureau-provided enumeration NRFU addresses that are unresolved by cases, where the enumerators attempt to application solution for conducting the the start of NRFU will receive additional locate the address in question and NRFU field data collection. field attempts during regular NRFU. collect its Global Positioning System Enumeration data and workload updates NRFU Reinterview (GPS) coordinates. A sample of the FV will be transmitted between the NRFU cases is selected for verification through instruments and response processing The NRFU Reinterview program will FV QC. Since FV cases only require an systems on a regular basis. Various check the quality of the work done by enumerator to determine the existence techniques will be used during NRFU to enumerators in NRFU. A sample of of an address and will not require an make the data collection as efficient as approximately 5 percent of NRFU interview with a respondent, the FV QC possible. The number of allowed interviews will be selected for program will consist of an independent attempts to contact will be controlled verification through NRFU Reinterview. check of the production enumerators within the automated instrument, and The NRFU Reinterview program where the FV QC enumerator will best-time-to-contact modeling will be involves conducting an independent conduct the same procedures as the FV used in the creation of the daily field reinterview for selected cases to enumerator. FV cases, along with their assignments. Every case in the NRFU verify that an enumerator conducted the QC component, have a maximum of one workload will initially have a maximum interview and followed procedures. The field contact day. of six unique contact days. (During the NRFU Reinterview interviewer/ The Coverage Improvement operation Closeout phase of the operation, cases enumerator always attempts to contact resolves categories of erroneous may receive additional attempts, as the respondent from the original enumerations (people counted in the necessary, to resolve incomplete cases.) interview, which may be a household wrong place or counted more than once) After a third attempt to contact a member, neighbor, or some other proxy. and omissions (people who were household does not yield a respondent, If the original respondent confirms that missed) identified through collected a case will become proxy-eligible. A he/she was contacted and an enumeration data. The Coverage proxy is a neighbor, landlord, real estate enumerator conducted the original Improvement operation will attempt to agent, or other knowledgeable person interview, the NRFU Reinterview resolve these issues from both self- who can provide information about the interviewer/enumerator collects roster response and NRFU responses. All cases unit and the people who live there. An names and ends the interview. If the that are selected for Coverage enumerator should attempt three respondent was not contacted or does Improvement with a valid phone proxies after each noninterview for a not know if an enumerator conducted number will be subject to an interview proxy-eligible case. the original interview, the NRFU attempt by a CQA Customer Service In addition to the initial in-person Reinterview interviewer/enumerator Representative. The workload identified contact attempt, these addresses will conducts a full interview with the for the Coverage Improvement operation also receive a final mailing that respondent. will be responses where a household encourages occupants to self-respond to During the early weeks of NRFU, enumeration shows a difference the 2020 Census. If the initial in-person enumerators will conduct interviews between the answer for the number of contact attempt is unsuccessful, the with multiunit structure managers to people within the household and the Census Bureau will use administrative determine the occupancy status of number of people enumerated, and records for the unit status or as the nonresponding units within the answers to coverage questions in the household response data when it has multiunit structure. This Manager Visit initial enumeration that reflect potential

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3755

coverage errors. Automation and the data will be accepted in lieu of use of enumeration operation is that it internet self-response option should the Individual Census Questionnaire if includes both group quarters and reduce the prevalence of these types of data are deemed to be of sufficiently housing units. A military vessel is respondent errors as compared to the high quality and completeness. defined as a United States Navy or 2010 Census, which was completed United States Coast Guard vessel Service-Based Enumeration almost entirely on paper questionnaires. assigned to a home port in the United Self-Response Quality Assurance The Service-Based Enumeration is States. See part Q for methods we will cases are generated as part of the quality specifically designed to approach use to count overseas military. assurance efforts for self-response. This people using service facilities because L. Paper Data Capture re-collection of the enumeration data they may be missed during the will also be worked within NRFU. traditional enumeration at housing units The Paper Data Capture operation and group quarters. These service scans and converts data from 2020 K. Group Quarters locations and outdoor locations include Census paper questionnaires. Core The 2020 Census Group Quarters (GQ) the following: sources for the Paper Data Capture operation will enumerate people living • Shelters: Shelters with sleeping operation include housing unit self- or staying in group quarters and will facilities for people experiencing response questionnaires mailed back by provide an opportunity for people homelessness; shelters for children who respondents and Group Quarters experiencing homelessness and are runaways, neglected, or Individual Census Reports. The Census receiving service at a service-based experiencing homelessness. Bureau’s in-house Integrated Computer location, such as a soup kitchen, to be • Soup kitchens. Assisted Data Entry system is used to counted in the census. • Regularly scheduled mobile food capture paper responses from The 2020 Census GQ operation vans: Stops where regularly scheduled questionnaires. Each write-in and consists of the following components: mobile food vans distribute meals. checkbox data field is data-captured, • • In-Office GQ Advance Contact. Targeted nonsheltered outdoor and Optical Character Recognition and • GQ Enumeration. locations. Optical Mark Recognition are • Service-Based Enumeration. For the 2020 Census, the Service- performed. If Key From Image is needed • Military Enumeration. Based Enumeration operation will be for forms that cannot be processed • Maritime Vessel (Shipboard) conducted over the three-day period through Optical Character Recognition Enumeration. that ends on April 1, 2020, Census Day. or Optical Mark Recognition, staff are Service providers for shelters, soup In-Office GQ Advance Contact presented the image of the page and are kitchens, and regularly scheduled able to clarify, correct, or add to what The In-Office GQ Advance Contact is mobile food vans will be given the was captured. The Census Bureau an in-office activity conducted in the flexibility for their facility to be maintains the data, images of the forms, area census offices. Preferred dates, enumerated on any one of the three and the paper forms themselves until times, methods of enumeration, and days. Targeted nonsheltered outdoor confirmation that the data have been expected population on Census Day will locations will be enumerated April 1, correctly captured, at which point the be collected. Special instructions or 2020. Field partnership specialists with paper forms are sent to destruction concerns related to privacy, local knowledge will help to identify while the data and images are retained. confidentiality, and security will also be nonsheltered outdoor locations during The Census Bureau maintains the addressed. the time of the census. images for archiving purposes until GQ Enumeration Domestic Violence Shelters such time as the National Archiving and Records Administration takes The GQ Enumeration will cover all 50 Domestic violence shelters are possession of the images for permanent states, the District of Columbia, and facilities for those seeking safety from archiving. Puerto Rico. An additional late GQ domestic violence. Domestic violence enumeration phase allows for the shelters are enumerated using special M. Response Processing stakeholder identification and procedures and specially trained The Response Processing Operation enumeration of group quarters that may personnel. These special procedures (RPO) supports the three major have been missed during the earlier include inviting members of the components of the 2020 Census: Pre- time frame. The primary method of National Coalition Against Domestic data collection activities, data collection conducting in-person enumeration of Violence state coalitions to participate activities, and post-data collection people residing in group quarters will in the 2020 Census Group Quarters activities. Specifically, the operation be by using the Individual Census Update Program to create a supports the following activities: Questionnaire as the paper data comprehensive and current address Pre-data collection: collection instrument. In-person listing for domestic violence shelters. • Create and distribute the initial interviewing is planned for all group These special procedures are designed 2020 Census enumeration universe of quarter types that are part of the field to protect the safety and security of living quarters. enumeration workload. respondents being enumerated at these • Assign the specific enumeration locations. GQ Enumeration—eResponse Data strategy for each living quarter based on Transfer Military Enumeration and Maritime case status and associated paradata. Vessel Enumeration Data collection: eResponse uses electronic data • Create and distribute workload files transfer from GQ administrators to the Military Enumeration involves required for enumeration operations. Census Bureau. Client-level data from enumeration of people living in GQs or • Track case enumeration status. systems maintained by GQ barracks on stateside military • Check for suspicious returns. Administrators can be transferred to a installations or military vessels. Military Post-data collection: standardized Census Bureau system that installations are fenced, secured areas • Run post-data collection processing will accept electronically submitted used for military purposes. An actions in preparation for producing the data in a standardized template. These important feature of the military final 2020 Census results.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3756 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

N. Redistricting Data Program President of the United States to provide data products will be determined in the to Congress by December 31, 2020. summer of 2019. The purpose of the 2020 Census • Tabulate 2020 Census data products Redistricting Data Program (RDP) is to for use by the states for redistricting. P. Archiving provide to each state the legally • Tabulate and disseminate 2020 The Archiving (ARC) operation required redistricting data tabulations Census data for use by the public. performs the following functions: by the mandated deadline of one year The DPD operation produces • Coordinate storage of the materials from Census Day: April 1, 2021. In information required by Public Law to and data and provides records deemed compliance with Public Law (P.L.) 94– satisfy apportionment and redistricting permanent as the official data of the 171, the Census Bureau will tabulate for requirements. Title 13, U.S. Code 2020 Census, including files containing each state the total population counts by (U.S.C.) requires that the apportionment the individual responses to the 2020 race and Hispanic origin. The Census population counts be delivered to the Census, to the National Archives and Bureau will tabulate these counts for the Office of the President within nine Records Administration (NARA). total population and for the population months of the census date. • Provide similar files to the Census age 18 and over in a prototype Apportionment counts are based on the Bureau’s National Processing Center in redistricting data file released as part of Census Unedited File, the Federally Indiana to use as source materials to the 2018 End-to-End Census Test. The Affiliated Overseas Personnel and conduct the Age Search Service. Census Bureau intends to work with Dependents Count File, and a • Store data to cover in-house needs. stakeholders, specifically ‘‘the officers geographic file of state changes. For the Q. Federally Affiliated Count Overseas or public bodies having initial 2020 Census, the census date is April 1, responsibility for the legislative 2020, and the President will receive the The Federally Affiliated Count apportionment of each state,’’ to solicit counts by December 31, 2020. Overseas operation obtains counts by feedback on the content of the prototype The DPD operation is also responsible home state of United States military and redistricting data file. If those for the production and dissemination of federal civilian employees who are stakeholders indicate a need for many data products, including national stationed or assigned overseas and their tabulations of citizenship data on the and state summary files, tabulated dependents living with them. For the 2020 Census Public Law 94–171 informational files, and data comparison 2020 Census, overseas is defined as Redistricting Data File, the Census tables. This includes electronic and anywhere outside the 50 states, the Bureau will make a design change to printed products that cover population District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and include citizenship as part of that data, and housing unit tabulations, the Island Areas: American Samoa, if collected. That new design would geographical maps, and products Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana then be published in the Federal specific to the Island Areas (U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and the United States Register after it is completed in the Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and Virgin Islands. Counts are submitted summer of 2019. The Census Bureau the Commonwealth of the Northern from federal agencies and the will also tabulate housing unit counts Mariana Islands). Department of Defense (Defense by occupancy status (occupied or The Center for Enterprise Manpower Data Command) through a vacant) and provide total population Dissemination Services and Consumer Census Bureau secure server and are counts for group quarters by group Innovation initiative is responsible for used to allocate the federally affiliated quarters type. For the prototype and for developing enterprise dissemination population living overseas to their home the 2020 Census Redistricting Data requirements. DPD is conducting a state for the purposes of apportioning Files, the Census Bureau will provide thorough review of the past product seats in the U.S. House of these tabulations for a variety of design (cross-tabulations and iterations Representatives. If military and federal standard census geographic areas of characteristics), while also looking to civilian employees of the U.S. including state, county, place, tract, and ensure that users can find data after the government are deployed overseas tabulation block. If states provide their 2020 Census quickly and easily. The while stationed or assigned within the congressional, legislative, and voting Census Bureau will undertake a U.S., they are counted at their U.S. district boundaries through the thorough analysis of the proposed 2020 residence where they live or sleep most Redistricting Data Program, the Census Census data products in keeping with of the time using administrative data Bureau will also provide the tabulations our sworn obligation to protect provided by federal agencies and the for these areas. Tabulations by respondents’ data as data stewards Department of Defense. See Section K congressional, legislative, and voting under Title 13. Federal Register Notice for more info on how we count stateside districts will be available for the 50 ‘‘Soliciting Feedback from Users on military personnel. 2020 Census Data Products,’’ July 19, states; equivalent tabulations will be R. Island Areas Censuses available for the District of Columbia 2018 (Vol. 83, pp. 34111—34112, FR and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Doc No. 2018–15458) was published The purpose of the Island Areas with a 60-day comment period. It Censuses (IAC) operation is to This program has a separate OMB requested feedback from users on enumerate all residents of American clearance number. There is more detail specific tables and geographic detail for Samoa, the Commonwealth of the about this program in Federal Register decennial census products such as Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), Notice ‘‘Redistricting Data Program,’’ Summary File 1, Summary File 2, and Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands; July 26, 2018, (Vol. 83, No. 144, pp. the Demographic Profile. The last day to process and tabulate the collected data; 35458–35460. FR Doc No. 2018–15972). provide comment on the notice was and disseminate data products to the O. Data Products and Dissemination September 17, 2018. Subsequently, this public. All data collection activities for notice was reopened for an additional the IAC will rely on the use of paper The Data Products and Dissemination 30-day comment period on October 9, questionnaires, paper maps, and paper (DPD) operation performs three primary 2018 (Vol. 83, p. 50636, FR Doc No. address registers to record the physical functions: 2018–21837). The last day to provide addresses of housing units and group • Prepare and deliver the 2020 comments on this notice was November quarters. The IAC questionnaire will Census apportionment data for the 8, 2018. The final suite of 2020 Census leverage the American Community

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3757

Survey questionnaire with minor otherwise sensitive or protected under chapters 3 and 5 of title II of the wording changes in order to take into information. You may submit Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 account the Island Areas local attachments to electronic comments in U.S.C. 2341–2356) (Trade Act), through governments’ concerns, where possible. Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or a national network of non-profit and Enumerators will list the addresses Adobe PDF file formats only. university-affiliated Trade Adjustment using paper address registers. Once the Assistance Centers (TAACs), each of addresses have been listed, enumerators Sheleen Dumas, which serves a different geographic will visit every living quarter to conduct Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the region. EDA certifies firms as eligible to interviews with household members Chief Information Officer, Commerce participate in the TAAF Program and Department. and follow up as necessary. The IAC provides funding to allow eligible will perform a clerical review of all [FR Doc. 2019–02223 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] client-firms to receive adjustment completed questionnaires for BILLING CODE 3510–07–P assistance through the TAACs. The completeness and data consistency, a information collected on Form ED–840P reinterview for a sample of and relevant supporting documentation DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE questionnaires, and an independent is used to determine whether a firm is address check. The response data will Economic Development Administration eligible to participate in the TAAF be processed through the Decennial Program. In accordance with the Trade Response Processing System. Data Proposed Information Collection; Act and EDA’s regulations as set out at products will include counts of the Comment Request; Form ED–840P, 13 CFR part 315, EDA must verify that population and housing units, data Petition by a Firm for Certification of the following have occurred: (1) A profiles, subject tables, ranking tables, Eligibility To Apply for Trade significant reduction in the number or and supplemental tables. Adjustment Assistance, and proportion of the workers in the firm, a reduction in the workers’ wage or work S. Evaluations and Experiments Adjustment Proposals; Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms hours, or an imminent threat of such The Census Bureau is not currently Program reductions; (2) sales or production of the planning a separate package for the firm have decreased absolutely, or sales Evaluations and Experiments program, AGENCY: Economic Development or production, or both, of any article or as has been done in past censuses. For Administration (EDA), Department of service accounting for at least 25 the 2020 Census, these evaluations and Commerce. percent of the firm’s sales or production experiments will be described either as ACTION: Notice. has decreased absolutely; and (3) an Substantive Changes to this package, to increase in imports of articles or the Census Bureau’s Post-Enumeration SUMMARY: The Department of services like or directly competitive Survey Independent Listing and QC Commerce, as part of its continuing with those produced or provided by the OMB package, or within the Generic effort to reduce paperwork and petitioning firm, which has contributed Clearance for Decennial Census Field respondent burden, invites the general importantly to the decline in Tests and Evaluations, covered under public and other federal agencies to take employment and sales or production of OMB approval 0607–0971. this opportunity to comment on the that firm. Additionally, to document the Affected Public: Individuals or proposed and/or continuing information connection of increased imports to Households. collections, as required by the declining employment and sales or Frequency: Once every 10 years. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. production, the firm must demonstrate Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. DATES: Written comments must be that its customers have reduced Legal Authority: Title 13, United submitted on or before April 15, 2019. purchases from the firm in favor of States Code, Section 141. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments buying items or services from foreign This information collection request and recommendations for the proposed suppliers. The use of Form ED–840P may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov. information collection to Jennifer standardizes and limits the information Follow the instructions to view Jessup, Departmental Paperwork collected as part of the certification Department of Commerce collections Clearance Officer, Department of process and eases the burden on currently under review by OMB. applicants and reviewers alike. Written comments and Commerce, Room 6616, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, In addition, after being certified as recommendations for the proposed eligible for TAAF Program assistance information collection, identified by DC 20230 (or via the internet at [email protected]). following submission of Form ED–840P, Docket number OMB–2018–0004, may firms must create an EDA-approved FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: be submitted to the Federal e- adjustment proposal in order to receive Rulemaking portal: https:// Requests for additional information or financial assistance under the TAAF www.regulations.gov within 30 days of copies of the information collection Program. The adjustment proposal is publication of this notice. You may also instrument and instructions should be each firm’s business plan to remain submit comments and recommendations directed to Irette Patterson, Program viable in the current global economy. to 2020_Census_Comments@ Analyst, Trade Adjustment Assistance Each adjustment proposal must meet omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395–5806. Division, Room 71030, Economic certain requirements as set out in the All comments received are part of the Development Administration, 1401 Trade Act and EDA’s regulation at 13 public record and will be posted to Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC CFR 315.16. This notice also includes http://www.regulations.gov for public 20230 at [email protected] or 202–482– an estimate of the amount of time a firm viewing. Comments will generally be 2743. spends to research and compile posted without change. All Personally SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information for adjustment proposals. Identifiable Information (for example, name and address) voluntarily I. Abstract II. Method of Collection submitted by the commenter may be EDA administers the Trade Form ED–840P may be obtained in publicly accessible. Do not submit Adjustment Assistance for Firms Portable Document Format (PDF) from confidential business information or (TAAF) Program, which is authorized EDA or the TAACs upon request.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3758 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

TAACs are responsible for preparing the Personally Identifiable Information (for with polyurethane foam; synthetic petition for certification on the firm’s example, name and address) voluntarily textile and cotton mix fabrics laminated behalf. Although there is no form submitted may be publicly accessible. If with polyurethane foam; and, associated with adjustment proposals, you send an email comment, your email polyurethane foam laminated with they must meet the requirements for address will be automatically captured woven scrim (duty rate ranges from adjustment proposals set out in EDA’s and included as part of the comment 2.7% to 6.5%). Woodbridge would be regulation at 13 CFR 315.16. Both that is placed in the public docket. able to avoid duty on foreign-status petitions for certification on Form ED– Please note that comments that include components which become scrap/waste. 840P and adjustment proposals may be a message stating the confidentiality of Customs duties also could possibly be submitted via email to [email protected] or the communication will be treated as deferred or reduced on foreign-status in hard copy to EDA at Trade public comments and will be made production equipment. Adjustment Assistance for Firms, 1401 available to the public. The components and materials Constitution Avenue NW, Room 71030, Sheleen Dumas, sourced from abroad include: Vinyl Washington DC 20230. Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the coated fabric with polyvinyl chloride; III. Data Chief Information Officer, Commerce woven polyester fabric yarn dyed and coated with polyurethane; synthetic OMB Control Number: 0610–0091. Department. [FR Doc. 2019–02132 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] leather rolls; vinyl leather imitation; Form Number(s): ED–840P. artificial leather cloth; sheets of Type of Review: Revision/Extension of BILLING CODE 3510–WH–P plastics—cellular—polyvinyl chloride a current information collection. fabric of man-made fibers; sheets of Affected Public: Businesses or other plastics—non-cellular—polyvinyl for-profit organizations. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Estimated Number of Respondents: chloride; sheets of plastics—cellular— 300 (150 petitions for certification and Foreign-Trade Zones Board 100% plastic; rolls of cotton fabric coated with polyvinyl chlorides; fabric 150 adjustment proposals). [B–03–2019] Estimated Time per Response: 128.2 of man-made fibers coated with over hours (8.2 for petitions for certification Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 68—El Paso, 70% plastic; fabric of man-made fibers and 120 for adjustment proposals). Texas; Notification of Proposed coated with under 70% plastic; sheets of Estimated Total Annual Burden Production Activity; The Woodbridge plastics—cellular—polyvinyl chloride— Hours: 19,230 (1,230 for petitions for Group (Flame Laminated Textiles) El over 70% plastic combined with 65/35 certification and 18,000 for adjustment Paso, Texas poly cotton fabrics; sheets of plastics— proposals). cellular—of other plastics; woven Estimated Total Annual Cost to The City of El Paso, grantee of FTZ 68, synthetic fabric rolls 100% for Public: $ 1,346,100 ($86,100 for submitted a notification of proposed automotive industry; polyvinyl chloride petitions for certification and production activity to the FTZ Board on leather; 100% polyester knit fabrics; $1,260,000 for adjustment proposals). behalf of The Woodbridge Group 9803X polyester nonwoven backing; (Woodbridge), located in El Paso, Texas. polyester nonwoven scrim; and, knitted IV. Request for Comments The notification conforming to the polyester fabric 100% (circular knit) Comments are invited on: (a) Whether requirements of the regulations of the (duty rate ranges from duty-free to the proposed collection of information FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.22) was 14.9%). The request indicates that the is necessary for the proper performance received on February 6, 2019. following components/materials will be of the functions of the agency, including The applicant indicates that it will be admitted to the zone in privileged whether the information shall have submitting a separate application for foreign status (19 CFR 146.41), thereby practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the FTZ designation at the Woodbridge precluding inverted tariff benefits on agency’s estimate of the burden facility under FTZ 68. The facility is such items: Vinyl coated fabric with (including hours and cost) of the used to produce laminates by bonding polyvinyl chloride; woven polyester proposed collection of information; (c) foam/fabric or foam/film and passing fabric yarn dyed and coated with ways to enhance the quality, utility, and the foam over an open flame. Pursuant polyurethane; synthetic leather rolls; clarity of the information to be to 15 CFR 400.14(b), FTZ activity would vinyl leather imitation; artificial leather collected; and (d) ways to minimize the be limited to the specific foreign-status cloth; sheets of plastics—cellular— burden of the collection of information materials and components and specific polyvinyl chloride fabric of man-made on respondents, including through the finished products described in the fibers; sheets of plastics—non-cellular— use of automated collection techniques submitted notification (as described polyvinyl chloride; sheets of plastics— or other forms of information below) and subsequently authorized by cellular—100% plastic; rolls of cotton technology. the FTZ Board. fabric coated with polyvinyl chlorides; Comments submitted in response to Production under FTZ procedures fabric of man-made fibers coated with this notice will be summarized and/or could exempt Woodbridge from customs over 70% plastic; fabric of man-made included in the request for OMB duty payments on the foreign-status fibers coated with under 70% plastic; approval of this information collection. components used in export production. sheets of plastics—cellular—polyvinyl All comments submitted in response to On its domestic sales, for the foreign- chloride—over 70% plastic combined this notice are a part of the public status materials/components noted with 65/35 poly cotton fabrics; sheets of record and will be made available to the below, Woodbridge would be able to plastics—cellular—of other plastics; public, which may include posting them choose the duty rates during customs woven synthetic fabric rolls 100% for on the Regulations.gov website. entry procedures that apply to: automotive industry; polyvinyl chloride Comments will generally be posted Synthetic textile fabrics laminated with leather; 100% polyester knit fabrics; without change. Please do not include polyurethane foam and woven scrim; and, knitted polyester fabric 100% information of a confidential nature, vinyl goods laminated with (circular knit). The request also such as sensitive personal information polyurethane foam and knit or woven indicates that certain materials/ or proprietary information. All scrim backing; vinyl goods laminated components are subject to special duties

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3759

under Section 301 of the Trade Act of inadvertently identified the incorrect Agenda 1974 (Section 301), depending on the period of review (POR) associated with Monday, April 1, 2019; 8:30 a.m.–5 p.m. country of origin. The applicable the CVD administrative review on HEDP Section 301 decisions require subject from China (i.e., incorrect POR The meeting will begin in a Closed merchandise to be admitted to FTZs in November 14, 2016, through April 30, Session of the Full Council to select privileged foreign status. 2018). The correct POR associated with members to the Data Collection and Public comment is invited from the CVD order on HEDP from China is Coral Advisory Panels; and, vote on the interested parties. Submissions shall be September 8, 2016, through December 2018 Law Enforcement Officer of the addressed to the Board’s Executive 31, 2017. This notice serves as a Year. The Council will also review the Secretary at the address below. The correction notice. 2015–18 Funding and Expenditures. The Committee Sessions will begin mid- closing period for their receipt is March This correction is published in morning with the Administrative/ 25, 2019. accordance with sections 751 and 777(i) Budget Committee reviewing the 2019 A copy of the notification will be of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. available for public inspection at the Anticipated Activities and Budget, Office of the Executive Secretary, Dated: February 7, 2019. Funded Expenditures, and Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room James Maeder, Supplemental Contracts. The Data 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Collection Committee will have a 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty discussion on Commercial Fishing Washington, DC 20230–0002, and in the Operations performing the duties of Deputy Unique Trip Identifiers; and, Southeast Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and For-Hire Integrated Electronic Reporting ‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the Board’s Countervailing Duty Operations. website, which is accessible via (SEFHIER) Implementation Update and [FR Doc. 2019–02176 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] www.trade.gov/ftz. Outreach Meeting Summaries. For further information, contact BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Following lunch, the Sustainable Christopher Wedderburn at Fisheries Committee will receive a presentation on the update of Deepwater [email protected] or (202) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 482–1963. Horizon Open Ocean Restoration Planning; review Final Action: Dated: February 7, 2019. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Replacement of Historical Captain Andrew McGilvray, Permits with Standard Federal For-Hire Executive Secretary. Permits; discussion and selection of [FR Doc. 2019–02179 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] RIN 0648–XG803 Allocation Review Triggers; and, review BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Final Action: Generic Amendment: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Carryover Provisions and Framework Council; Public Meeting Modifications. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Tuesday, April 2, 2019; 8:30 a.m.–5:30 International Trade Administration Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and p.m. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), [C–570–046] The Reef Fish Committee will review Commerce. of Reef Fish Landings; receive a 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1,1-Diphoshonic ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. presentation on 2019 For-Hire Red Acid From the People’s Republic of Snapper Fishing Season; review Final China: Notice of Correction to the SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Action: Amendment 50—State Rescission of 2016–2017 Management Council (Council) will Management Program for Recreational Countervailing Duty Administrative hold a four-day meeting to consider Red Snapper and Individual State Review actions affecting the Gulf of Mexico Amendments. fisheries in the exclusive economic zone After lunch, the Reef Fish Committee AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, (EEZ). will reconvene to review Final Action: International Trade Administration, Red Grouper Framework Action to Department of Commerce DATES: The meeting will convene on Monday, April 1 through Thursday, Modify Annual Catch Limits and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: April 4, 2019. Annual Catch Targets; Framework Annathea Cook, AD/CVD Operations, Action to Modify Greater Amberjack Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place Commercial Trip Limits; and, Review International Trade Administration, at the Imperial Palace (IP) Casino & Draft Reef Fish Amendment 52: Red U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Resort Hotel, located at 850 Bayview Snapper Reallocation. The committee Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, Avenue, Biloxi, MS 39530; telephone: will also review Draft Amendment 36B: DC 20230; telephone 202.482.0250. (228) 436–3000. Modifications to Commercial Individual SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Council address: Gulf of Mexico Fishing Quota (IFQ) Programs and Fishery Management Council, 4107 W receive a Statistical and Scientific Correction Spruce Street, Suite 200, Tampa, FL Committee (SSC) Summary Report. On February 1, 2019, the Department 33607; telephone: (813) 348–1630. Wednesday, April 3, 2019; 8:30 a.m.– of Commerce (Commerce) published the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 5:30 p.m. rescission of 2016–2018 countervailing Carrie Simmons, Executive Director, duty (CVD) administrative review of 1- The Habitat Protection and Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Restoration Committee will receive a Hydroxyethylidene-1,1-Diphoshonic Council; telephone: (813) 348–1630. Acid (HEDP) from the People’s Republic presentation on the results of the of China (China).1 The Rescission SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Council’s 5-year Essential Fish Habitat Review. The Shrimp Committee will 1 See 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1,1-Diphoshonic Acid 2016–2018 Countervailing Duty Administrative review the updated Stock Assessments; from the People’s Republic of China: Rescission of Review, 84 FR 1060 (February 1, 2019) (Rescission). Biological Review of the Texas Closure;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3760 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

receive a summary from the Shrimp Meeting Adjourns Council’s Executive, Budget and Advisory Panel meeting; and, review of The meeting will be broadcast via Legislative Standing Committee meeting Final Action-Shrimp Amendment 18: webinar. You may register for the will be closed to the public. Evaluation of Shrimp Effort Threshold webinar by visiting www.gulfcouncil.org DATES: The meetings will be held Reduction in the Area Monitored for and clicking on the Council meeting on between March 12 and March 21, 2019. Juvenile Red Snapper Bycatch. The Law the calendar. For specific times and agendas, see Enforcement Committee will receive a The timing and order in which agenda SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. summary from the Law Enforcement items are addressed may change as ADDRESSES: The 131st SSC, Joint AP, the Technical Committee meeting. required to effectively address the issue, Council’s Executive, Budget and Mid-morning, the Full Council will and the latest version along with other Legislative Standing Committee and convene with a Call to Order, meeting materials will be posted on Pelagic and International Standing Announcements, and Introductions; www.gulfcouncil.org as they become Committee meetings will be held at the Council office, 1164 Bishop Street, Suite followed by an Adoption of Agenda and available. 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, phone: (808) Approval of Minutes. The Council will Although other non-emergency issues 522–8220. The 176th Council meeting review Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) not contained in this agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those will be held at the Laniakea YWCA, applications, along with any public Fuller Hall, 1040 Richards Street, comments noted on the applications; issues may not be the subjects of formal action during this meeting. Council Honolulu, HI 96813, phone: (808) 538– and, receive a presentation on 7061. The Fishers Forum will be held at Mississippi’s Law Enforcement efforts. action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any the Ala Moana Hotel, 410 Atkinson Dr., After lunch, the Council will receive Honolulu, HI 96814, phone: (808) 955– public testimony from 1:30 p.m. until issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action 4811. 5:30 p.m. on the following items: Final under section 305(c) of the Magnuson- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Action: Amendment 50: State Stevens Act, provided that the public Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director, Management Program for Recreational has been notified of the Council’s intent Western Pacific Fishery Management Red Snapper and Individual State to take final action to address the Council; phone: (808) 522–8220. Amendments; Final Action: Generic emergency. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 131st Amendment: Carryover Provisions and SSC meeting will be held between 8:30 Special Accommodations Framework Modifications; Final Action: a.m. and 5 p.m. on March 12–14, 2019. Red Grouper Framework Action to This meeting is physically accessible The Joint AP Meeting will be held Modify Annual Catch Limits and to people with disabilities. Requests for between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. on March 15– Annual Catch Targets; Final Action: sign language interpretation or other 16, 2019. The Executive, Budget and Shrimp Amendment 18: Evaluation of auxiliary aids should be directed to Legislative Standing Committee meeting Shrimp Effort Threshold Reduction in Kathy Pereira (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 will be held on March 18, 2019, from 9 the Area Monitored for Juvenile Red days prior to the meeting date. a.m. to 12 noon. The portion of the Snapper Bycatch; and, Final Action: Dated: February 8, 2019. Executive, Budget and Legislative Replacement of Historical Captain Tracey L. Thompson, Standing Committee meeting from 9:30 Permits with Standard Federal For-Hire a.m. to 10 a.m. will be closed to the Permits; and, open testimony on any Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. public in accordance with Section other fishery issues or concerns. Anyone 302(i)(3)(ii) of the Magnuson-Stevens [FR Doc. 2019–02168 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] wishing to speak during public Fishery Conservation and Management comment should sign in at the BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Act (MSA) for a briefing on litigation by registration station located at the counsel. The Pelagic and International entrance to the meeting room. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Standing Committee will be held on March 18, 2019, between 2 p.m. and 5 Thursday, April 4, 2019; 8:30 a.m.–3 p.m. The 176th Council meeting will be p.m. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration held between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. on March 19–21, 2019. On March 19, 2019, The Council will receive management RIN 0648–XG801 committee reports from the Shrimp, the Council will host a Fishers Forum Administrative/Budget, Data Collection, Western Pacific Fishery Management between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. Agenda items noted as ‘‘Final Action Sustainable Fisheries, Habitat Protection Council; Public Meetings and Restoration, Law Enforcement and, Items’’ refer to actions that result in Reef Fish Management Committees; AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Council transmittal of a proposed and, Announce the 2018 Law Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and fishery management plan, proposed Enforcement Officer of the Year. After Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), plan amendment, or proposed regulations to the U.S. Secretary of lunch, the Council will vote on Commerce. Commerce, under Sections 304 or 305 of Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) ACTION: Notice of public meetings, the MSA. In addition to the agenda applications, if any; and receive updates hearings, and a partially closed meeting. items listed here, the Council and its from the following supporting agencies: SUMMARY: The Western Pacific Fishery advisory bodies will hear South Atlantic Fishery Management Management Council (Council) will recommendations from Council Council; NOAA Office of Law hold its 131st Scientific and Statistical advisors. An opportunity to submit Enforcement (OLE), Gulf States Marine Committee (SSC) meeting, Joint public comment will be provided Fisheries Commission; U.S. Coast Advisory Panel (AP) meeting, 176th throughout the agendas. The order in Guard; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Council meeting and its associated which agenda items are addressed may and, the Department of State. meetings to take actions on fishery change and will be announced in Lastly, the Council will discuss Other management issues in the Western advance at the Council meeting. The Business items: Pacific Region. A portion of the meetings will run as late as necessary to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3761

complete scheduled business. Management B. Palmyra Project Background documents will be available B. Developing a Process to Comply 5. Workshop Discussion on Fishery from, and written comments should be with the Modern Fish Act Management Measures sent to, Kitty M. Simonds, Executive C. Review of Draft Biological Opinion A. What Works Director; Western Pacific Fishery 10. Pelagic Fisheries B. What Doesn’t Management Council, 1164 Bishop A. Updates to the Pelagic Fisheries 6. Report on Progress of Advisory Panel Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, Research Program Plans phone: (808) 522–8220 or fax: (808) B. American Samoa Longline Annual A. American Samoa 522–8226. Fishery Report i. Plan Progress C. Hawaii Longline Annual Fishery ii. Additional Issues Agenda for 131st SSC Meeting Report B. Commonwealth of the Northern Tuesday, March 12, 2019, 8:30 a.m. to D. Hawaii Shallow-set Longline Mariana Islands (CNMI) 5 p.m. Fishery i. Plan Progress ii. Additional Issues 1. Introductions 1. Status of the Hawaii Shallow-set Longline ESA Consultation C. Guam 2. Approval of Draft Agenda and i. Plan Progress Assignment of Rapporteurs 2. Managing Loggerhead and Leatherback Sea Turtle Interactions ii. Additional Issues 3. Status of the 130th SSC Meeting D. Hawaii Recommendations in the Hawaii-based Shallow-set Longline Fishery (Action Item) i. Plan Progress 4. Remarks from the NOAA Fisheries ii. Additional Issues E. US Participating Territory Longline Director of Scientific Programs and 7. Public Comment Bigeye Specifications (Action Item) Chief Science Advisor 8. Discussion and Recommendations 5. Report from the Pacific Islands F. Maturity, Age, and Growth of 9. Other Business Fisheries Science Center Director Central North Pacific Striped A. Status of Council Research Priority Marlin Agenda for the Executive, Budget and for the FY 2020 Annual Guidance G. International Fisheries Meetings Legislative Standing Committee Memo 1. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Monday, March 18, 2019, 9 a.m. to 12 6. Program Planning and Research Commission (IATTC) Tuna Growth Noon A. SSC Responsibilities in the Modern Workshop Fish Act 2. IATTC Abundance Indices and 1. Financial Reports B. Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Tagging Workshops 2. Administrative Reports Act (MSRA) Five Year Research 3. 15th Regular Session of the Western 3. CLOSED SESSION (MSA Priority 2020–24 Central Pacific Fisheries § 302(i)(3)(A)(ii)—Status of C. NOAA Climate Science Workshop Commission (WCPFC) Litigation 9:30 a.m. to 10 a.m. and Regional Action Plan Report 4. 2018 Workshop on Identifying the 4. 2020–24 Program Plan and Budget D. Public Comment Spatial Stock Structure of Tropical 5. Council Family Changes E. SSC Discussion and Pacific Tuna Stocks 6. SSC role under new Modernization Recommendations 5. North Pacific Fisheries Commission Act 7. Island Fisheries (NPFC) 7. NOAA website/Pacific Islands A. Main Hawaiian Islands (MHI) Kona 6. South Pacific Regional Fisheries Section Crab Benchmark Stock Assessment Management Organization 8. Recusal Policy Western Pacific Stock Assessment (SPRFMO) 9. Meetings and Workshops Review (WPSAR) Report H. Public Comment 10. Other Issues B. Benchmark Stock Assessment for I. SSC Discussion and 11. Public Comment the MHI Kona Crab with Catch Recommendations 12. Discussion and Recommendations Projections for 2020–24 Thursday, March 14, 2019, 8:30 a.m. to Agenda for the Pelagic and C. Public Comment 5 p.m. International Standing Committee D. SSC Discussion and Recommendations 11. Other Business Monday, March 18, 2019, 2 p.m. to 5 8. Protected Species A. 132nd SSC Meetings Dates p.m. A. Discussion Paper on Seabird B. Council’s Five Year Program Plan 1. Introduction and Opening of Bycatch Mitigation Measures C. SSC Three-Year Plan (2020–22) Committee Meeting B. Status of the False Killer Whale D. National Scientific Coordinating 2. Managing Loggerhead and Take Reduction Team (FKWTRT) Subcommittee Meeting 2020 Leatherback Sea Turtle Interactions Recommendations 12. Summary of SSC Recommendations in the Hawaii-based Shallow-set C. Updates on Endangered Species to the Council Longline Fishery (Action Item) Act (ESA) and Marine Mammal 3. US Participating Territory Longline Agenda for the Joint Advisory Panel Protection Act (MMPA) Actions Bigeye Limits (Action Item) Meeting D. Public Comment 4. Advisory Group Report and E. SSC Discussion and Friday, March 15, 2019, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Recommendations Recommendations 1. Welcome and Introductions A. Scientific & Statistical Committee 5. Other Issues Wednesday, March 13, 2019, 8:30 a.m. 2. Review of Agenda 6. Public Comment to 5 p.m. 3. FISH 101 Training 7. Committee Discussion and Action Plenary Presentation by Ray Hilborn— Saturday, March 16, 2019, 8 a.m. to 5 Agenda for 176th Council Meeting Blue Ocean Marine Protected Area p.m. 9. SSC Concurrent Work Session 4. Spatial Management Tuesday, March 19, 2019, 8:30 a.m. to A. Developing a Road Map for A. Biodiversity Beyond National 5 p.m. Effective Fishery Spatial Jurisdiction (BBNJ) 1. Welcome and Introductions

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3762 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

2. Approval of the 176th Agenda A. Legislative Report A. Guam 3. Approval of the 174th and 175th B. SSC Working Group Report 1. Isla Informe Meeting Minutes 1. Blue Ocean Marine Protected Area 2. Legislative Report 4. Executive Director’s Report Subgroup Report 3. Enforcement Issues 5. Agency Reports 2. Modern Fish Act Subgroup Report 4. Mandatory Permit and Licensing A. National Marine Fisheries Service C. MSRA Five Year Research Priority Regulation 1. Pacific Islands Regional Office 2020–24 5. Community Activities and Issues 2. Pacific Islands Fisheries Science D. NOAA Climate Science Workshop 6. Education and Outreach Initiatives Center and Regional Action Plan Reports B. CNMI a. Status of Council Research Priority E. Regional, National and 1. Arongol Falu´ for the FY 2020 Annual Guidance International Outreach & Education 2. Legislative Report Memo F. Advisory Group Report and 3. Enforcement Issues B. NOAA Office of General Counsel, Recommendations 4. Community Activities and Issues Pacific Islands Section 1. Advisory Panel a. Bottomfish Fishery Development C. U.S. State Department 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee Project D. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service G. Public Comment b. Mandatory License and Reporting E. Enforcement H. Council Discussion and Action Regulation 1. U.S. Coast Guard 10. Pelagic & International Fisheries 5. Education and Outreach Initiatives 2. NOAA Office of Law Enforcement A. American Samoa Longline Annual C. Marianas Shark Research Project 3. NOAA Office of General Counsel, Fisheries Report D. Update on Marianas Trench Marine Enforcement Section B. Hawaii Longline Annual Fishery National Monument Management F. Public Comment Report Plan and Sanctuary Request G. Council Discussion and Action C. Hawaii Shallow-Set Longline E. Advisory Group Reports and 6. Hawaii Archipelago & Pacific Remote Fishery Recommendations Island Areas 1. Status of the Hawaii Shallow-set 1. Advisory Panel A. Moku Pepa Longline ESA Consultation 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee B. Legislative Report 2. Managing Loggerhead and F. Public Comment C. Enforcement Issues Leatherback Sea Turtle Interactions G. Council Discussion and Action D. Bottomfish Restricted Fishing in the Hawaii-based Shallow-set 13. Administrative Matters Areas Removal Report Longline Fishery (Final Action A. Financial Reports E. MHI Kona Crab Benchmark Stock Item) B. Administrative Reports Assessment WPSAR Report D. US Participating Territory Longline C. 2020–24 Program Plan and Budget F. Benchmark Stock Assessment for Bigeye Limits (Final Action Item) D. Council Family Changes the MHI Kona Crab with Catch E. International Fisheries a. Advisory Panel Projections for 2020–24 1. IATTC b. Plan Team G. Hawaii Charter Fishery Cost a. Tuna Growth Workshop c. Education Committee Earning Survey (2012) Report b. Tuna Stock Assessment Workshop d. Marine Planning and Climate H. Registry Permit License Study 2. WCPFC15 Change Committee 3. 2018 Workshop on Identifying the Group Meeting Report e. Fishery Data Collection and I. Education and Outreach Initiatives Spatial Stock Structure of Tropical Research Committee J. Advisory Group Report and Pacific Tuna Stocks f. Protected Species Advisory 4. NPFC Recommendations Committee 5. 7th Meeting- SPRFMO 1. Advisory Panel E. Conflict of Interest and Recusal 6. United Nations Intergovernmental 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee Policy Conference on BBNJ K. Public Comment F. Meetings and Workshops F. Advisory Group Report and L. Council Discussion and Action G. Standing Committee Recommendations 7. Protected Species Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel H. Public Comment A. Discussion Paper on Seabird 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee Bycatch Mitigation Measures G. Standing Committee I. Council Discussion and Action B. Status of the FKWTRT Recommendations 14. Other Business Recommendations H. Public Hearing Non-emergency issues not contained C. Updates on ESA and MMPA I. Council Discussion and Action in this agenda may come before the Actions 11. American Samoa Archipelago Council for discussion and formal D. Advisory Group Report and A. Motu Lipoti Council action during its 176th meeting. Recommendations B. Fono Report However, Council action on regulatory 1. Advisory Panel C. Enforcement Issues issues will be restricted to those issues 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee D. Community Activities and Issues specifically listed in this document and E. Public Comment E. Education and Outreach Initiatives any regulatory issue arising after F. Council Discussion and Action F. Marine Conservation Plan Projects publication of this document that requires emergency action under section Tuesday, March 19, 2019, 4 p.m. G. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, Public Comment on Non-agenda Items 1. Advisory Panel provided the public has been notified of the Council’s intent to take action to Tuesday, March 19, 2019, 6 p.m.–9 p.m. 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee H. Public Comment address the emergency. Fishers Forum I. Council Discussion and Action Special Accommodations Wednesday, March 20, 2019, 8:30 a.m.– Thursday, March 21, 2019, 8:30 a.m. to These meetings are accessible to 5 p.m. 5 p.m. people with disabilities. Requests for 9. Program Planning and Research 12. Mariana Archipelago sign language interpretation or other

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3763

auxiliary aids should be directed to and discuss recent activities by the Council address: Pacific Fishery Kitty M. Simonds, (808) 522–8220 Northeast Trawl Advisory Panel Management Council, 7700 NE (voice) or (808) 522–8226 (fax), at least (NTAP). In addition, the following Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, 5 days prior to the meeting date. agenda items have been added and will OR 97220. Instructions for attending the Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. be addressed by the SSC: Recommend meeting via live stream broadcast are interim 2020 ABC specifications for given under SUPPLEMENTARY Dated: February 8, 2019. scup, black sea bass and bluefish. The INFORMATION, below. Tracey L. Thompson, SSC may take up any other business as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable necessary. Chuck Tracy, Executive Director; Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. A detailed agenda and background telephone: (503) 820–2280 or (866) 806– [FR Doc. 2019–02169 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] documents will be made available on 7204 toll-free; or access the Pacific BILLING CODE 3510–22–P the Council’s website (www.mafmc.org) Council website, http:// prior to the meeting. www.pcouncil.org for the current Special Accommodations meeting location, proposed agenda, and DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE meeting briefing materials. The meeting is physically accessible SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: National Oceanic and Atmospheric to people with disabilities. Requests for The Administration sign language interpretation or other March 6–12, 2019 meeting of the Pacific Council will be streamed live on the RIN 0648–XG757 auxiliary aid should be directed to M. Jan Saunders, (302) 526–5251, at least 5 internet. The broadcasts begin initially days prior to the meeting date. at 9 a.m. PST Thursday, March 7, 2019 Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management and continue at 8 a.m. daily through Council (MAFMC); Public Meeting; Dated: February 8, 2019. Tuesday, March 12, 2019. Broadcasts Addendum Tracey L. Thompson, end daily at 5 p.m. PST or when AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable business for the day is complete. Only Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. the audio portion and presentations Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), [FR Doc. 2019–02170 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] displayed on the screen at the Pacific Commerce. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Council meeting will be broadcast. The ACTION: Notice of an addendum to a audio portion is listen-only; you will be public meeting. unable to speak to the Pacific Council DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE via the broadcast. To access the meeting online, please use the following link: SUMMARY: The Mid-Atlantic Fishery National Oceanic and Atmospheric http://www.gotomeeting.com/online/ Management Council’s (Council) Administration Scientific and Statistical Committee webinar/join-webinar and enter the (SSC) will hold a meeting. RIN 0648–XG805 March Webinar ID, 634–645–459, and DATES: The meeting will be held on your email address. You can attend the Pacific Fishery Management Council; webinar online using a computer, tablet, Thursday, February 21, 2019, from 10 Public Meetings a.m. to 4 p.m. See SUPPLEMENTARY or smart phone, using the GoToMeeting INFORMATION for agenda details. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries application. It is recommended that you use a computer headset to listen to the ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place Service, National Oceanic and meeting, but you may use your over webinar with a telephone-only Atmospheric Administration, telephone for the audio-only portion of connection option. Details on how to Commerce. the meeting. The audio portion may be connect to the webinar by computer and ACTION: Notice of public meetings. attended using a telephone by dialing by telephone will be available at: http:// SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery the toll number 1–562–247–8422 (not a www.mafmc.org/ssc. Management Council (Pacific Council) toll-free number), audio access code Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery and its advisory entities will hold 532–691–006, and entering the audio Management Council, 800 N State public meetings. pin shown after joining the webinar. Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; DATES: The Pacific Council and its The following items are on the Pacific telephone: (302) 674–2331; website: Council agenda, but not necessarily in www.mafmc.org. advisory entities will meet March 6–12, 2019. The Pacific Council meeting will this order. Agenda items noted as ‘‘Final FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: begin on Thursday, March 7, 2019 at 9 Action’’ refer to actions requiring the Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive a.m. Pacific Standard Time (PST), Council to transmit a proposed fishery Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery reconvening at 8 a.m. each day through management plan, proposed plan Management Council, telephone: (302) Tuesday, March 12, 2019. All meetings amendment, or proposed regulations to 526–5255. are open to the public, except a closed the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The session will be held from 8 a.m. to 9 Sections 304 or 305 of the Magnuson- original notice published in the Federal a.m., Thursday, March 7 to address Stevens Fishery Conservation and Register on February 6, 2019 (84 FR litigation and personnel matters. The Management Act. Additional detail on 2175). This notice adds agenda items to Pacific Council will meet as late as agenda items, Council action, advisory the meeting agenda. necessary each day to complete its entity meeting times, and meeting The purpose of this meeting is to scheduled business. rooms are described in Agenda Item make multi-year acceptable biological ADDRESSES: A.4, Proposed Council Meeting Agenda, catch (ABC) recommendations for Meeting address: The meetings of the and will be in the advance March 2019 summer flounder based on the results of Pacific Council and its advisory entities briefing materials and posted on the the recently completed benchmark stock will be held at the Hilton Vancouver Pacific Council website at assessment. The SSC will recommend Washington Hotel, 301 W. 6th Street, www.pcouncil.org no later than Friday, revised 2019 and new 2020–21 ABC Vancouver, WA; telephone: (360) 993– February 15, 2019. specifications. The SSC will also review 4500. A. Call to Order

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3764 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

1. Opening Remarks J. Highly Migratory Species Management Oregon State Delegation—7 a.m. 2. Roll Call 1. National Marine Fisheries Service Washington State Delegation—7 a.m. 3. Executive Director’s Report Report Groundfish Advisory Subpanel—8 a.m. 4. Approve Agenda 2. Recommend International Groundfish Management Team—8 a.m. B. Open Comment Period Management Activities Highly Migratory Species Advisory 1. Comments on Non-Agenda Items 3. Drift Gillnet Performance Metrics Subpanel—8 a.m. C. Administrative Matters Review Highly Migratory Species Management 1. Marine Planning Update K. Coastal Pelagic Species Management Team—8 a.m. 2. Legislative Matters—cancelled 1. Comments on Court Ordered Salmon Advisory Subpanel—8 a.m. 3. Membership Appointments and Rulemaking on Harvest Salmon Technical Team—8 a.m. Council Operating Procedures Specifications for the Central Tribal Policy Group—Ad Hoc 4. Approval of Council Meeting Subpopulation of Northern Tribal and Washington Technical Record Anchovy Group—Ad Hoc 5. Future Council Meeting Agenda Advisory Body Agendas Enforcement Consultants—Ad Hoc and Workload Planning D. Salmon Management Advisory body agendas will include Day 5—Sunday, March 10, 2019 1. National Marine Fisheries Service discussions of relevant issues that are California State Delegation—7 a.m. Report on the Pacific Council agenda for this Oregon State Delegation—7 a.m. 2. Review of Rebuilding Plans meeting, and may also include issues Washington State Delegation—7 a.m. 3. Review of 2018 Fisheries and that may be relevant to future Council Highly Migratory Species Advisory Summary of 2019 Stock Forecasts meetings. Proposed advisory body Subpanel—8 a.m. 4. Identify Management Objectives agendas for this meeting will be Highly Migratory Species Management and Preliminary Definition of 2019 available on the Pacific Council website Team—8 a.m. Management Alternatives http://www.pcouncil.org/council- Salmon Advisory Subpanel—8 a.m. 5. Recommendations for 2019 operations/council-meetings/current- Salmon Technical Team—8 a.m. Management Alternative Analysis briefing-book/ no later than Friday, Tribal Policy Group—Ad Hoc 6. Further Direction for 2019 February 15, 2019. Tribal and Washington Technical Management Alternatives Schedule of Ancillary Meetings Group—Ad Hoc 7. Further Direction for 2019 Enforcement Consultants—Ad Hoc Day 1—Wednesday, March 6, 2019 Management Alternatives Day 6—Monday, March 11, 2019 8. Adopt 2019 Management Ecosystem Advisory Subpanel—8 a.m. Alternatives for Public Review Ecosystem Workgroup—8 a.m. California State Delegation—7 a.m. 9. Appoint Salmon Hearing Officers Habitat Committee—8 a.m. Oregon State Delegation—7 a.m. E. Ecosystem Management Scientific and Statistical Committee—8 Washington State Delegation—7 a.m. 1. California Current Ecosystem and a.m. Highly Migratory Species Advisory Integrated Ecosystem Assessment Tribal Policy Group—7 p.m. Subpanel—8 a.m. Report and Science Review Topics Tribal and Washington Technical Highly Migratory Species Management 2. Climate and Communities Initiative Group—Ad Hoc Team—8 a.m. Salmon Advisory Subpanel—8 a.m. Update Day 2—Thursday, March 7, 2019 3. Fishery Ecosystem Plan Five-Year Salmon Technical Team—8 a.m. Review California State Delegation—7 a.m. Tribal Policy Group—Ad Hoc F. Habitat Oregon State Delegation—7 a.m. Tribal and Washington Technical 1. Current Habitat Issues Washington State Delegation—7 a.m. Group—Ad Hoc Ecosystem Advisory Subpanel—8 a.m. Enforcement Consultants—Ad Hoc G. Groundfish Management Ecosystem Workgroup—8 a.m. 1. National Marine Fisheries Service Groundfish Advisory Subpanel—8 a.m. Day 7—Tuesday, March 12, 2019 Report Groundfish Management Team—8 a.m. California State Delegation—7 a.m. 2 Amendment 28—Essential Fish Salmon Advisory Subpanel—8 a.m. Habitat and Rockfish Conservation Salmon Technical Team—8 a.m. Oregon State Delegation—7 a.m. Area—Final Implementation Scientific and Statistical Committee—8 Washington State Delegation—7 a.m. 3. New Methodology Informing Sigma a.m. Although non-emergency issues not Values—Final Adoption Enforcement Consultants—3 p.m. contained in this agenda may come 4. Omnibus Workload Planning Tribal Policy Group—Ad Hoc before the Pacific Council for Process Review and Project Tribal and Washington Technical discussion, those issues may not be the Prioritization Group—Ad Hoc subject of formal Council action during 5. Inseason Adjustments—Final Day 3—Friday, March 8, 2019 this meeting. Council action will be Action restricted to those issues specifically 6. Implementation of the 2019 Pacific California State Delegation—7 a.m. listed in this notice and any issues Whiting Fishery Under the U.S./ Oregon State Delegation—7 a.m. arising after publication of this notice Canada Agreement Washington State Delegation—7 a.m. that require emergency action under Groundfish Advisory Subpanel—8 a.m. H. Pacific Halibut Management Groundfish Management Team—8 a.m. section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens 1. Annual International Pacific Salmon Advisory Subpanel—8 a.m. Fishery Conservation and Management Halibut Commission (IPHC) Salmon Technical Team—8 a.m. Act, provided the public has been Meeting Report Tribal Policy Group—Ad Hoc notified of the Pacific Council’s intent to 2. Incidental Catch Tribal and Washington Technical take final action to address the Recommendations: Options for the Group—Ad Hoc emergency. Salmon Troll and Final Enforcement Consultants—Ad Hoc Recommendations for Fixed Gear Special Accommodations Sablefish Fisheries Day 4—Saturday, March 9, 2019 These meetings are physically I. Enforcement—cancelled California State Delegation—7 a.m. accessible to people with disabilities.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3765

Requests for sign language FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE interpretation or other auxiliary aids Documentation prepared in support of should be directed to Mr. Kris this information collection request is Department of the Army, Corps of Kleinschmidt at (503) 820–2280, ext. available at www.regulations.gov. Engineers 411 at least ten business days prior to Requests for additional information Withdrawal of the Notice of Intent To the meeting date. should be directed to Darrin King, PRA Prepare an Environmental Impact Dated: February 8, 2019. Officer, at (202) 435–9575, or email: _ Statement (EIS) for the New York New Tracey L. Thompson, CFPB [email protected]. If you require this Jersey Harbor and Tributaries Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable document in an alternative electronic (NYNJHAT) Coastal Storm Risk _ Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. format, please contact CFPB Management Feasibility Study [FR Doc. 2019–02167 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] [email protected]. Please do not AGENCY BILLING CODE 3510–22–P submit comments to these email boxes. : U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DOD. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ACTION: Notice. BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL Title of Collection: Bureau of SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of PROTECTION Consumer Financial Protection Speaker Request Form. Engineers, New York District, Planning [Docket No. CFPB–2109–0008] Division is notifying interested parties OMB Control Number: 3170–0NEW. that it has withdrawn the Notice of Agency Information Collection Type of Review: New collection, Intent (NOI) to develop an EIS for the Activities: Comment Request request for a new OMB control number. proposed NYNJHAT Coastal Storm Risk AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial Affected Public: Private sector. Management (CSRM) Feasibility Study. Protection. The original NOI to Prepare an EIS was Estimated Number of Respondents: published in the Federal Register on ACTION: Notice and request for comment. 1,000. Wednesday, December 27, 2017. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Estimated Total Annual Burden FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Hours: 250. Questions regarding the withdrawal of (PRA), the Bureau of Consumer Abstract: The Bureau of Consumer this NOI should be addressed to Mr. Financial Protection (Bureau) is Financial Protection Speaker Request Peter Weppler, Chief, Environmental requesting to renew the Office of Form is used to collect information Analysis Branch, (CENAN–PL–E) U.S. Management and Budget (OMB) relevant to reviewing and processing an Army Corps of Engineers, New York approval for a new information external speaking invitation. District, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, collection titled, ‘‘Bureau of Consumer New York 10278–0090; 918–790–8634; Financial Protection Speaker Request Request for Comments: Comments are [email protected]. Form.’’ invited on: (a) Whether the collection of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March information is necessary for the proper DATES: Written comments are 20, 2018, the Office of Management and performance of the functions of the encouraged and must be received on or Budget (OMB) and the Council on before April 15, 2019 to be assured of Bureau, including whether the Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued an consideration. information will have practical utility; OMB/CEQ Memorandum for Heads of (b) The accuracy of the Bureau’s ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Federal Departments and Agencies identified by the title of the information estimate of the burden of the collection titled ‘‘One Federal Decision Framework collection, OMB Control Number (see of information, including the validity of for the Environmental Review and below), and docket number (see above), the methods and the assumptions used; Authorization Process for Major by any of the following methods: (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, Infrastructure Projects under Executive • Electronic: Go to http:// and clarity of the information to be Order [E.O.] 13807.’’ Additionally, www.regulations.gov. Follow the collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the twelve federal agencies, including instructions for submitting comments. burden of the collection of information Department of the Army, signed a • Email: FederalRegisterComments@ on respondents, including through the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) cfpb.gov. Include Docket No. CFPB– use of automated collection techniques as an appendix to the OMB/CEQ 2019–0008 in the subject line of the or other forms of information Memorandum. The MOU is titled message. technology. Comments submitted in ‘‘Memorandum of Understanding • Mail: Comment Intake, Bureau of response to this notice will be Implementing One Federal Decision Consumer Financial Protection summarized and/or included in the Under Executive Order 13807’’ and was (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street request for OMB approval. All effective on April 10, 2018. E.O. 13807 sets a goal for agencies by reducing the NW, Washington, DC 20552. comments will become a matter of • Hand Delivery/Courier: Comment time for completing environmental public record. Intake, Bureau of Consumer Financial reviews and authorization decisions to Protection (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 Dated: February 7, 2018. an agency average of not more than two G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552. Darrin A. King, years from publication of a NOI to Please note that comments submitted Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Bureau of prepare an EIS. after the comment period will not be Consumer Financial Protection. Subsequent to the publication of the accepted. In general, all comments [FR Doc. 2019–02101 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] NOI, the NYNJHAT CSRM Feasibility received will become public records, Study was granted an exemption from including any personal information BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P the requirement to complete the provided. Sensitive personal feasibility study within 3 years, as information, such as account numbers required in Section 1001(a) of the Water or Social Security numbers, should not Resources Reform and Development Act be included. of 2014. This exemption was granted on

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3766 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

October 31, 2018 on an interim basis, ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Dated: February 7, 2019. and allows for an additional 15 months identified by docket number and title, Shelly E. Finke, to complete the Draft Integrated by any of the following methods: Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Feasibility Report and Tier 1 Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// Officer, Department of Defense. Environmental Impact Statement. www.regulations.gov. Follow the [FR Doc. 2019–02061 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Therefore, in order to align the revised instructions for submitting comments. BILLING CODE 5001–06–P study schedule with E.O. 13807, it is Mail: Department of Defense, Office of necessary to withdraw the existing NOI the Chief Management Officer, to develop and re-scope a NEPA Directorate for Oversight and DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE coordination/review schedule with the Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, appropriate Federal and state resource Mailbox #24 Suite 08D09, Alexandria, Department of the Navy agencies that have statutory jurisdiction VA 22350–1700. [Docket ID: USN–2019–HQ–0007] over the review process for any action Instructions: All submissions received being contemplated in the course of the must include the agency name, docket Proposed Collection; Comment feasibility study and development of an number and title for this Federal Request environmental impact statement. Public, Register document. The general policy agency and stakeholder comments and for comments and other submissions AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. feedback will continue to be accepted from members of the public is to make ACTION: Information collection notice. during the re-scoping of the NEPA these submissions available for public review schedule. viewing on the internet at http:// SUMMARY: In compliance with the Study Website and Addresses: www.regulations.gov as they are Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Pertinent information about the study received without change, including any Department of the Navy announces a can be found at: http:// personal identifiers or contact proposed public information collection www.nan.usace.army.mil/Missions/ information. and seeks public comment on the Civil-Works/Projects-in-New-York/New- provisions thereof. Comments are York-New-Jersey-Harbor-Tributaries- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To invited on: Whether the proposed Focus-Area-Feasibility-Study/. request more information on this collection of information is necessary proposed information collection or to for the proper performance of the Dated: February 5, 2019. obtain a copy of the proposal and functions of the agency, including Peter M. Weppler, associated collection instruments, whether the information shall have Chief, Environmental Analysis Branch, please write to the Commanding practical utility; the accuracy of the Planning Division. General, Marine Corps Recruiting agency’s estimate of the burden of the [FR Doc. 2019–02152 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Command (G3), Officer Programs, care proposed information collection; ways BILLING CODE 3720–58–P of Captain David P. Foley, USMC, 3280 to enhance the quality, utility, and Russell Road, Quantico, VA 22134– clarity of the information to be 5103, 703–432–9511, or contact Head, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE collected; and ways to minimize the Officer Programs or Deputy, Officer burden of the information collection on Programs at 703–784–9449/50/51. Department of the Navy respondents, including through the use SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of automated collection techniques or [Docket ID: USN–2019–HQ–0006] Title; Associated Form; and OMB other forms of information technology. Number: Academic Certification for Proposed Collection; Comment DATES: Consideration will be given to all Marine Corps Officer Candidate Request comments received by April 15, 2019. Program; NAVMC Form 10469; OMB ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Control Number 0703–0011. AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. identified by docket number and title, Needs and Uses: The Marine Corps ACTION: Information collection notice. by any of the following methods: Officer Selection Officer (OSO) will Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// SUMMARY: In compliance with the submit the completed original NAVMC www.regulations.gov. Follow the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Form 10469 with the officer instructions for submitting comments. Department of the Navy announces a applications for the Platoon Leaders’ Mail: Department of Defense, Office of proposed public information collection Class and Officer Candidate Course the Chief Management Officer, and seeks public comment on the (OCC) Programs when the candidate has Directorate for Oversight and provisions thereof. Comments are not yet completed the requirements for Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, invited on: Whether the proposed a degree. This form is to be completed Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria, collection of information is necessary by a school official of the applicant’s VA 22350–1700. for the proper performance of the college or university and verified by the functions of the agency, including Instructions: All submissions received OSO. Use of this form is the only must include the agency name, docket whether the information shall have accurate and specific method to practical utility; the accuracy of the number and title for this Federal determine an officer-candidate Register document. The general policy agency’s estimate of the burden of the applicant’s academic qualifications to proposed information collection; ways for comments and other submissions serve as a Marine Corps Officer. from members of the public is to make to enhance the quality, utility, and Affected Public: Individuals or these submissions available for public clarity of the information to be households. viewing on the internet at http:// collected; and ways to minimize the Annual Burden Hours: 875. www.regulations.gov as they are burden of the information collection on Number of Respondents: 3,500. received without change, including any respondents, including through the use Responses per Respondent: 1. of automated collection techniques or Annual Responses: 3,500. personal identifiers or contact other forms of information technology. Average Burden per Response: 15 information. DATES: Consideration will be given to all minutes. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To comments received by April 15, 2019. Frequency: On occasion. request more information on this

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3767

proposed information collection or to DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Education is especially interested in obtain a copy of the proposal and public comment addressing the associated collection instruments, [Docket No.: ED–2018–ICCD–0120] following issues: (1) Is this collection please write to the Commanding Agency Information Collection necessary to the proper functions of the General, Marine Corps Recruiting Activities; Submission to the Office of Department; (2) will this information be Command (G3), Officer Programs, care Management and Budget for Review processed and used in a timely manner; of Captain David P. Foley, USMC, 3280 and Approval; Comment Request; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; Russell Road, Quantico, VA 22134– Gainful Employment Disclosure (4) how might the Department enhance 5103, 703–432–9511, or contact Head, Template the quality, utility, and clarity of the Officer Programs or Deputy, Officer information to be collected; and (5) how Programs at 703–784–9449/50/51. AGENCY: Federal Student Aid (FSA), might the Department minimize the Department of Education (ED). burden of this collection on the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ACTION: Notice. respondents, including through the use Title; Associated Form; and OMB SUMMARY: In accordance with the of information technology. Please note Number: Personal Information Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is that written comments received in Questionnaire; NAVMC 100064; OMB proposing a revision of an existing response to this notice will be Control Number 0703–0012. information collection. considered public records. Needs and Uses: The Officer Selection DATES: Interested persons are invited to Title of Collection: Gainful Officer (OSO) will forward a Personal submit comments on or before March Employment Disclosure Template. Information Questionnaire (PIQ) form to 15, 2019. OMB Control Number: 1845–0107. individuals to be named by the ADDRESSES: To access and review all the applicant for completion and return as documents related to the information Type of Review: A revision of an character references. The questionnaire collection listed in this notice, please existing information collection. establishes a pattern of moral character use http://www.regulations.gov by Respondents/Affected Public: Private on individuals applying for the Marine searching the Docket ID number ED– Sector; State, Local, and Tribal Corps Officer Program. 2018–ICCD–0120. Comments submitted Governments; Individuals or Affected Public: Individuals or in response to this notice should be Households. submitted electronically through the Households. Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// Total Estimated Number of Annual Annual Burden Hours: 4,175 hours. www.regulations.gov by selecting the Responses: 72,794,823. Number of Respondents: 16,700. Docket ID number or via postal mail, Total Estimated Number of Annual commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Burden Hours: 16,217,015. Responses per Respondent: 1. Please note that comments submitted by Abstract: Under the disclosure Annual Responses: 16,700. fax or email and those submitted after requirements, an institution must the comment period will not be Average Burden per Response: 15 provide current and prospective minutes. accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by students with information about each of Frequency: On occasion. postal mail or delivery should be its programs that prepares students for gainful employment in a recognized The OSO will forward a Personal addressed to the Director of the occupation (GE programs) using a Information Questionnaire (PIQ) form to Information Collection Clearance disclosure template provided by the individuals to be named by the Division, U.S. Department of Education, Secretary. The Secretary must specify applicant for completion and return as 550 12th Street SW, PCP, Room 9086, the information to be included on the character references. The PIQ is used to Washington, DC 20202–0023. disclosure template in a notice provide Headquarters, U.S. Marine FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For published in the Federal Register. The Corps with a standardized method in specific questions related to collection Department is requesting revision of the rating officer program applicants in the activities, please contact Beth burden currently calculated for 1845– areas of character, leadership, ability, Grebeldinger, 202–377–4018. 0107. This request revises the current and suitability for service as a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information collection for the disclosure commissioned officer. The OSO must Department of Education (ED), in template to reflect the updated ensure the integrity of the PIQ process accordance with the Paperwork disclosure requirements that institutions by not allowing applicants to directly Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. must provide current and prospective handle PIQ forms. All PIQs will be 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general students. The Secretary may, by notice dated and are valid for one year. public and Federal agencies with an in the Federal Register, change the Individuals completing the form have opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of disclosure items required. Not all items volunteered to complete the form prior information. This helps the Department listed under 34 CFR 668.412 are to being sent the questionnaire. assess the impact of its information included in the revised disclosure Dated: February 7, 2019. collection requirements and minimize template. Shelly E. Finke, the public’s reporting burden. It also Dated: February 7, 2019. helps the public understand the Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Kate Mullan, Officer, Department of Defense. Department’s information collection Acting Director, Information Collection [FR Doc. 2019–02062 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy BILLING CODE 5001–06–P soliciting comments on the proposed Officer, Office of Management. information collection request (ICR) that [FR Doc. 2019–02110 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] is described below. The Department of BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3768 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Application Deadline Data Extension in requirements and limitations in the Case of Technical Issues with the competition NIA. Common Instructions for Applicants to Grants.gov System, we are changing, in 4. Data Universal Numbering System Department of Education Discretionary three places, the time of the application Number, Taxpayer Identification Grant Programs deadline from 4:30:00 p.m., Eastern Number, and System for Award Time, to 11:59:59 p.m., Eastern Time. Management: To do business with the AGENCY: Office for Planning, Evaluation We are making these changes so that Department, and to submit your and Policy Development, Department of applicants not located in the Eastern application electronically using Education. Time will have a full business day to Grants.gov, you must— ACTION: Notice; revised common submit their applications before the a. Have a Data Universal Numbering instructions. deadline passes. We are also adding a System (DUNS) number and a Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN); SUMMARY: On February 12, 2018, the sentence notifying applicants that b. Register both your DUNS number Department of Education (Department) assistance from Principal Office staff is and TIN with the System for Award published a set of common instructions available until 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time Management (SAM.gov), the for applicants seeking funds under a on the application deadline date. Government’s primary registrant Department discretionary grant Lastly, we are revising the database; competition as part of a broader effort to instructions for submitting an c. Provide your DUNS number and reduce barriers for applicants. These application electronically, under section TIN on your application; and common instructions are referenced in 5, Other Submission Requirements, so d. Maintain an active SAM individual competition notices inviting that applications can be submitted using registration with current information applications (NIAs). In this notice, we Microsoft Word. We are making this while your application is under review are publishing a revised version of the change to provide greater flexibility for by the Department and, if you are common instructions that supersedes applicants to submit an acceptable awarded a grant, during the project the version published on February 12, application for review; however, we period. 2018. recommend that applicants submit all documents as read-only flattened PDFs. You can obtain a DUNS number from FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The revised common instructions are Dun and Bradstreet at the following Ronald B. Petracca, U.S. Department of set forth as follows: website: http://fedgov.dnb.com/ Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Common Set of Instructions for webform. A DUNS number can be Room 6E306, Washington, DC 20202. Applicants: Application and created within one to two business days. Telephone: (202) 401–6008. Email: Submission Information. If you are a corporate entity, agency, [email protected]. 1. Address to Request Application institution, or organization, you can If you use a telecommunications Package: You can obtain an application obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue device for the deaf (TDD) or a text package from the Department’s website Service (IRS). If you are an individual, telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay or Grants.gov. you can obtain a TIN from the IRS or the Service (FRS), toll-free, at 1–800–877– To obtain a copy via the Department’s Social Security Administration. If you 8339. website, use the following address: need a new TIN, please allow two to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/ five weeks for your TIN to become Background: This document provides grantapps/index.html. active. applicants with a centralized and up-to- 2. Content and Form of Application The SAM registration process can take date set of instructions for applying to Submission: Requirements concerning approximately seven business days, but the Department’s discretionary grant the content and form of an application, may take upwards of several weeks, programs. Future NIAs will reference together with the forms you must depending on the completeness and this document in lieu of providing this submit, are in the application package accuracy of the data you enter into the series of instructions within each NIA. for the program. SAM.gov database. Thus, if you think Rarely, exceptions will need to be made 3. Submission Dates and Times: you might want to apply for Federal to these instructions and will be noted Submit applications for grants under the financial assistance under a program in an individual competition NIA. program electronically using Grants.gov. administered by the Department, please Revised Common Instructions: The For information (including dates and allow sufficient time to obtain and Department is making several changes times) about how to submit your register your DUNS number and TIN. to the common instructions for application electronically, please refer We recommend that you register early. applicants provided in the notice to Other Submission Requirements in If you are unable to submit an published in the Federal Register on section 5 of these instructions. application on Grants.gov by the February 12, 2018 (83 FR 6003). First, in We do not consider an application application deadline because you do not section four, Data Universal Numbering that does not comply with the deadline have an active SAM registration, you System Number, Taxpayer requirements. will not be considered for funding. Identification Number, and System for Individuals with disabilities who Note: Once your SAM.gov registration is Award Management, we are adding a need an accommodation or auxiliary aid active, it may be 24 to 48 hours before you sentence above the Note that clarifies in connection with the application can access the information in, and submit an that applicants who are unable to process should contact the person listed application through, Grants.gov. submit an application via Grants.gov by in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION If you are currently registered with the application deadline, because their CONTACT section in the competition NIA. SAM.gov, you may not need to make System for Award Management (SAM) If the Department provides an any changes. However, please make registration is not active, will not be accommodation or auxiliary aid to an certain that the TIN associated with considered for funding. individual with a disability in your DUNS number is correct. Note: Second, in section 5(a), under Other connection with the application You must update your SAM registration Submission Requirements—Electronic process, the individual’s application annually. This may take three or more Submission of Applicants and— remains subject to all other business days.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3769

Information about SAM is available at the person listed in the FOR FURTHER attachments to your application as files www.SAM.gov. To further assist you INFORMATION CONTACT section in the in either Portable Document Format with obtaining and registering your competition NIA during normal (PDF) or Microsoft Word. Although DUNS number and TIN in SAM.gov or business hours and no later than 5:00 applicants have the option of uploading updating your existing SAM account, p.m., Eastern Time, on the application any narrative sections and all other we have prepared a SAM.gov Tip Sheet, deadline date. attachments to their application in which you can find at: http:// • The amount of time it can take to either PDF or Microsoft Word, we www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/sam- upload an application will vary recommend applicants submit all faqs.html. depending on a variety of factors, documents as read-only flattened PDFs, In addition, in order to submit your including the size of the application and meaning any fillable PDF files must be application via Grants.gov, you must (1) the speed of your internet connection. saved and submitted as non-fillable PDF register as an applicant using your Therefore, we recommend that you files and not as interactive or fillable DUNS number and (2) be designated by leave yourself plenty of time to PDF files, to better ensure applications your organization’s E-Biz Point of complete your submission. are processed in a more timely, Contact as an Authorized Organization • Applications received by accurate, and efficient manner. If you Representative (AOR). Details on these Grants.gov are date- and time-stamped choose to submit your application in steps are outlined at the following upon submission. Your application Microsoft Word, you may do so using Grants.gov web page: https:// must be fully uploaded and submitted any version of Microsoft Word (i.e., a www.grants.gov/web/grants/ and must be date- and time-stamped by document ending in a .doc or .docx register.html. the Grants.gov system no later than extension). If you upload a file type 5. Other Submission Requirements: 11:59:59 p.m., Eastern Time, on the other than PDF or Microsoft Word or if a. Electronic Submission of application deadline date. Except as you submit a password-protected file, Applications. otherwise noted in this section, we will we will be unable to review that We are participating as a partner in not accept your application if it is material. Please note that this will likely the Government-wide Grants.gov site. received—that is, date- and time- result in your application not being Submit applications electronically using stamped by the Grants.gov system—after considered for funding. The Department Grants.gov and do not email them 11:59:59 p.m., Eastern Time, on the will not convert material from other unless explicitly allowed in a application deadline date. We do not formats to PDF or Microsoft Word. competition NIA. consider an application that does not • After you electronically submit A Grants.gov applicant must apply comply with the deadline requirements. your application, you will receive from online using Workspace, a shared When we retrieve your application from Grants.gov an automatic notification of environment where members of a grant Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are receipt that contains a Grants.gov team may simultaneously access and rejecting your application because it tracking number. Grants.gov also will edit different web forms within an was late. Receipt of a date- and time- notify you automatically by email if application. An applicant can create an stamp does not mean that your your application met all of the individual Workspace for each application meets program eligibility Grants.gov validation requirements or if application and establish for that requirements described in the there were any errors (such as application a collaborative application application package. submission of your application by package that allows more than one • You should review and follow the someone other than a registered AOR, person in the applicant’s organization to Education Submission Procedures for issues with your DUNS number, or work concurrently on an application. submitting an application through inclusion of an attachment with a file The Grants.gov system also enables the Grants.gov that are included in the name that contains special characters). applicant to reuse forms from previous application package for the program to You will be given an opportunity to submissions, check them in and out to ensure that you submit your application correct any errors and resubmit, but you complete them, and submit the on time. You can also find the must still meet the deadline for application package. For access to Education Submission Procedures submission of your application. further instructions on how to apply pertaining to Grants.gov under News Once your application is successfully using Grants.gov, refer to: and Events on the Department’s G5 validated by Grants.gov, the Department www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/ system home page at www.G5.gov. In will retrieve your application from apply-for-grants.html. addition, for specific guidance and Grants.gov and send you an email with You may access the electronic grant procedures for submitting an a unique PR/Award number for your applications at www.Grants.gov. You application through Grants.gov, please application. must search for the downloadable refer to the Grants.gov website at: Email confirmations and receipts from application package for this competition www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/ Grants.gov do not indicate receipt by the by the CFDA number. Do not include apply-for-grants.html. Department, nor do they mean that your the CFDA number’s alpha suffix in your • When you submit your application application is complete or has met all search (e.g., search for 84.184, not electronically, all documents must be application requirements. While your 84.184D). submitted in this manner, including all application may have been successfully Please note the following: information you typically provide on validated by Grants.gov, it also must be • Applicants needing assistance with the following forms: The Application for reviewed in accordance with the Grants.gov may contact the Grants.gov Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department’s application requirements Support Center either by calling 1–800– Department of Education Supplemental as specified in the competition NIA and 518–4726 or by sending an email to Information for SF 424, Budget in these application instructions. It is [email protected]. The Grants.gov Information—Non-Construction your responsibility to ensure that your Support Center is available 24 hours a Programs (ED 524), and all necessary submitted application has met all of the day, seven days a week, except for assurances and certifications. Department’s requirements. Federal holidays. Applicants needing • When you submit your application Additionally, we may request that you assistance from Principal Office staff electronically, you must upload any provide us original signatures on forms with their applications should contact narrative sections and all other at a later date.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3770 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

Application Deadline Date Extension application deadline date, to the Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is in Case of Technical Issues with the Department at the following address: available free at the site. Grants.gov System: If you experience U.S. Department of Education, You may also access documents of the problems submitting your application Application Control Center, Attention: Department published in the Federal through Grants.gov, please contact the (CFDA Number), LBJ Basement Level 1, Register by using the article search Grants.gov Support Desk immediately, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, feature at: www.federalregister.gov. toll-free, at 1–800–518–4726. The DC 20202–4260. Specifically, through the advanced Grants.gov Support Center will provide You must show proof of mailing search feature at this site, you can limit you with a Support Desk Case Number consisting of one of the following: your search to documents published by documenting your communication. You (1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service the Department. must retain your Support Desk Case postmark. James C. Blew, (2) A legible mail receipt with the Number for future reference as proof of Assistant Secretary for Planning, Evaluation your communication with the Support date of mailing stamped by the U.S. and Policy Development. Center. Please subsequently contact the Postal Service. [FR Doc. 2019–02206 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] person listed in the FOR FURTHER (3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or BILLING CODE 4000–01–P INFORMATION CONTACT section in the receipt from a commercial carrier. competition NIA and provide an (4) Any other proof of mailing explanation of the technical problem acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY you experienced with Grants.gov, along Department of Education. with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case If you mail your application through Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical Number. the U.S. Postal Service, we do not Advisory Committee; Meeting If you are prevented from accept either of the following as proof electronically submitting your of mailing: AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and application on the application deadline (1) A private metered postmark. Renewable Energy, Department of date because of technical problems (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by Energy. within the Grants.gov system, we will the U.S. Postal Service. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. grant you an extension until 11:59:59 Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not SUMMARY: This notice announces an p.m., Eastern Time, the following uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before business day to enable you to transmit relying on this method, you should check open meeting of the Hydrogen and Fuel your application electronically, with your local post office. Cell Technical Advisory Committee provided we can verify the technical (HTAC). The Federal Advisory We will not consider applications Committee Act requires notice of the issues affected your ability to submit postmarked after the application your application on time via your meeting be announced in the Federal deadline date. Register. Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. Note for Mail Delivery of Paper Note: The extensions to which we refer in Applications: If you mail your DATES: Monday, March 18, 2019; 8:00 this section apply only to technical problems application to the Department— a.m.–6:30 p.m. with the Grants.gov system. We will not grant (1) You must indicate on the envelope ADDRESSES: National Renewable Energy you an extension if you failed to fully register and in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA Laboratory, 901 D Street SW, Suite 930, in order to submit your application to number, including suffix letter, if any, Washington, DC 20024. Grants.gov (including with the required FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DUNS number and TIN currently registered of the competition under which you are in SAM) before the application deadline date submitting your application; and Email: [email protected] or at the mailing and time or if the technical problem you (2) The Application Control Center address: Shawna McQueen, Designated experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov will notify you of the Department’s Federal Officer, U.S. Department of system. receipt of your grant application. If you Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and b. Submission of Paper Applications. do not receive this notification within Renewable Energy, 1000 Independence We discourage paper applications, but 15 business days from the application Avenue SW, EE–3F, Washington, DC if electronic submission is not possible deadline date, you should call the 20585, Telephone number (202) 586– (e.g., you do not have access to the Application Control Center at (202) 0833. internet), you must provide a written 245–6288. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: statement that you intend to submit a Accessible Format: Individuals with Purpose of the Committee: The paper application. Send this written disabilities can obtain this document Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical statement no later than two weeks and a copy of the application package in Advisory Committee (HTAC) was before the application deadline date (14 an accessible format (e.g., braille, large established under section 807 of the calendar days or, if the 14th calendar print, audiotape, or compact disc) on Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT), day before the application deadline date request to the program contact person Public Law 109–58; 119 Stat. 849, to falls on a Federal holiday, the next listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION provide advice and recommendations to business day following the Federal CONTACT. the Secretary of Energy on the program holiday). Electronic Access to This Document: authorized by Title VIII of EPACT. If you mail your written statement to The official version of this document is Tentative Agenda: (updates will be the Department, it must be postmarked the document published in the Federal posted on the web at): http:// no later than two weeks before the Register. You may access the official hydrogen.energy.gov/advisory_ application deadline date. Please send edition of the Federal Register and the htac.html). this statement to the person listed in the Code of Federal Regulations at: • HTAC Business (including public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can comment period) section of the competition NIA. view this document, as well as all other • DOE Leadership Updates If you submit a paper application, you documents of this Department • Program and Budget Updates must mail the original and two copies published in the Federal Register, in • Updates from Federal/State of your application, on or before the text or PDF. To use PDF you must have Governments and Industry

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3771

• HTAC Subcommittee Updates the Administration’s energy policies; DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY • Open Discussion Period the Department’s basic and applied Public Participation: The meeting is research and development activities; Federal Energy Regulatory open to the public. Individuals who economic and national security policy; Commission would like to attend and/or to make oral and other activities as directed by the [Docket No. CP17–41–000] statements during the public comment Secretary. period must register no later than 5:00 Purpose of the Meeting: This meeting Eagle LNG Partners Jacksonville, LLC; p.m. on Monday, March 11, 2019, by is the first meeting of new members Notice of Reopening of Comment email at: [email protected]. Entry to the under Secretary Perry. Period meeting room will be restricted to those who have confirmed their attendance in Tentative Agenda: The meeting will On November 16, 2018, the advance. Please provide your name, start at 9:00 a.m. on March 5. The Commission issued a notice setting organization, citizenship, and contact tentative meeting agenda includes: January 7, 2019, as the end of the formal information. Anyone attending the Introduction of SEAB’s members, period to file comments on the meeting will be required to present informational briefings, and an Jacksonville Project draft environmental government-issued identification. Those opportunity for comments from the impact statement. Due to the funding wishing to make a public comment are public. The meeting will conclude at lapse at certain federal agencies between required to register. The public 12:00 p.m. December 22, 2018 and January 25, 2019, the Commission is reopening the comment period will take place Public Participation: The meeting is sometime between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 comment period until February 25, open to the public. Individuals who a.m. on March, 18, 2019. Time allotted 2019. would like to attend must RSVP to Kurt per speaker will depend on the number Heckman no later than 5:00 p.m. on Dated: February 7, 2019. who wish to speak but will not exceed Kimberly D. Bose, five minutes. Those not able to attend Thursday, February 28, 2019, by email at: [email protected]. Please provide Secretary. the meeting or have insufficient time to [FR Doc. 2019–02141 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] address the committee are invited to your name, organization, citizenship, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P send a written statement to: HTAC@ and contact information. Anyone nrel.gov. attending the meeting will be required to present REAL ID compliant, Minutes: The minutes of the meeting DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY will be available for public review at government-issued identification. http://hydrogen.energy.gov/advisory_ Individuals and representatives of Federal Energy Regulatory htac.html. organizations who would like to offer Commission Signed in Washington, DC, on February 8, comments and suggestions may do so 2019. during the meeting. Approximately 15 Combined Notice of Filings #1 LaTanya Butler, minutes will be reserved for public Take notice that the Commission Deputy Committee Management Officer. comments. Time allotted per speaker received the following electric rate [FR Doc. 2019–02184 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] will depend on the number who wish to filings: BILLING CODE 6450–01–P speak but will not exceed five minutes. Docket Numbers: ER19–765–000; The Designated Federal Officer is ER19–766–000; ER19–767–000. empowered to conduct the meeting in a Applicants: Gulf Power Company. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY fashion that will facilitate the orderly Description: Amendment to January 4, conduct of business. Those wishing to Secretary of Energy Advisory Board; 2019 Gulf Power Company tariff filings. speak should register to do so via email, Meeting Filed Date: 2/6/19. [email protected], no later than 5 p.m. Accession Number: 20190206–5150. AGENCY: Department of Energy. on Thursday, February 28, 2019. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/19. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. Those not able to attend the meeting Docket Numbers: ER19–361–000. or who have insufficient time to address Applicants: Midcontinent SUMMARY: This notice announces an the committee are invited to send a Independent System Operator, Inc., open meeting of the Secretary of Energy International Transmission Company, Advisory Board (SEAB). The SEAB was written statement to Kurt Heckman, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Michigan Electric Transmission reestablished pursuant to the Federal Company, ITC Midwest LLC. Advisory Committee Act. This notice is Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, or email to: [email protected]. Description: Report Filing: 2019–02– provided in accordance with the Act. 07_2nd Refund Report for ITC DATES: Tuesday, March 5, 2019; 9:00 Minutes: The minutes of the meeting Companies re Transco Adder (EL18– a.m.–12:00 p.m. will be available on the SEAB website 140) to be effective N/A. ADDRESSES: Department of Energy, 1000 or by contacting Mr. Heckman. He may Filed Date: 2/7/19. Independence Avenue SW, Room 8E– be reached at the above postal address Accession Number: 20190207–5086. 089, Washington, DC 20585. or email address, or by visiting SEAB’s Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kurt website at www.energy.gov/seab. Docket Numbers: ER19–998–000. Heckman, Designated Federal Officer, Signed in Washington, DC, on February 8, Applicants: Alabama Power U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 2019. Company. Independence Avenue SW, Washington, LaTanya Butler, Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: OPC DC 20585; email: [email protected]. Deputy Committee Management Officer. IA Amendment Filing (to Remove Gulf) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: to be effective 1/1/2019. [FR Doc. 2019–02219 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Background: The Board was Filed Date: 2/6/19. established to provide advice and BILLING CODE 6450–01–P Accession Number: 20190206–5098. recommendations to the Secretary on Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/19.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3772 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

Docket Numbers: ER19–999–000. Applicants: Mississippi Power Accession Number: 20190207–5177. Applicants: Alabama Power Company. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. Company. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: JEA Docket Numbers: ER19–1013–000. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: CED Interchange Contract Amendment Filing Applicants: California Independent Solar Development (Timberland Solar) to be effective 1/1/2019. System Operator Corporation. LGIA Amendment Filing to be effective Filed Date: 2/7/19. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 1/1/2019. Accession Number: 20190207–5003. 2019–02–07 Specify Minimum Filed Date: 2/6/19. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. Requirements for Interconnection Accession Number: 20190206–5100. Docket Numbers: ER19–1007–000. Requests Amendment to be effective Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/19. Applicants: FirstEnergy Solutions 4/1/2019. Docket Numbers: ER19–1000–000. Corp. Filed Date: 2/7/19. Applicants: Alabama Power Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Accession Number: 20190207–5178. Company. Amendment to Reactive Service Rate Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: TVA Schedule FERC No. 1 and Request for Docket Numbers: ER19–1014–000. Interchange Agreement Amendment Waiver to be effective 2/5/2019. Applicants: Midcontinent Filing to be effective 1/1/2019. Filed Date: 2/7/19. Independent System Operator, Inc., Filed Date: 2/6/19. Accession Number: 20190207–5087. Ameren Illinois Company. Accession Number: 20190206–5129. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: _ Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/19. Docket Numbers: ER19–1008–000. 2019–02–07 SA 3244 Ameren Illinois- Docket Numbers: ER19–1001–000. Applicants: Southern California Marathon Petroleum CPA (Heath Applicants: Georgia Power Company. Edison Company. Substation) to be effective 1/8/2019. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: TVA Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: GIA Filed Date: 2/7/19. Interchange Agreement Amendment & Distrib Serv Agmt Strata Saticoy, LLC Accession Number: 20190207–5179. Filing to be effective 1/1/2019. Saticoy Energy Storage to be effective Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. Filed Date: 2/6/19. 2/8/2019. Take notice that the Commission Accession Number: 20190206–5135. Filed Date: 2/7/19. received the following electric securities Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/19. Accession Number: 20190207–5088. filings: Docket Numbers: ER19–1002–000. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. Docket Numbers: ES19–18–000. Applicants: Mississippi Power Docket Numbers: ER19–1009–000. Applicants: Northern Maine Company. Applicants: Revere Power, LLC. Independent System Administrator, Inc. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: TVA Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Description: Application under Interchange Agreement Amendment MBR Application to be effective 12/31/ Section 204 of the Federal Power Act for Filing to be effective 1/1/2019. 9998. Authorization to Issue Securities of the Northern Maine Independent System Filed Date: 2/6/19. Filed Date: 2/7/19. Administrator, Inc. Accession Number: 20190206–5136. Accession Number: 20190207–5089. Filed Date: 2/6/19. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/19. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. Accession Number: 20190206–5139. Docket Numbers: ER19–1003–000. Docket Numbers: ER19–1010–000. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/19. Applicants: Crystal Lake Wind Energy Applicants: Midcontinent The filings are accessible in the II, LLC. Independent System Operator, Inc. Commission’s eLibrary system by Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: clicking on the links or querying the Crystal Lake Wind Energy II, LLC 2019–02–07_SA 3235 ITC Midwest- docket number. Application for Market-Based Rates to Duane Arnold Solar GIA (J504) to be Any person desiring to intervene or be effective 4/7/2019. effective 1/24/2019. protest in any of the above proceedings Filed Date: 2/6/19. Filed Date: 2/7/19. Accession Number: 20190206–5137. must file in accordance with Rules 211 Accession Number: 20190207–5099. and 214 of the Commission’s Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/19. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and Docket Numbers: ER19–1004–000. Docket Numbers: ER19–1011–000. 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Applicants: Alabama Power Applicants: PJM Interconnection, time on the specified comment date. Company. L.L.C. Protests may be considered, but Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: JEA Description: Tariff Cancellation: intervention is necessary to become a Interchange Contract Amendment Filing Notice of Cancellation of ICSA/SA No. party to the proceeding. to be effective 1/1/2019. 3789; Queue No. T16 to be effective 12/ eFiling is encouraged. More detailed Filed Date: 2/7/19. 21/2018. information relating to filing Accession Number: 20190207–5001. Filed Date: 2/7/19. requirements, interventions, protests, Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. Accession Number: 20190207–5176. service, and qualifying facilities filings Docket Numbers: ER19–1005–000. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For Applicants: Georgia Power Company. Docket Numbers: ER19–1012–000. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: JEA other information, call (866) 208–3676 Applicants: PJM Interconnection, (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Interchange Contract Amendment Filing L.L.C. to be effective 1/1/2019. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Dated: February 7, 2019. Filed Date: 2/7/19. Revisions to the OATT and RAA re Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Accession Number: 20190207–5002. Price Responsive Demand Modifications Deputy Secretary. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/28/19. to be effective 4/9/2019. [FR Doc. 2019–02149 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Docket Numbers: ER19–1006–000. Filed Date: 2/7/19. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3773

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs- DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY filing/esubscription.asp. Federal Energy Regulatory Additional information about the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Project is available from the Commission [Docket Nos. CP18–512–000; CP18–513– Commission’s Office of External Affairs 000] at (866) 208–FERC or on the FERC [Docket No. CP15–521–000] website (www.ferc.gov). Using the Corpus Christi Liquefaction Stage III, ‘‘eLibrary’’ link, select ‘‘General Search’’ Gulf LNG Liquefaction Company, LLC, LLC; Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC; from the eLibrary menu, enter the Gulf LNG Energy, LLC, Gulf LNG and Cheniere Corpus Christi Pipeline, selected date range and ‘‘Docket Pipeline, LLC; Notice of Reopening of L.P.; Notice of Revised Schedule for Number’’ excluding the last three digits Comment Period Environmental Review of the Stage 3 (i.e., CP18–512 and CP18–513), and Project follow the instructions. For assistance On November 15, 2018, the with access to eLibrary, the helpline can Commission issued a notice setting This notice identifies the Federal be reached at (866) 208–3676, TTY (202) Energy Regulatory Commission staff’s January 7, 2019, as the end of the formal 502–8659, or at FERCOnlineSupport@ period to file comments on the Gulf revised schedule for the completion of ferc.gov. The eLibrary link on the FERC LNG Liquefaction Project draft the environmental assessment (EA) for website also provides access to the texts environmental impact statement. Due to the Corpus Christi Liquefaction Stage of formal documents issued by the III, LLC, Corpus Christi Liquefaction, the funding lapse at certain federal Commission, such as orders, notices, LLC, and Cheniere Corpus Christi and rulemakings. agencies between December 22, 2018 Pipeline, L.P. (collectively, Cheniere) and January 25, 2019, the Commission Stage 3 Project. The first notice of Dated: February 7, 2019. is reopening the comment period until schedule, issued on August 31, 2018, Kimberly D. Bose, February 25, 2019. identified February 8, 2019 as the EA Secretary. Dated: February 7, 2019. issuance date. The previous notice [FR Doc. 2019–02144 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Kimberly D. Bose, states, however, that the forecasted BILLING CODE 6717–01–P schedule was based upon Cheniere Secretary. providing complete and timely [FR Doc. 2019–02142 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] responses to any data requests. In its DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY BILLING CODE 6717–01–P partial data request responses filed in December 2018 and January 2019, Federal Energy Regulatory Cheniere states that it does not plan to Commission DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY file the outstanding information until February 7 and 22, 2019, respectively. [Docket Nos. CP18–102–000; CP18–103– Federal Energy Regulatory 000] As a result, staff has revised the Commission schedule for issuance of the EA. The Cheyenne Connector, LLC, Rockies revised schedule for the EA is based Express Pipeline LLC; Notice of [Docket No. CP16–480–000] upon Cheniere meeting its commitment Reopening of Comment Period to provide complete responses to Annova LNG Common Infrastructure, outstanding data requests on the dates it On December 18, 2018, the LLC, Annova LNG Brownsville A, LLC, has identified. Commission issued a Notice of Annova LNG Brownsville B, LLC, Schedule for Environmental Review Availability (December 18 Notice) Annova LNG Brownsville C, LLC; setting January 17, 2019, as the end of Issuance of EA: March 29, 2019 Notice of Reopening of Comment the formal period to file comments on Period 90-day Federal Authorization Decision the environmental assessment issued for Deadline: June 27, 2019 the Cheyenne Connector Pipeline and On December 14, 2018, the If a schedule change becomes Cheyenne Hub Enhancement Projects. Commission issued a notice setting necessary, additional notice will be Due to the funding lapse at certain February 4, 2019, as the end of the provided so that the relevant agencies federal agencies between December 22, formal period to file comments on the are kept informed of the Project’s 2018 and January 25, 2019, and due to Annova LNG Brownsville Project draft progress. a printing error with the December 18 environmental impact statement. Due to Additional Information Notice, the Commission is reopening the comment period until March 5, 2019. A the funding lapse at certain federal In order to receive notification of the complete copy of the December 18 agencies between December 22, 2018 issuance of the EA and to keep track of Notice is attached, which contains and January 25, 2019, the Commission all formal issuances and submittals in instructions on how to submit is reopening the comment period until specific dockets, the Commission offers comments. March 13, 2019. a free service called eSubscription. This Dated: February 7, 2019. can reduce the amount of time you Dated: February 7, 2019. spend researching proceedings by Kimberly D. Bose, Kimberly D. Bose, automatically providing you with Secretary. Secretary. notification of these filings, document [FR Doc. 2019–02143 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2019–02140 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] summaries, and direct links to the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3774 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Online service, please email cooperate in the preparation of the [email protected]. or call environmental document cannot also Federal Energy Regulatory (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call intervene. See 94 FERC ¶ 61,076 (2001). Commission (202) 502–8659. k. With this notice, we are initiating [Docket No. ER19–481–001] Dated: February 7, 2019. informal consultation with: (a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., LMBE Project Company LLC; Fisheries under section 7 of the Deputy Secretary. Supplemental Notice That Initial Endangered Species Act and the joint Market-Based Rate Filing Includes [FR Doc. 2019–02150 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] agency regulations thereunder at 50 Request for Blanket Section 204 BILLING CODE 6717–01–P CFR, part 402, and (b) the State Historic Authorization Preservation Officer, as required by section 106, National Historic This is a supplemental notice in the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Preservation Act, and the implementing above-referenced proceeding of LMBE regulations of the Advisory Council on Federal Energy Regulatory Project Company LLC’s application for Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2. market-based rate authority, with an Commission l. With this notice, we are designating accompanying rate tariff, noting that [Project Nos. 2361–055; 2362–043] Allete, Inc. as the Commission’s non- such application includes a request for federal representative for carrying out blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Allete, Inc.; Notice of Intent To File informal consultation, pursuant to part 34, of future issuances of securities License Application, Filing of Pre- section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and assumptions of liability. Application Document (Pad), and section 106 of the National Historic Any person desiring to intervene or to Commencement of Pre-Filing Process, Preservation Act. protest should file with the Federal and Scoping; Request for Comments m. Allete, Inc. filed with the Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 on the Pad and Scoping Document, Commission a Pre-Application First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, and Identification of Issues and Document (PAD; including a proposed in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 Associated Study Requests process plan and schedule), pursuant to of the Commission’s Rules of Practice 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission’s and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to regulations. 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to File License Application for a n. A copy of the PAD is available for intervene or protest must serve a copy Subsequent Licence for the Prairie River review at the Commission in the Public of that document on the Applicant. Hydroelectric Project and a New License Reference Room or may be viewed on Notice is hereby given that the for the Grand Rapids Hydroelectric the Commission’s website (http:// deadline for filing protests with regard Project, and Commencing Pre-filing www.ferc.gov), using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ to the applicant’s request for blanket Process. link. Enter the docket numbers, authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of b. Project Nos.: 2361–055 and 2362– excluding the last three digits in the future issuances of securities and 043. docket number field to access the assumptions of liability, is February 27, c. Dated Filed: December 13, 2018. document. For assistance, contact FERC 2019. d. Submitted By: Allete, Inc. Online Support at The Commission encourages e. Name of Projects: Prairie River and [email protected], (866) electronic submission of protests and Grand Rapids Hydroelectric Projects. 208–3676 (toll free), or (202) 502–8659 interventions in lieu of paper, using the f. Location: The Prairie River Project (TTY). A copy is also available for FERC Online links at http:// is located on the Prairie River near the inspection and reproduction at the www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic township of Arbo in Itasca County, address in paragraph h. service, persons with internet access Minnesota. The Grand Rapids Project is Register online at http:// who will eFile a document and/or be located on the Mississippi River near www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ listed as a contact for an intervenor the City of Grand Rapids in Itasca esubscription.asp to be notified via must create and validate an County, Minnesota. Neither project email of new filing and issuances eRegistration account using the occupies federal lands. related to these or other pending eRegistration link. Select the eFiling g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR part 5 of projects. For assistance, contact FERC link to log on and submit the the Commission’s Regulations Online Support. intervention or protests. h. Potential Applicant Contact: Nora o. With this notice, we are soliciting Persons unable to file electronically Rosemore, Hydro Operations comments on the PAD and should submit an original and 5 copies Superintendent, Minnesota Power; Commission’s staff Scoping Document 1 of the intervention or protest to the [email protected] or (218) (SD1), as well as study requests. All Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 725–2101. comments on the PAD and SD1, and 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC i. FERC Contact: Laura Washington at study requests should be sent to the 20426. (202) 502–6072 or email at address above in paragraph h. In The filings in the above-referenced [email protected]. addition, all comments on the PAD and proceeding are accessible in the j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, SD1, study requests, requests for Commission’s eLibrary system by local, and tribal agencies with cooperating agency status, and all clicking on the appropriate link in the jurisdiction and/or special expertise communications to and from above list. They are also available for with respect to environmental issues Commission staff related to the merits of electronic review in the Commission’s that wish to cooperate in the the potential application must be filed Public Reference Room in Washington, preparation of the environmental with the Commission. DC. There is an eSubscription link on document should follow the The Commission strongly encourages the website that enables subscribers to instructions for filing such requests electronic filing. Please file all receive email notification when a described in paragraph o below. documents using the Commission’s document is added to a subscribed Cooperating agencies should note the eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/ docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Commission’s policy that agencies that docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3775

submit brief comments up to 6,000 Location: Timberlake Lodge, 144 SE Dated: February 7, 2019. characters, without prior registration, 17th Street, Grand Rapids, MN 55744. Kimberly D. Bose, using the eComment system at http:// Phone: (218) 326–2600. Secretary. www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ SD1, which outlines the subject areas [FR Doc. 2019–02145 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] to be addressed in the environmental ecomment.asp. You must include your BILLING CODE 6717–01–P name and contact information at the end document, was mailed to the of your comments. For assistance, individuals and entities on the Commission’s mailing list. Copies of please contact FERC Online Support at FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE SD1 will be available at the scoping [email protected]. In lieu of CORPORATION electronic filing, please send a paper meetings, or may be viewed on the web copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy at http://www.ferc.gov, using the Agency Information Collection Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Follow the directions Activities: Submission for OMB NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first for accessing information in paragraph Review; Comment Request (OMB No. page of any filing should include docket n. Based on all oral and written 3064–0161) numbers P–2361–055 and P–2362–043. comments, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2) All filings with the Commission must may be issued. SD2 may include a AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance bear the appropriate heading: revised process plan and schedule, as Corporation (FDIC). ‘‘Comments on Pre-Application well as a list of issues, identified ACTION: Notice and request for comment. Document,’’ ‘‘Study Requests,’’ through the scoping process. SUMMARY: The FDIC, as part of its ‘‘Comments on Scoping Document 1,’’ Environmental Site Review ‘‘Request for Cooperating Agency obligations under the Paperwork Status,’’ or ‘‘Communications to and The potential applicant and Reduction Act of 1995, invites the from Commission Staff.’’ Any Commission staff will conduct an general public and other Federal individual or entity interested in Environmental Site Review of the agencies to take this opportunity to submitting study requests, commenting projects on Wednesday, March 6, 2019, comment on the renewal of the existing on the PAD or SD1, and any agency starting at 10:00 a.m. All participants information collection described below requesting cooperating status must do so should meet in the parking lot at Prairie (3064–0161). On November 27, 2018, by April 12, 2019. River Hydro, 30301 County Highway 61, the FDIC requested comment for 60 days p. Although our current intent is to Grand Rapids, MN. If you plan to attend on a proposal to renew the information prepare an environmental assessment the environmental site review, please collection described below. No (EA), there is the possibility that an contact Nora Rosemore, at (218) 725– comments were received. The FDIC Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 2101 or [email protected], by hereby gives notice of its plan to submit will be required. Nevertheless, the March 1, 2019. Participants must be 16 to OMB a request to approve the meetings listed below will satisfy the years of age or older and wear closed- renewal of this collection, and again NEPA scoping requirements, toe shoes. Please indicate how many invites comment on this renewal. irrespective of whether an EA or EIS is participants will be attending with you. DATES: Comments must be submitted on issued by the Commission. Meeting Objectives or before March 15, 2019. Scoping Meetings At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments to Commission staff will hold two Initiate scoping of the issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions and the FDIC by any of the following scoping meetings in the vicinity of the methods: projects at the times and places noted resource management objectives; (3) • review and discuss existing information https://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/ below. The daytime meeting will focus laws/federal. on resource agency, Indian tribes, and and identify preliminary information • and study needs; (4) review and discuss Email: [email protected]. Include non-governmental organization the name and number of the collection concerns, while the evening meeting is the process plan and schedule for pre- filing activity that incorporates the time in the subject line of the message. primarily for receiving input from the • Mail: Jennifer Jones (202–898– public. We invite all interested frames provided for in Part 5 of the Commission’s regulations and, to the 6768), Counsel, MB–3105, Federal individuals, organizations, and agencies Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th to attend one or both of the meetings, extent possible, maximizes coordination of federal, state, and tribal permitting Street NW, Washington, DC 20429. and to assist staff in identifying • Hand Delivery: Comments may be particular study needs, as well as the and certification processes; and (5) discuss the appropriateness of any hand-delivered to the guard station at scope of environmental issues to be the rear of the 17th Street Building addressed in the environmental federal or state agency or Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency for (located on F Street), on business days document. The times and locations of between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. these meetings are as follows: development of an environmental document. All comments should refer to the Evening Scoping Meeting for Both Meeting participants should come relevant OMB control number. A copy Projects prepared to discuss their issues and/or of the comments may also be submitted to the OMB desk officer for the FDIC: Date and Time: Wednesday, March 6, concerns. Please review the PAD in Office of Information and Regulatory 2019 at 6:00 p.m. preparation for the scoping meetings. Location: Timberlake Lodge, 144 SE Directions on how to obtain a copy of Affairs, Office of Management and 17th Street, Grand Rapids, MN 55744. the PAD and SD1 are included in Budget, New Executive Office Building, Phone: (218) 326–2600. paragraph n of this document. Washington, DC 20503. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daytime Scoping Meeting for Both Meeting Procedures Jennifer Jones, Counsel, 202–898–6768, Projects The meetings will be recorded by a [email protected], MB–3105, Federal Date and Time: Thursday, March 7, stenographer and will be placed in the Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th 2019 at 9:00 a.m. public records of the projects. Street NW, Washington, DC 20429.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3776 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On to approve the renewal of this 1. Title: Furnisher Information November 27, 2018, the FDIC requested collection, and again invites comment Accuracy and Integrity (FACTA 312). comment for 60 days on a proposal to on this renewal. OMB Number: 3064–0161. renew the information collection Proposal to renew the following Form Number: None. described below. No comments were currently approved collection of Affected Public: State nonmember received. The FDIC hereby gives notice banks. information: of its plan to submit to OMB a request Burden Estimate: SUMMARY OF ANNUAL BURDEN

Total annual Obligation to Estimated Estimated Estimated Frequency of estimated Type of burden respond number of frequency of time per response burden respondents responses response (hours)

Procedures to Enhance the Accu- Reporting ...... Mandatory ...... 3,533 1 40 hours...... Annually ...... 141,320 racy and Integrity of Information furnished to Consumer Reporting Agencies Under Section 312 of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act. Distribution of Notices in Response Third-Party Dis- Mandatory ...... 3,533 1 14 minutes ...... On Occasion .... 16,487 to Direct Disputes. closure.

Total Hourly Burden ...... 157,807

General Description of Collection: Dated at Washington, DC, on February 8, • Email: [email protected]. Include Sec. 312 of the Fair and Accurate Credit 2019. the name and number of the collection Transaction Act of 2003 (FACT Act) Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. in the subject line of the message. requires the FDIC to: Issue guidelines Robert E. Feldman, • Mail: Manny Cabeza (202–898– for furnishers regarding the accuracy Executive Secretary. 3767), Counsel, MB–3007, Federal and integrity of the information about [FR Doc. 2019–02173 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th consumers furnished to consumer BILLING CODE 6714–01–P Street NW, Washington, DC 20429. reporting agencies; prescribe regulations • Hand Delivery: Comments may be requiring furnishers to establish hand-delivered to the guard station at reasonable policies/procedures to FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE the rear of the 17th Street Building implement the guidelines; and issue CORPORATION (located on F Street), on business days regulations identifying the between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. circumstances where a furnisher must Agency Information Collection All comments should refer to the reinvestigate a dispute about the Activities: Submission for OMB relevant OMB control number. A copy accuracy of information in a consumer Review; Comment Request (OMB No. of the comments may also be submitted report based on a direct request from a 3064–0093) to the OMB desk officer for the FDIC: consumer. AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Office of Information and Regulatory There is no change in the method or Corporation (FDIC). Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, substance of the collection. The overall ACTION: Notice and request for comment. reduction in burden hours is the result Washington, DC 20503. of economic fluctuation. In particular, SUMMARY: The FDIC, as part of its FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the number of respondents has obligations under the Paperwork Manny Cabeza, Counsel, 202–898–3767, decreased while the hours per response Reduction Act of 1995, invites the [email protected], MB–3007, Federal and frequency of responses have general public and other Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th remained the same. agencies to take this opportunity to Street NW, Washington, DC 20429. Request for Comment: Comments are comment on the renewal of the existing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information collection described below November 23, 2018, the FDIC requested information is necessary for the proper (control Number 3064–0095; 3064– comment for 60 days on a proposal to performance of the FDIC’s functions, 0145). On November 23, 2018, the FDIC renew the information collections including whether the information has requested comment for 60 days on a described below.1 No comments were practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the proposal to renew this information received. The FDIC hereby gives notice estimates of the burden of the collection. No comments were received. of its plan to submit to OMB a request information collection, including the The FDIC hereby gives notice of its plan to approve the renewal of this validity of the methodology and to submit to OMB a request to approve information collection, and again invites assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the renewal of this collection, and again comment on the renewal. the quality, utility, and clarity of the invites comment on the renewal. Proposal to renew the following information to be collected; and (d) DATES: Comments must be submitted on currently approved collection of ways to minimize the burden of the or before March 15, 2019. information: collection of information on ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 1. Title: Notices Required of respondents, including through the use invited to submit written comments to Government Securities Dealers or of automated collection techniques or the FDIC by any of the following Brokers. other forms of information technology. methods: OMB Number: 3064–0093. All comments will become a matter of • https://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/ public record. laws/federal. 1 83 FR 59382 (November 23, 2018).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3777

Form Number: G–FIN; G–FINW; G– Affected Public: Insured state Burden Estimate: FIN4 & G–FIN5. nonmember banks acting as government securities brokers and dealers.

SUMMARY OF ANNUAL BURDEN

Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Information collection description Type of Obligation number of frequency of time per annual burden burden to respond respondents responses response (hours)

Notice by Financial Institutions of Gov- Reporting ...... Mandatory ...... 1 On Occasion .. 1 hour ...... 1 ernment Securities Broker or Govern- ment Securities Dealer Activities (G– FIN). Notice By Financial Institutions of Termi- Reporting ...... Mandatory ...... 1 On Occasion .. 15 minutes ...... 25 nation of Activities as a Government Securities Broker of Government Se- curities Dealer (G–FINW). Disclosure Form for Person Associated Reporting ...... Mandatory ...... 1 On Occasion .. 2 hours ...... 2 with a Financial Institution Securities Broker or Dealer (G–FIN–4). Uniform Termination Notice for Persons Reporting ...... Mandatory ...... 5 On Occasion .. 2 hours ...... 10 Associated With a Financial Institution Government Securities Broker of Dealer (G–FIN–5).

Total Estimated Annual Burden ...... 13.25

General Description of Collection: The information is necessary for the proper agencies to take this opportunity to Government Securities Act of 1986 performance of the FDIC’s functions, comment on the renewal of the existing requires all financial institutions acting including whether the information has information collection described below as government securities brokers and practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the (control Number 3064–0095; 3064– dealers to notify their Federal regulatory estimates of the burden of the 0145). On December 10, 2018, the FDIC agencies of their broker-dealer activities, information collection, including the requested comment for 60 days on a unless exempted from the notice validity of the methodology and proposal to renew this information requirements by Treasury Department assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance collection. No comments were received. regulation. the quality, utility, and clarity of the The FDIC hereby gives notice of its plan The Form G–FIN and Form G–FINW information to be collected; and (d) to submit to OMB a request to approve are used by insured State nonmember ways to minimize the burden of the the renewal of this collection, and again banks that are government securities collection of information on invites comment on the renewal. brokers or dealers to notify the FDIC of respondents, including through the use DATES: Comments must be submitted on their status or that they have ceased to of automated collection techniques or or before March 15, 2019. function as a government securities other forms of information technology. broker or dealer. All comments will become a matter of ADDRESSES: Interested parties are The Form G–FIN–4 is used by public record. invited to submit written comments to associated persons of insured State the FDIC by any of the following Dated at Washington, DC, on February 8, methods: nonmember banks that are government 2019. securities brokers or dealers to provide • Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. https://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/ certain information to the bank and to laws/federal. the FDIC concerning employment, Robert E. Feldman, • Executive Secretary. Email: [email protected]. Include residence, and statutory the name and number of the collection [FR Doc. 2019–02180 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] disqualification. in the subject line of the message. The Form G–FIN–5 is used by insured BILLING CODE 6714–01–P • Mail: Manny Cabeza (202–898– State nonmember banks that are 3767), Counsel, MB–3007, Federal government securities brokers or dealers Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th to notify the FDIC that an associated FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE Street NW, Washington, DC 20429. person is no longer associated with the CORPORATION • government securities broker or dealer Hand Delivery: Comments may be Agency Information Collection function of the bank. hand-delivered to the guard station at There is no change in the method or Activities: Submission for OMB the rear of the 17th Street Building substance of the collection. The overall Review; Comment Request (OMB No. (located on F Street), on business days reduction in burden hours (from 17 3064–0095) between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. hours to 13.25 hours) is the result of AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance All comments should refer to the economic fluctuation. In particular, the Corporation (FDIC). relevant OMB control number. A copy number of respondents has decreased ACTION: Notice and request for comment. of the comments may also be submitted from 17 to 8 while the hours per to the OMB desk officer for the FDIC: response and frequency of responses SUMMARY: The FDIC, as part of its Office of Information and Regulatory have remained the same. obligations under the Paperwork Affairs, Office of Management and Request for Comment: Comments are Reduction Act of 1995, invites the Budget, New Executive Office Building, invited on: (a) Whether the collection of general public and other Federal Washington, DC 20503.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3778 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: described below.1 No comments were 1. Title: Procedures for Monitoring Manny Cabeza, Counsel, 202–898–3767, received. The FDIC hereby gives notice Bank Protection Act Compliance. [email protected], MB–3007, Federal of its plan to submit to OMB a request OMB Number: 3064–0095. Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th to approve the renewal of this Street NW, Washington, DC 20429. information collection, and again invites Form Number: None. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On comment on the renewal. Affected Public: Insured state December 10, 2018, the FDIC requested Proposal to renew the following nonmember banks. comment for 60 days on a proposal to currently approved collection of Burden Estimate: renew the information collections information:

SUMMARY OF ANNUAL BURDEN

Estimated Obligation to Estimated Estimated time per Estimated Information collection description Type of burden respond number of frequency of response annual burden respondents responses (hours) (hours)

Bank Protection Act Compliance Recordkeeping ... Mandatory ...... 3,533 Annually ...... 5 1,766.5 Program.

Estimated Total Annual Burden ...... 1,766.5

General Description of Collection: The decrease of 48.5 hours from the current SUMMARY: The FDIC is extending the collection requires insured state burden estimate of 1,815 hours. public comment period for its request nonmember banks to comply with the Request for Comment: Comments are for information on the FDIC’s deposit Bank Protection Act and to review bank invited on: (a) Whether the collection of insurance application process until security programs The Bank Protection information is necessary for the proper March 31, 2019. Act of 1968 (12 U.S.C. 1881–1884) performance of the FDIC’s functions, DATES: The comment period for the requires each Federal supervisory including whether the information has notice published on December 12, 2018 agency to promulgate rules establishing practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the (83 FR 63868), regarding the request for minimum standards for security devices estimates of the burden of the information on the FDIC’s deposit and procedures to discourage financial information collection, including the insurance application process, is crime and to assist in the identification validity of the methodology and extended from February 11, 2019, to of persons who commit such crimes. To assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance March 31, 2019. avoid the necessity of constantly the quality, utility, and clarity of the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, updating a technology-based regulation, information to be collected; and (d) identified by RIN 3064–ZA03, by any of the FDIC takes a flexible approach to ways to minimize the burden of the the methods identified in the notice.1 collection of information on implementing this statute. It requires Please submit your comments using respondents, including through the use each insured nonmember bank to only one method. of automated collection techniques or designate a security officer who will FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: other forms of information technology. administer a written security program. RMS Contacts: Donald Hamm, Special All comments will become a matter of Advisor, (202) 898–3528, DHamm@ The security program must: (1) Establish public record. procedures for opening and closing for FDIC.gov. business and for safekeeping valuables; Dated at Washington, DC, on February 8, Legal Contacts: Annmarie Boyd, (2) establish procedures that will assist 2019. Counsel, (202) 898–3714, ABoyd@ FDIC.gov; Catherine Topping, Counsel, in identifying persons committing Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. (202) 898–3975, [email protected]; crimes against the bank; (3) provide for Robert E. Feldman, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, initial and periodic training of Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2019–02177 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] 550 17th Street NW, Washington, DC employees in their responsibilities 20429. under the security program; and (4) BILLING CODE 6714–01–P provide for selecting, testing, operating SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On and maintaining security devices as December 12, 2018, the FDIC published prescribed in the regulation. In addition, FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE in the Federal Register a request for the FDIC requires the security officer to CORPORATION information seeking comments from interested parties on all aspects of the report at least annually to the bank’s RIN 3064–ZA03 board of directors on the effectiveness of deposit insurance application process. The request is part of the FDIC’s efforts the security program. Extension of Comment Period for the to enhance transparency, efficiency, and There is no change in the method or Request for Information on the FDIC’s accountability regarding the application substance of the collection. The FDIC Deposit Insurance Application Process process. estimates that the number of AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance The FDIC seeks comments from respondents will decrease due to Corporation (FDIC). interested parties on all aspects of the economic fluctuations from 3,629 to deposit insurance application process, ACTION: Notice and request for 3,533. The annual burden for this including guidance and other issuances, information; extension of comment information collection is estimated to be the steps in the application process, and period. 1,766.5 hours. This represents a communications with applicants, other

1 83 FR 63507 (December 10, 2018). 1 See 83 FR 63868 (December 12, 2018).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3779

interested parties, and the general All comments will be available for feedback from customers and public. In addition to any general inspection at 250 E Street SW, stakeholders on the Agency’s services comments, the FDIC invites comments Washington, DC 20427, Room 7113 will be unavailable. in response to the specific topics and (Reading Room) from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 The Agency will only submit a questions presented in the request for p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding collection for approval under this information. legal holidays. generic clearance if it meets the The extension of the comment period FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For following conditions: will allow interested parties additional • The collections are voluntary; specific questions related to collection • time to prepare comments and provide activities, please contact Jeannette The collections are low-burden for meaningful feedback on the request for Walters-Marquez, 202–606–5488, respondents (based on considerations of information. Accordingly, the comment [email protected]. total burden hours, total number of respondents, or burden-hours per period for the proposal is extended from SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments respondent) and are low-cost for both February 11, 2019, to March 31, 2019. submitted in response to this notice may the respondents and the Federal Dated at Washington, DC, on February 7, be made available to the public through 2019. Government; posting on a government website. For • The collections are non- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. this reason, please do not include in controversial and do not raise issues of Robert E. Feldman, your comments information of a concern to other Federal agencies; Executive Secretary. confidential nature, such as sensitive • Any collection is targeted to the [FR Doc. 2019–02100 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] personal information or proprietary solicitation of opinions from BILLING CODE 6714–01–P information. If you send an email respondents who have experience with comment, your email address will be the program or may have experience automatically captured and included as with the program in the near future; FEDERAL MEDIATION AND part of the comment that is placed in the • Personally identifiable information CONCILIATION SERVICE public docket and made available on the (PII) is collected only to the extent internet. Please note that responses to necessary and is not retained; Agency Information Collection this public comment request containing • Information gathered is used only Activities; Proposed Collection; any routine notice about the internally for general service Comment Request confidentiality of the communication improvement and program management will be treated as public comments that purposes and is not intended for release AGENCY: Federal Mediation and may be made available to the public outside of the agency; Conciliation Service. notwithstanding the inclusion of the • Information gathered is not used for ACTION: Notice and request for routine notice. the purpose of substantially informing comments. The proposed information collection influential policy decisions; and activity provides a means to garner • Information gathered yields SUMMARY: The Federal Mediation and qualitative customer and stakeholder qualitative information; the collections Conciliation Service (FMCS), as part of feedback in an efficient, timely manner, are not designed or expected to yield its continuing effort to reduce in accordance with the Administration’s statistically reliable results or used as paperwork and respondent burden, commitment to improving service though the results are generalizable to invites the general public to take this delivery. By qualitative feedback we the population of study. opportunity to comment on the mean information that provides useful Feedback collected under this generic ‘‘Generic Clearance for the Collection of insights on perceptions and opinions, clearance provides useful information, Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service but are not statistical surveys that yield but it does not yield data that can be Delivery’’ for approval under the quantitative results that can be generalized to the overall population. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This generalized to the population of study. This type of generic clearance for collection was developed as part of a This feedback will provide insights into qualitative information will not be used Federal Government-wide effort to customer or stakeholder perceptions, for quantitative information collections streamline the process for seeking experiences and expectations, provide that are designed to yield reliably feedback from the public on service an early warning of issues with service, actionable results, such as monitoring delivery. This notice announces our or focus attention on areas where trends over time or documenting intent to submit this collection to OMB communication, training or changes in program performance. Such data uses for approval and solicits comments on operations might improve delivery of require more rigorous designs that specific aspects for the proposed products or services. These collections address: The target population to which information collection. will allow for ongoing, collaborative and generalizations will be made, the DATES: Written comments are due by actionable communications between the sampling frame, the sample design April 15, 2019. Agency and its customers and (including stratification and clustering), ADDRESSES: Send comments to: stakeholders. It will also allow feedback the precision requirements or power Jeannette Walters-Marquez, Federal to contribute directly to the calculations that justify the proposed Mediation and Conciliation Service, 250 improvement of program management. sample size, the expected response rate, E Street SW, Washington, DC 20427, The solicitation of feedback will target methods for assessing potential non- telephone and fax (202) 606–5488, or areas such as: Timeliness, response bias, the protocols for data send via email to [email protected]. appropriateness, accuracy of collection, and any testing procedures Comments may also be sent by information, courtesy, efficiency of that were or will be undertaken prior to electronic mail message over the service delivery, and resolution of fielding the study. Depending on the internet via the Federal eRulemaking issues with service delivery. Responses degree of influence the results are likely Portal. See Federal eRulemaking Portal will be assessed to plan and inform to have, such collections may still be website (http://www.regulations.gov) for efforts to improve or maintain the eligible for submission for other generic instructions on providing comments via quality of service offered to the public. mechanisms that are designed to yield the Federal Rulemaking Portal. If this information is not collected, vital quantitative results.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3780 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

As a general matter, information Independence, Missouri, The William C. Governors not later than March 11, collections will not result in any new Esry Family Trust and William C. Esry, 2019. system of records containing privacy Independence, Missouri, individually A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago information and will not ask questions and as trustee, The David Reich Esry (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice of a sensitive nature, such as sexual Family Trust and David R. Esry, Lee’s President) 230 South LaSalle Street, behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, Summit, Missouri, individually, as Chicago, Illinois 60690–1414: and other matters that are commonly custodian, and as trustee, Marcie Esry 1. Greenwoods Financial Group, Inc., considered private. Johnson, Sarasota, Florida, The Carolyn Lake Mills, Wisconsin; to acquire voting Current Action: New collection of Marcile Weir Irrevocable Trust, shares of Fox River Financial information. Independence, Missouri, Weir Farm Corporation and thereby indirectly Type of Review: New collection. LLC, Independence, Missouri, Robert K. acquire Fox River State Bank, both of Affected Public: Individuals and Weir, Independence, Missouri, William Burlington, Wisconsin. Households, Businesses and N. Weir, Blue Springs, Missouri, Susan 2. Waterman Acquisition Group, LLC, Organizations, State, Local or Tribal Weir Carter, Bay Village, Ohio, and Wilmette, Illinois; to become a bank Government. Geoffrey D. Carter, Bay Village, Ohio; to holding company by acquiring voting Below we provide projected average become members of the Reich Family shares of Waterman State Bank, annual estimates: Group and thereby retain shares of Blue Waterman, Illinois. Estimated Number of Annual Ridge Bancshares and its subsidiary, Respondents: 7,000. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Blue Ridge Bank and Trust Company, System, February 8, 2019. Expected Annual Number of both of Independence, Missouri. Activities: 1. Yao-Chin Chao, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Assistant Secretary of the Board. Number of Respondents per Activity: System, February 8, 2019. 1. [FR Doc. 2019–02174 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Yao-Chin Chao, Annual Responses: 7,000. BILLING CODE P Frequency of Response: Once per Assistant Secretary of the Board. request. [FR Doc. 2019–02175 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Average Minutes per Response: 10. BILLING CODE P GENERAL SERVICES Average Expected Annual Burden ADMINISTRATION hours: 1,667. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Dated: February 6, 2019. [Notice–PBS–2019–01; Docket No. 2019– Jeannette Walters-Marquez, Formations of, Acquisitions by, and 0002; Sequence No. 1] Attorney Advisor, Federal Mediation and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies Notice of Availability for the Final Conciliation Service. The companies listed in this notice Environmental Impact Statement for [FR Doc. 2019–01938 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] have applied to the Board for approval, the Otay Mesa Port of Entry, San BILLING CODE 6732–01–P pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Diego, California Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) AGENCY: Public Buildings Service (PBS), (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part General Services Administration (GSA). FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 225), and all other applicable statutes ACTION: Notice of availability. Change in Bank Control Notices; and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or SUMMARY: This notice announces the Bank Holding Company assets or the ownership of, control of, or availability of the Final Environmental the power to vote shares of a bank or Impact Statement (FEIS), which The notificants listed below have bank holding company and all of the examines the potential impacts of a applied under the Change in Bank banks and nonbanking companies proposal by the General Services Control Act (‘‘Act’’) (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) owned by the bank holding company, Administration (GSA) to modernize and and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation including the companies listed below. expand the existing Otay Mesa Land The applications listed below, as well Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of Port of Entry (LPOE) located at the as other related filings required by the a bank or bank holding company. The United States (U.S.)-Mexico border in Board, are available for immediate factors that are considered in acting on the City of San Diego community of inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 Otay Mesa, in San Diego County, indicated. The applications will also be of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). California. The FEIS describes the The notices are available for available for inspection at the offices of reason the project is being proposed, the immediate inspection at the Federal the Board of Governors. Interested alternatives being considered, the Reserve Bank indicated. The notices persons may express their views in potential impacts of each of the also will be available for inspection at writing on the standards enumerated in alternatives on the existing the offices of the Board of Governors. the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the environment, and avoidance, Interested persons may express their proposal also involves the acquisition of minimization, and/or mitigation views in writing to the Reserve Bank a nonbanking company, the review also measures. indicated for that notice or to the offices includes whether the acquisition of the As the lead agency in this of the Board of Governors. Comments nonbanking company complies with the undertaking, GSA is acting on behalf of must be received not later than February standards in section 4 of the BHC Act its major tenant at this facility, the 27, 2019. (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise Department of Homeland Security’s A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas noted, nonbanking activities will be (DHS) Customs and Border Protection City (Dennis Denney, Assistant Vice conducted throughout the United States. President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas Unless otherwise noted, comments (CBP). City, Missouri 64198–0001: regarding each of these applications DATES: The comment period for the FEIS 1. Carroll D. Esry, Sarasota, Florida, must be received at the Reserve Bank ends March 11th, 2019. After this date, The Nancy Marie Esry Irrevocable Trust, indicated or the offices of the Board of GSA will prepare the Record of Decision

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3781

(ROD). A public meeting for the FEIS housed in the Pedestrian, Commercial Manager, 50 United Nations Plaza, 3345 will be held on March 7th, 2019. Import and Commercial Export Mailbox #9, San Francisco, CA 94102. buildings; renovation of existing ADDRESSES: Further information, Next Steps including an electronic copy of the facilities throughout the Otay Mesa FEIS, may be found online on the LPOE; and demolition of facilities that After comments are received from the following website: https://www.gsa.gov/ would no longer be needed would also public and reviewing agencies, GSA about-us/regions/welcome-to-the- occur. New construction would include may 1. Give environmental approval to pacific-rim-region-9/land-ports-of-entry/ commercial import and exit booths, six the Project by signing a ROD no sooner otay-mesa-land-port-of-entry/otay-mesa- additional pedestrian lanes in the than 30 days after the FEIS is issued. In environmental-review. Questions or Pedestrian Building, a Commercial the ROD, GSA will explain all the comments concerning the FEIS should Annex Building (CAB), a return-to- factors that were considered in reaching be directed to: Osmahn Kadri, NEPA Mexico lane for commercial traffic, a its final decision, including the Project Manager, 50 United Nations pedestrian ramp and parking areas for environmental factors. GSA will Plaza, 3345 Mailbox #9, San Francisco, the new commercial lot. Building identify the environmentally preferable CA 94102, or via email to renovations would include the alternative or alternatives and may [email protected]. installation of energy conservation select one of the alternatives or a measures and water conservation combination of alternatives analyzed in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Otay measures across the Otay Mesa LPOE, Mesa LPOE is located approximately 17 the EIS. 2. Undertake additional the correction of deficiencies miles southeast of downtown San Diego, environmental studies, or 3. Abandon throughout existing facilities (e.g., just north of the U.S. border and the the Project. updating security systems, updating Baja California Peninsula of Mexico. If the Project is given environmental HVAC systems, improving lighting and approval and funding is appropriated, When it was constructed in 1983, its repaving old asphalt surfaces), and primary purpose was to divert growing the GSA could design and construct all refurbishing the interiors of the or part of the Project. commercial truck traffic from the Pedestrian, Commercial Import and increasingly busy San Ysidro LPOE to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Commercial Export buildings including Osmahn A. Kadri, NEPA Project the west at the southern terminus of repainting and replacing flooring. Interstate 5. The LPOE handles Manager, General Services The Reduced Build Alternative would Administration at 415–522–3617. Please commercial and privately-owned include many of the same activities as also call this number if special vehicle and pedestrian traffic. Since the under the Preferred Alternative; assistance is needed to attend and LPOE opened, vehicle and pedestrian however, the overall activity level participate in the public meeting. traffic and the population and general would be lower. Notably, no new development in the area have grown. It construction would occur on the 10-acre Dated: February 6, 2019. is now one of the ten busiest land ports GSA-owned plot of land, and the CAB Matthew Jear, in the country and is the busiest would not be constructed; instead, the Director, Portfolio Management Division, commercial port on the California- plot of land would be paved and used Pacific Rim Region, Public Buildings Service. Mexico border, handling the second as additional space for the commercial [FR Doc. 2019–02205 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] highest volume of trucks, and third vehicle inspection booths which would BILLING CODE 6820–YF–P highest dollar volume of trade among all be reconfigured to increase traffic flow. U.S.-Mexico LPOEs. Ever-increasing Renovation of existing facilities would traffic loads and new security initiatives still occur, but activities would be DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE require increased capacity and new limited to updating security and HVAC inspection technology to be installed systems and repainting interiors. GENERAL SERVICES and implemented at the existing The No Action Alternative assumes ADMINISTRATION facilities. that modernization and expansion of the NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND Background existing LPOE would not occur and that a new facility would not be constructed SPACE ADMINISTRATION The Project’s purpose is to improve adjacent to the existing LPOE. The the efficiency, effectiveness, security [OMB Control No. 9000–0107; Docket No. LPOE would continue to operate under 2018–0003; Sequence No. 22] and safety at the existing Otay Mesa current conditions. LPOE. The Project’s need, or the need to Public Meeting Submission for OMB Review; Federal which the GSA is responding, is to Acquisition Regulation Part 23 increase the LPOE’s capacity due to A public meeting for the FEIS will be Requirements increased demand, and to address held on Thursday, March 7th from 4 to public and employee safety and border 6 p.m. at: Holiday Inn Express and AGENCY: Department of Defense (DOD), security concerns. Suites San Diego, 2296 Niels Bohr General Services Administration (GSA), The FEIS considers two ‘‘action’’ Court, San Diego, CA 92154, 619–710– and National Aeronautics and Space alternatives and one ‘‘no action’’ 0900. Administration (NASA). alternative. The Preferred Alternative The meeting will be conducted in an ACTION: Notice. would include the development of an open house format, where project approximately 10-acre GSA-owned plot information will be presented and SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the of land to the immediate east of the distributed. Interested parties are Paperwork Reduction Act, the existing commercial import lot. The encouraged to attend and provide Regulatory Secretariat Division will be new lot would be used to construct written comments on the FEIS. submitting to the Office of Management commercial inspection buildings and Comments must be received by March and Budget (OMB) a request to review additional commercial import lanes. 11th, 2019 and emailed to and approve an extension of a Improvements to existing pedestrian [email protected] or sent to: previously approved information lanes and personal vehicle inspection General Services Administration, collection requirement regarding FAR lanes; relocation of personnel currently Attention: Osmahn Kadri, NEPA Project part 23 requirements.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3782 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

DATES: Submit comments on or before Biobased Products Under Service and insight into operations, spurs March 15, 2019. Construction Contracts. innovation, and helps identify ADDRESSES: Submit comments regarding This information collection opportunities for efficiency and savings, this burden estimate or any other aspect requirement pertains to information that outcomes which can translate into both of this collection of information, a contractor must submit in response to environmental and financial benefits. including suggestions for reducing this a number of requirements from FAR Executive Order (E.O.) 13693, Planning burden to: Office of Information and Part 23, which are as follows: for Federal Sustainability in the Next 1. Notice of Radioactive Materials. Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention: Decade, March 25, 2015, serves as the The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, (42 Desk Officer for GSA, Room 10236, legal underpinning for this collection of U.S.C. 2011), as amended, establishes NEOB, Washington, DC 20503. information, as it prescribes the requirements for protecting radioactive continuation of the Federal policy that Additionally submit a copy to GSA by materials. The requirements of this Act any of the following methods: agencies shall increase their efficiency are implemented in the FAR at clause and improve their environmental • Federal eRulemaking Portal: This 52.223–7, Notice of Radioactive performance, including the reduction of website provides the ability to type Materials. This clause requires greenhouse gas emissions across Federal short comments directly into the contractors to notify the Government operations and the Federal supply chain comment field or attach a file for prior to delivery of items containing (e.g., Federal contractors). lengthier comments. Go to http:// radioactive materials. 5. Pollution Prevention and Right-to- www.regulations.gov and follow the 2. Drug-Free Workplace. As mandated Know Information. The Emergency instructions on the site. in Public Law 100–690, the Drug-Free Planning and Community Right-to- • Mail: General Services Workplace Act of 1988, and as enacted Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA) (42 U.S.C. Administration, Regulatory Secretariat in Public Law 111–350, which 11001–11050) and the Pollution Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW, recodifies Title 41—Public Contracts of Prevention Act of 1990 (PPA) (42 U.S.C. Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. the United States Code: (1) Government 13101–13109), require that Federal Mandell/IC 9000–0107, Federal contractor employees are required to facilities maintain reports on hazardous Acquisition Regulation Part 23 notify their employer of any criminal materials and toxic chemicals and Requirements. drug statute conviction for a violation pollution prevention efforts. In keeping Instructions: Please submit comments occurring in the workplace; and (2) with these mandates, FAR clause only and cite Information Collection Government contractors, after receiving 52.223–5, Pollution Prevention and 9000–0107, Federal Acquisition notice of such conviction, must notify Right-to-Know Information, requires Regulation Part 23 Requirements, in all the Government contracting officer. FAR Federal contractors performing at a correspondence related to this clause 52.223–6, Drug-Free Workplace, Federal facility to provide sufficient collection. Comments received generally implements the Act. information to the Government to will be posted without change to http:// 3. High Global Warming Potential ensure that the facility is compliant www.regulations.gov, including any Hydrofluorocarbons. FAR clauses with the PPA and EPCRA. This personal and/or business confidential 52.223–11, Ozone-Depleting Substances, information pertains to the Toxic information provided. To confirm and 52.223–12, Refrigeration Equipment Release Inventory and PPA reports; receipt of your comment(s), please and Air Conditioners, address high other reports required by the EPCRA; check www.regulations.gov, global warming potential (GWP) implementation of Environmental approximately two to three days after hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). For Management Systems; and completion submission to verify posting (except equipment and appliances that normally of Facility Compliance Audits. allow 30 days for posting of comments contain 50 or more pounds of HFCs or 6. Environmentally Sound Products. submitted by mail). HFC blends, the clauses include Section 6002 of the Resource FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. requirements to track by type, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Mahruba Uddowla, Procurement equipment/application, contract, Public Law 94–580, (42 U.S.C. 6962), Analyst, at telephone 703–605–2868, or agency, and location, the amount in requires Federal agencies to develop email [email protected]. pounds of HFCs or HFC blends— affirmative procurement programs to i. Contained in such equipment and ensure that items composed of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: appliances delivered to the Government; recovered materials will be purchased to A. Purpose or the maximum extent practicable. Each ii. Added or taken out of such agency’s affirmative procurement This information collection equipment and appliances that will be program must provide estimates of the requirement, OMB Control No. 9000– maintained, repaired, or disposed under total percentage of recovered materials 0107, currently titled ‘‘Notice of the contract. used in the performance of a contract, Radioactive Materials,’’ is proposed to The contractor is required to report certification of minimum recovered be retitled ‘‘Federal Acquisition the HFC information annually to a material content actually used, where Regulation Part 23 Requirements’’ due centralized Government website. appropriate, and reasonable verification to consolidation with currently 4. Public Disclosure of Greenhouse procedures for estimates and approved information collection Gas Emissions and Reduction Goals— certifications. The minimum recovered requirements OMB Control No. 9000– Representation. FAR provision 52.223– material content standards are 0101, Drug-Free Workplace; 9000–0191, 22 contains an annual representation for designated by the Environmental High Global Warming Potential vendors to indicate if and where they Protection Agency (EPA). These Hydrofluorocarbons; 9000–0194, Public publicly disclose greenhouse gas standards are grouped into eight Disclosure of Greenhouse Gas Emissions emissions and greenhouse gas reduction categories— and Reduction Goals—Representation; goals or targets. Public disclosure of (i) Construction products; 9000–0147, Pollution Prevention and greenhouse gas emission management is (ii) Landscaping products; Right-to-Know Information; 9000–0134, increasingly becoming standard practice (iii) Non-paper paper office supplies; Environmentally Sound Products; and in many industries, because an (iv) Paper and paper products; 9000–0180, Affirmative Procurement of inventory of this information provides (v) Park and recreation products;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3783

(vi) Transportation products; The commenter stated this request is a Services Administration, Regulatory (vii) Vehicular products; and public right to petition for the issuance, Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F (viii) Miscellaneous products. amendment, or repeal of a rule under Street NW, Washington, DC 20405, FAR clause 52.223–9, Estimate of the Administrative Procedures Act, telephone 202–501–4755. Please cite Percentage of Recovered Material codified in 5 U.S.C. 553(e). OMB Control No. 9000–0107, Federal Content for EPA-Designated Items, was Response: These comments are out of Acquisition Regulation Part 23 created to assist agencies with scope because they did not express an Requirements, in all correspondence. compliance with section 6002. Clause opinion on whether the stated number Dated: February 7, 2019. 52.223–9 requires a contractor, on of burden hours is accurate for what completion of the contract that is for or Janet Fry, they believe to be the actual number of Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, specifies the use of EPA-designated hours an offeror/contractor expend to items containing recovered materials, to Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, comply with the FAR part 23 Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of (a) estimate the percentage of the total requirements. Governmentwide Policy. recovered material content delivered or [FR Doc. 2019–02131 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] used in performance of the contract, C. Annual Reporting Burden BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P including, if applicable, the percentage 1. Notice of Radioactive Materials. of post-consumer material content and Respondents: 500. (b) submit an estimate to the contracting Responses per Respondent: 5. GENERAL SERVICES agency. Total Annual Responses: 2,500. ADMINISTRATION Although section 6002 requires that Hours per Response: 1. agencies develop these estimates Total Burden Hours: 2,500. [Notice–MA–2019–01; Docket No. 2019– whenever an acquisition sets forth 2. Drug-Free Workplace. 0001, Sequence No. 3] minimum percentages of recovered Respondents: 205. Federal Travel Regulation: materials, when the price of the item Responses per Respondent: 1. Reimbursement of Fees for exceeds $10,000, or when the aggregate Total Annual Responses: 205. Nonconventional Lodging amount paid for the item or functionally Hours per Response: 0.5. equivalent items in the preceding fiscal Total Burden Hours: 102.5. AGENCY: Office of Government-wide year was $10,000 or more, the clause at 3. High Global Warming Potential Policy (OGP), General Services 52.223–9 is only used in solicitations Hydrofluorocarbons. Administration (GSA). and contracts exceeding $150,000. Respondents: 2,337. ACTION: Notice of Federal Travel Acquisitions of commercially available Responses per Respondent: 1. Regulation (FTR) Bulletin 19–04, off-the-shelf (COTS) items are excluded Total Annual Responses: 2,337. Reimbursement of fees for conventional from this requirement. Hours per Response: 8. and nonconventional lodging. 7. Affirmative Procurement of Total Burden Hours: 18,696. Biobased Products Under Service and 4. Public Disclosure of Greenhouse SUMMARY: Per the Federal Travel Construction Contracts. FAR clause Gas Emissions and Reduction Goals— Regulation (FTR), agencies may 52.223–2, Affirmative Procurement of Representation. reimburse employees for the use of Biobased Products Under Service and Respondents: 7,740. nonconventional lodging ‘‘when there Construction Contracts, requires prime Responses per Respondent: 1. are no conventional lodging facilities in contractors to report annually the Total Annual Responses: 7,740. the area (e.g., in remote areas) or when product types and dollar values of U.S. Hours per Response: 0.25. conventional facilities are in short Department of Agriculture (USDA)- Total Burden Hours: 1,935. supply.’’ As the use of nonconventional designated biobased products 5. Pollution Prevention and Right-to- lodging amongst Federal travelers has purchased. The information reported by Know Information. grown, so have questions about the prime contractors enables Federal Respondents: 3,148. associated fees agencies may reimburse. agencies to report annually to the Office Total Annual Responses: 4,713. FTR Bulletin 19–04 clarifies what fees of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) Hours per Response: 3.9622. agencies may reimburse when concerning actions taken to implement Total Burden Hours: 18,674. employees use either conventional or and measure progress in carrying out 6. Environmentally Sound Products. nonconventional lodging while on the preference for biobased products Respondents: 585. official temporary duty (TDY) travel. required under section 9002 of the Farm Responses per Respondent: 1. This Bulletin is located at www.gsa.gov/ Security and Rural Investment Act of Total Annual Responses: 585. ftr under the ‘‘FTR & Related Files’’ tab. 2002, codified at 7 U.S.C. 8102. Hours per Response: 0.5. DATES: Applicable date: February 13, Total Burden Hours: 292.5. 2019. B. Public Comment 7. Affirmative Procurement of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For A 60-day notice published in the Biobased Products Under Service and clarification of content, please contact Federal Register at 83 FR 51462 on Construction Contracts. Jill Denning, Program Analyst, Office of October 11, 2018. Two comments were Respondents: 29,612. Government-wide Policy, Office of received; however, they did not change Responses per Respondent: 5. Asset and Transportation Management, the estimate of the burden. Total Annual Responses: 148,060. at 202–208–7642, or by email at Comment 1: The commenter is Hours per Response: 5. [email protected]. Please cite Notice concerned with potential changes to Total Burden Hours: 740,300. of FTR Bulletin 19–04. regulations concerning HFCs. 8. Summary. Comment 2: The commenter asked the Respondents: 44,127. Dated: February 7, 2019. General Services Administration to Total Annual Responses: 166,140. Jessica Salmoiraghi, implement a rule requiring all federal Total Burden Hours: 782,520. Associate Administrator, Office of facilities under their management to Obtaining Copies: Requesters may Government-wide Policy. procure 100% of their electricity needs obtain a copy of the information [FR Doc. 2019–02138 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] from carbon-neutral sources by 2035. collection documents from the General BILLING CODE 6820–14–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3784 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Dated: February 7, 2019. Kevin Funk, Procurement Analyst, at Janet Fry, GENERAL SERVICES telephone 202–357–5805, or email Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, ADMINISTRATION [email protected]. Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND Governmentwide Policy. SPACE ADMINISTRATION A. Purpose [FR Doc. 2019–02130 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] [OMB Control No. 9000–0059; Docket No. The Federal Acquisition Regulation BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P 2018–0003; Sequence No. 23] (FAR) clause at 52.229–2, North Carolina State and Local Sales and Use Submission for OMB Review; North Tax, requires contractors for Carolina Sales Tax Certification construction or vessel repair to be DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND AGENCY: Department of Defense (DOD), performed in North Carolina to provide HUMAN SERVICES General Services Administration (GSA), certified statements setting forth the cost and National Aeronautics and Space of the property purchased from each Centers for Disease Control and Administration (NASA). vendor and the amount of sales or use Prevention taxes paid. ACTION: Notice. The North Carolina Sales and Use Tax Notice of Closed Meeting SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Act authorizes counties and Paperwork Reduction Act, the incorporated cities and towns, to obtain Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Regulatory Secretariat Division will be each year from the Commissioner of Federal Advisory Committee Act, as submitting to the Office of Management Revenue of the State of North Carolina, amended, notice is hereby given of the and Budget (OMB) a request to review a refund of sales and use taxes following meeting. and approve an existing OMB indirectly paid on building materials, The meeting will be closed to the emergency clearance notice concerning supplies, fixtures, and equipment that public in accordance with the North Carolina sales tax certification. become a part of or are annexed to any provisions set forth in sections DATES: Submit comments on or before building or structure in North Carolina. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., March 15, 2019. However, to substantiate a refund claim as amended, and the Determination of ADDRESSES: Submit comments regarding for sales or use taxes paid on purchases the Chief Operating Officer, CDC, this burden estimate or any other aspect of building materials, supplies, fixtures, pursuant to Public Law 92–463. The of this collection of information, or equipment by a contractor, the grant applications and the discussions Government must secure from the including suggestions for reducing this could disclose confidential trade secrets contractor certified statements setting burden to: Office of Information and or commercial property such as forth the cost of the property purchased Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention: patentable material, and personal Desk Officer for GSA, Room 10236, from each vendor and the amount of sales or use taxes paid. Similar certified information concerning individuals NEOB, Washington, DC 20503. associated with the grant applications, Additionally submit a copy to GSA by statements by subcontractors must be obtained by the general contractor and the disclosure of which would any of the following methods: constitute a clearly unwarranted • Federal eRulemaking Portal: This furnished to the Government. invasion of personal privacy. website provides the ability to type B. Public Comment short comments directly into the Name of Committee: Disease, Disability, comment field or attach a file for A 60-day notice published in the and Injury Prevention and Control Special lengthier comments. Go to http:// Federal Register at 83 FR 51953 on Emphasis Panel (SEP)—RFA–OH–19–001, www.regulations.gov and follow the October 15, 2018. No comments were Occupational Safety and Health National instructions on the site. received. Center for Construction Safety and Health • Research and Translation. Mail: General Services C. Annual Reporting Burden Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Dates: May 14, 2019 and May 15, 2019. Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW, The Federal Procurement Data System Time: 6:00 p.m.–7:00 p.m. EDT and 8:30 Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. (FPDS) for 2017 was used to develop the a.m.–5:00 p.m. EDT. Mandell/IC 9000–0059, North Carolina estimated burden hours as shown Place: Hilton Embassy Suites, 1900 Sales Tax Certification. below: Diagonal Road, Alexandria, Virginia 22314, Instructions: Please submit comments Respondents: 377. (703) 684–5900. only and cite Information Collection Responses per Respondent: 1. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 9000–0059, North Carolina Sales Tax applications. Total Annual Responses: 377. Certification, in all correspondence For Further Information Contact: Michael related to this collection. Comments Hours per Response: 1.25. Goldcamp, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, received generally will be posted Total Burden Hours: 471. Office of Extramural Programs, CDC, 1095 without change to http:// Obtaining Copies: Requesters may Willowdale Road, Morgantown, West www.regulations.gov, including any obtain a copy of the information Virginia 26505, (304) 285–5951; personal and/or business confidential collection documents from the General [email protected]. information provided. To confirm Services Administration, Regulatory The Chief Operating Officer, Centers for receipt of your comment(s), please Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Disease Control and Prevention, has been check www.regulations.gov, Street NW, Washington, DC 20405, delegated the authority to sign Federal approximately two to three days after telephone 202–501–4755. Please cite Register notices pertaining to submission to verify posting (except OMB Control No. 9000–0059, North announcements of meetings and other allow 30 days for posting of comments Carolina Sales Tax Certification, in all committee management activities, for both submitted by mail). correspondence. the Centers for Disease Control and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3785

Prevention and the Agency for Toxic DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Substances and Disease Registry. HUMAN SERVICES HUMAN SERVICES Sherri Berger, Food and Drug Administration Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Centers for Disease Control and Control and Prevention. Prevention [Docket No. FDA–2015–N–0126] [FR Doc. 2019–02165 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Notice of Closed Meeting BILLING CODE 4163–18–P Authorization of Emergency Use of an In Vitro Diagnostic Device for Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Detection of Ebola virus; Availability Federal Advisory Committee Act, as DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HUMAN SERVICES amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting. HHS. ACTION: Notice. Centers for Disease Control and The meeting will be closed to the Prevention public in accordance with the SUMMARY: The Food and Drug provisions set forth in sections Disease, Disability, and Injury Administration (FDA) is announcing the 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Prevention and Control Special issuance of an Emergency Use Emphasis Panel (SEP)—Funding as amended, and Determination of the Authorization (EUA) (the Authorization) Opportunity Announcement (FOA), Chief Operating Officer, Centers for for an in vitro diagnostic device for PAR 16–098, Cooperative Research Disease Control and Prevention, detection of Ebola virus (species Zaire Agreements to the World Trade Center pursuant to Public Law 92–463. The ebolavirus and hereafter referred to as Health Program (U01); Amended grant applications and the discussions Ebola virus) in response to the Ebola Notice of Meeting could disclose confidential trade secrets virus outbreak in the Democratic or commercial property such as Republic of the Congo. FDA issued this Notice is hereby given of a change in patentable material, and personal Authorization under the Federal Food, the meeting of the Disease, Disability, information concerning individuals Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act), and Injury Prevention and Control associated with the grant applications, as requested by Chembio Diagnostic Special Emphasis Panel (SEP)— the disclosure of which would Systems, Inc. The Authorization Funding Opportunity Announcement constitute a clearly unwarranted contains, among other things, (FOA), PAR 16–098, Cooperative invasion of personal privacy. conditions on the emergency use of the Research Agreements to the World authorized in vitro diagnostic device. Trade Center Health Program (U01); Name of Committee: Disease, Disability, The Authorization follows the and Injury Prevention and Control Special Dates and Times: March 27, 2019, 8:00 September 22, 2006, determination by Emphasis Panel (SEP)—SIP19–004, Cancer a.m.–5:00 p.m., EDT and March 28, then-Secretary of the Department of Prevention and Control Research Network 2019, 8:00 a.m.–12:00 p.m., EDT. Homeland Security (DHS), Michael Coordinating Center and SIP19–005, Cancer Hampton Inn & Suites Atlanta Chertoff, that the Ebola virus presents a Prevention and Control Research Network Buckhead, 3312 Piedmont Road, material threat against the U.S. Collaborating Center. population sufficient to affect national Atlanta, Georgia 30305, which was Dates: April 30, 2019–May 1, 2019. published in the Federal Register on security. On the basis of such Times: 10:00 a.m.–6:30 p.m., EDT. determination, the Secretary of Health January 31, 2019, Volume 84, Number Place: Teleconference. 21, pages 730. and Human Services (HHS) declared on Agenda: To review and evaluate grant August 5, 2014, that circumstances exist The meeting is being amended to applications. justifying the authorization of Atlanta Marriott Buckhead Hotel & For Further Information Contact: Jaya emergency use of in vitro diagnostic Conference Center, 3405 Lenox Road Raman Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, CDC, devices for detection of Ebola virus, NE, Atlanta, GA 30326, Telephone: 4770 Buford Highway, Mailstop F80, Atlanta, subject to the terms of any authorization (404) 261–9250. The meeting is closed Georgia 30341, Telephone: (770) 488–6511, issued under the FD&C Act. The to the public. [email protected]. Authorization, which includes an For Further Information Contact: Nina The Chief Operating Officer, Centers for explanation of the reasons for issuance, Turner, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Disease Control and Prevention, has been is reprinted in this document. CDC/NIOSH, 1095 Willowdale Road, delegated the authority to sign Federal DATES: The Authorization is effective as Register notices pertaining to Mailstop L1055, Morgantown, West of November 9, 2018. Virginia 26505, Telephone: (304) 285– announcements of meetings and other ADDRESSES: 5975, [email protected]. committee management activities, for both Submit written requests for the Centers for Disease Control and single copies of the EUA to the Office The Chief Operating Officer, Centers of Counterterrorism and Emerging for Disease Control and Prevention, has Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Threats, Food and Drug Administration, been delegated the authority to sign 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 1, Federal Register notices pertaining to Sherri Berger, rm. 4338, Silver Spring, MD 20993– announcements of meetings and other Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease 0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive committee management activities, for Control and Prevention. label to assist that office in processing both the Centers for Disease Control and [FR Doc. 2019–02172 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] your request or include a fax number to Prevention and the Agency for Toxic BILLING CODE 4163–18–P which the Authorization may be sent. Substances and Disease Registry. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Sherri Berger, section for electronic access to the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Authorization. Control and Prevention. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 2019–02164 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Michael Mair, Office of BILLING CODE 4163–18–P Counterterrorism and Emerging Threats,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3786 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

Food and Drug Administration, 10903 significant potential to affect, national product authorized under section 564, New Hampshire Ave. Bldg. 1, rm. 4340, security or the health and security of approved or cleared under the FD&C Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002, 301– U.S. citizens living abroad, and that Act, or licensed under section 351 of the 796–8510 (this is not a toll-free involves a biological, chemical, PHS Act, for diagnosing, treating, or number). radiological, or nuclear agent or agents, preventing such a disease or condition or a disease or condition that may be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: caused by such an agent and (B) the attributable to such agent or agents; or known and potential benefits of the I. Background (4) the identification of a material threat product, when used to diagnose, Section 564 of the FD&C Act (21 by the Secretary of Homeland Security prevent, or treat such disease or U.S.C. 360bbb-3) as amended by the under section 319F–2 of the Public condition, outweigh the known and Project BioShield Act of 2004 (Pub. L. Health Service (PHS) Act (42 U.S.C. potential risks of the product, taking 108–276) and the Pandemic and All- 247d-6b) sufficient to affect national into consideration the material threat Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization security or the health and security of posed by the agent or agents identified Act of 2013 (Pub. L. 113–5), allows FDA U.S. citizens living abroad. in a declaration under section Once the Secretary of HHS has to strengthen the public health 564(b)(1)(D) of the FD&C Act, if declared that circumstances exist protections against biological, chemical, applicable; (3) that there is no adequate, justifying an authorization under nuclear, and radiological agents. Among approved, and available alternative to section 564 of the FD&C Act, FDA may the product for diagnosing, preventing, other things, section 564 of the FD&C authorize the emergency use of a drug, Act allows FDA to authorize the use of or treating such disease or condition; (4) device, or biological product if the in the case of a determination described an unapproved medical product or an Agency concludes that the statutory unapproved use of an approved medical in section 564(b)(1)(B)(ii), that the criteria are satisfied. Under section request for emergency use is made by product in certain situations. With this 564(h)(1) of the FD&C Act, FDA is EUA authority, FDA can help assure the Secretary of Defense; and (5) that required to publish in the Federal such other criteria as may be prescribed that medical countermeasures may be Register a notice of each authorization, used in emergencies to diagnose, treat, by regulation are satisfied. and each termination or revocation of an No other criteria for issuance have or prevent serious or life-threatening authorization, and an explanation of the diseases or conditions caused by been prescribed by regulation under reasons for the action. Section 564 of the section 564(c)(4) of the FD&C Act. biological, chemical, nuclear, or FD&C Act permits FDA to authorize the radiological agents when there are no Because the statute is self-executing, introduction into interstate commerce of regulations or guidance are not required adequate, approved, and available a drug, device, or biological product alternatives. for FDA to implement the EUA intended for use when the Secretary of authority. Section 564(b)(1) of the FD&C Act HHS has declared that circumstances provides that, before an EUA may be exist justifying the authorization of II. EUA Request for an In Vitro issued, the Secretary of HHS must emergency use. Products appropriate for Diagnostic Device for Detection of the declare that circumstances exist emergency use may include products Ebola Zaire Virus justifying the authorization based on and uses that are not approved, cleared, one of the following grounds: (1) A On September 22, 2006, then- or licensed under sections 505, 510(k), Secretary of DHS, Michael Chertoff, determination by the Secretary of 512 or 515 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. Homeland Security that there is a determined that the Ebola virus presents 355, 360(k), 360b and 360e) or section a material threat against the U.S. domestic emergency, or a significant 351 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262), or potential for a domestic emergency, population sufficient to affect national conditionally approved under section 3 involving a heightened risk of attack security. On August 5, 2014, under 571 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360ccc). section 564(b)(1) of the FD&C Act and with a biological, chemical, radiological, FDA may issue an EUA only if, after or nuclear agent or agents; (2) a on the basis of such determination, the consultation with the HHS Assistant Secretary of HHS declared that determination by the Secretary of Secretary for Preparedness and Defense that there is a military circumstances exist justifying the Response, the Director of the National authorization of emergency use of in emergency, or a significant potential for Institutes of Health, and the Director of a military emergency, involving a vitro diagnostic devices for detection of the Centers for Disease Control and Ebola virus, subject to the terms of any heightened risk to U.S. military forces, Prevention (to the extent feasible and including personnel operating under the authorization issued under section 564 appropriate given the applicable of the FD&C Act. Notice of the authority of title 10 or title 50, United circumstances), FDA 2 concludes: (1) States Code, of attack with (i) a declaration of the Secretary was That an agent referred to in a published in the Federal Register on biological, chemical, radiological, or declaration of emergency or threat can nuclear agent or agents; or (ii) an agent August 12, 2014 (79 FR 47141). On cause a serious or life-threatening November 5, 2018, Chembio Diagnostic or agents that may cause, or are disease or condition; (2) that, based on otherwise associated with, an Systems, Inc. submitted a complete the totality of scientific evidence request for, and on November 9, 2018, imminently life-threatening and specific available to FDA, including data from 1 FDA issued, an EUA for the DPP Ebola risk to U.S. military forces ; (3) a adequate and well-controlled clinical determination by the Secretary of HHS Antigen System, subject to the terms of trials, if available, it is reasonable to the Authorization. that there is a public health emergency, believe that: (A) The product may be or a significant potential for a public effective in diagnosing, treating, or 3 Under section 564(b)(1) of the FD&C Act, the health emergency, that affects, or has a preventing (i) such disease or condition HHS Secretary’s declaration that supports the EUA or (ii) a serious or life-threatening issuance must be based on one of four 1 In the case of a determination by the Secretary determinations, including the identification by the of Defense, the Secretary of HHS shall determine disease or condition caused by a DHS Secretary of a material threat under section within 45 calendar days of such determination, 319F–2 of the PHS Act sufficient to affect national whether to make a declaration under section 2 The Secretary of HHS has delegated the security or the health and security of U.S. citizens 564(b)(1) of the FD&C Act, and, if appropriate, shall authority to issue an EUA under section 564 of the living abroad (section 564(b)(1)(D) of the FD&C promptly make such a declaration. FD&C Act to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs. Act).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3787

III. Electronic Access IV. The Authorization terms of the Authorization. The Authorization in its entirety (not An electronic version of this Having concluded that the criteria for including the authorized versions of the document and the full text of the issuance of the Authorization under fact sheets and other written materials) Authorization are available on the section 564(c) of the FD&C Act are met, follows and provides an explanation of internet at https://www.regulations.gov. FDA has authorized the emergency use the reasons for its issuance, as required of an in vitro diagnostic device for by section 564(h)(1) of the FD&C Act. detection of Ebola virus subject to the BILLING CODE 4164–01–P

November 9, 2018

Thomas D. Vice President, Clinical and Ke!~Ui

Dear .Mr.

respoJr~se to your request that the Food and Administration for use of Chembio Ul

Sej)telnbc~r22, 2006, ofthe of Homeland St>r:nrt1tv Chertoff, detennined, pursuant to section 31 9F-2 ofthe Public Health U.S.C. § that the Ebola virus presents a material threat popullatlon sufficient to affect national 4 Pursuant to section

it not cross-react other Eb<:>ICJ1c•in,rs of reference, this lener will refer to "l.ilmr"t"rie~ of such testing treatment centers and Pursuant to section of the Act {2 I supports EllA issuance must based on one Secretary of a materia! threat pursuant to section 3 I 9F-2 of the PHS Act security or the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES EN13FE19.002 3788 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

Inc.

U.S.C § and on the basis of such determination, the Set~retRrv n""'"rtm.,.nt of Health and Human Services declared on 5, circumstances vitro Otagnc>Sti•cs detection ofEbola of the Act (21 U .S.C. § ->vvuvv·->

concluded that the criteria for issuance of this authorization under section of the U.S. C. § are met, f am the emergency use of the DPP Ebola (as described in the section ofthis letter II)) in individuals with and with risk factors described in for the pre:surnptive detection of Ebola virus.

I. Criteria for Issuance of Autboriz~tion

I have concluded that the emergenc:y detection ofEbola an authorization under section

l. The Ebola virus can cause EVD, a serious or humans infected with this virus;

2. it is reasonable to believe otagmJsu!g EVD, and that the for EVD,

3. There is no ad1:quate, an,nm.ve,rl and available alternative to the emergency use of the DPP Ebo!a for EVD.

Il. of Authorization

I have concluded, of this authorization is limited to the use laboratories and facilities for the detection of Ebola virus in individuals with and symptoms of EVD in risk factors. The DPP Ebola is intended for circumstances when use Ebola virus test is determined to be more than use of an Ebola virus nucleic acid test, which has been demonstrated to be more sensitive in the Ebola virus. The DPP Ebola is not intended for

health and security of United States citbroens living abroad {section 'U.S. of Health and Human Services. Declaration Reg:ara'ingErmtrg~:ncy Virus. 79 Fed. Reg. 47141 !2, have been regulation under section564(c)(4) of !he Act.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES EN13FE19.003 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3789

3-Mr.

use for of individuals without

The Authorized DPP Eboia

area functionalized the Chembio DPP Micro Reader, or other authorized mstruments, the of the CONTROL area and area vo:sulon; and reports a reactive, nm1re:actiive. value for the TEST area.

The DPP Ebola other authorized materials:

The DPP Ebola authorized control materials and m~m•1m""'" used in with the DPP Ebola

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES EN13FE19.004 3790 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

"' The DPP Ebola Test Control Pack: contains the DPP Ebola Reactive Ebola Non-Reactive Control and insert. The assay controls are used to and assess the assay the user's to the test and to the results. "' The DPP Micro Reader: contains the Chembio DPP Micro Reader with Ebola RF!D 3 type CR2032 coin cell custom DPP Holder, microfiber and DPP

reaui11~m(:nts should be followed in conformance with state, and federal rcg,wauuJ.I:> or accreditation reouir1•me,nts and the user standard control

also the use of additional materials and"""'""'" cornmonllv used clinical laboratories and that are described in the i!11fhn•ri,.,.,.l Instructions for Use.

The above described DPP Ehola is authorized to be the follov.·irur information "",.;,;,,;," emergency use, which is authorized to be made available to healthcare """'vld!,.ro

" Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers: DPP Ebola • Fact Sheet for Patients: DPP Ebola

As described in Section IV Chembio is also authorized to make available additional information to the emergency use of the authorized DPP Ebola that is consistent and does not exceed, the terms of this letter

I have concluded, pursuant to section of the Act, that it is reasonable to believe that the known and benefits of the ""1·hn•ri7•>rl DPP Ebola in the spe:cified notml~ttlon. when used for ore~urmn1vt: detection ofVP40 virus and used "'v"'~'~'''" of Authorization of this letter the known and ,..,.,,.,.,,,;,! risks of such a

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES EN13FE19.005 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3791

5-Mr. lnc.

I have concluded, pursuant to section ofthe Act, based on the of scientific evidence available to FDA, that it is reasonable to believe that the authorized DPP Ebola be effective in the when used with the Autho,riz:ati

the information the authorized "~''"""'""" OO!Jut

The emergency use of the authorized DPP Ebola

consistent and may not the terms of this !ett'Cr, ...... 15 Authorization !I) and the Conditions of Authorization to the terms of this EUA and under the circumstances set forth in the of OHS's determination described above and the ofl-[HS's declaration under section the OPP Ebola described above is to EVO in individuals with and symptoms ofEVO in with risk factors.

This EUA will cease to be effective when the HHS declaration that circumstances exist to the EUA is terminated under section of the Act or when the EUA is revoked under section of the Act.

I am the tollo~rim:• r<'Afmncnu""' for the DPP Ebola the duration of this EUA: ..

IV. Conditions of Authorization

Pursuant to section 564 of the Act, I am the conditions on this authorization:

A.

B. Chembio and its authorized >Viii distribute the authori.zed DPP Ebola

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES EN13FE19.006 3792 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

C. Chembio and its authorized di~,tril)ntorf~1 to authorized laboratories and facilities the authorized DPP Ebola Fact Sheet tor Healthcare Providers and the authorized DPP Ebola Fact Sheet for Patients.

D. Chembio and its authorized di

E. Chembio and its authorized will inform authorized laboratories and facilities and relevant health mllm,.·nv• of this EUA, the terms and conditions herein.

F. Chembio and its authorized will ensure that authorized laboratories and facilities the authorized DPP Ebola have a for ..,...,.,,,..;.,,.test results to healthcare as

G. a process maintain records of device usage.

H. Chembio and its authorized will collect information on the perrormance of the assay. Chembio will report to FDA any suspec:ted and false results and deviations the established ,..,,form~,.,.," chara.cteris;tics of the assay of which Chembio becomes aware.

L Chembio and its authorized are authorized to make available additional to the emergency use of the authorized DPP Ebola COJi1si:steJttt with, and does not exceed, the terms of this letter of

J. Chembio and its authorized will make available the DPP Ebola Test Control Pack or other authorized control materials for as the DPP Ebola

Chembio

authorized

L Chembiowill

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES EN13FE19.007 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3793

7-Mr.

communicate to its authorized be made to this EUA and its authorized ac<:on1P2UiVin

M. Chembio may request to the authorized DPP Ebola Sheet for Healthcare Providers and the authorized DPP Ebola Fact Sheet for Patients. Such requests will be made Chembio in consultation with, and concurrence of. DMD/OIR!CDRH.

N. Chembio may request the addition of other instruments for use with the authorized DPP Ebo.!a Such requests will be made Chembio in consultation and DMD/OIR!CDRH.

0. Chembio may request the addition of other'""""''"·' reagents for use with the authorized DPP Ebo!a Such will be made by Chembio in consultation and

P. Chembio may request the addition of other types for use with the authorized DPP Ebola will be made Chembio in consultation and

consultation

R. Chembio may request substitution tor or to the authorized materials used in the detection process ofEbola virus in the Such requests will be made Chembio in consultation with, and concurrence of, DMD/OIRJCDRH.

S. Chembio will track adverse events and report to FDA under 21 CFR Part 803.

T. Chembio W'i!l assess of the DPP Ebola with any FDA- recommended reference After submission to FDA and DMD/OlR/CDRH's review of and concurrence with the Chembio will its to reflect the additional Such will be made consultation and

U. Chembio will finalize the additional upon 7, 2018) crcfss-reacti,vitv studies within 3 months of the date ofEUA issuance. and DMD/OIR!CDRH's review of and concurrence \Vith the to reflect the Such will be made in

V. Chembio will track the of the DPP Ebola and report to DMD/OIRICDRH on a semi-annual basis.

1 Traceability refers to tracing analytical sensitivity/reactivity back to a FDA-recommended reference material.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES EN13FE19.008 3794 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

8 Mr. Inc.

Authorized Laboratories and Facilities

W. Authorized laboratories and facilities will include with Ebola the authorized Fact Sheet for t·r"'"'m'""''""' for Patients. Under ,.u.,e.,.,e.;n<>t;,,, these Fact Sheets may be used, which may include mass

X. Authorized laboratories and facilities will as outlined in the DPP Ebo!a Instructions for Use. the authorized the authorized authorized clinical types, authorized control materials, authorized "'"'"'"''"Y reagents and authorized materials to the DPP Ebola are not

Y. Authorized laboratories and facilities must read the results of the DPP Ebola on the DPP Micro Reader or on other authorized instruments. Alrthr:rri:~ed laboratories and facilities must not attempt to the results of the DPP Ebola

Z. Authorized laboratories and facilities will have a process in results to healthcare and relevant health autllor!ttes,

AA, Authorized laboratories and facilities will collect information on the netfmmance DPP Ebola and report to DMD/OIRICDRH I~£PJ,l!lill:g:g;J~!cflllt:?:,l!,.\t~J and Chembio any sus.pec:ted results and deviations characteristics of which a\vare.

BB. mn.l'l>1r<\f1,~t.nr'lihif' U:O'-'IIIItYUCl>, USe lll'lf)r<)l'!ri:ate !abOr

and Authorized Laboratories and Facilities

CC. its authorized and authorized laboratories and facilities will ensure that any records associated with this EUA are maintained until notified by FDA. Such records will be made available to FDA for upon request

matter to the use of the be consistent with the authorized Fact

According to CDC, EVD is a nationally notifiable condition

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES EN13FE19.009 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3795

Dated: February 7, 2019. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Lowell J. Schiller, HUMAN SERVICES Administration (FDA) is withdrawing Acting Associate Commissioner for Policy. approval of new drug application (NDA) Food and Drug Administration [FR Doc. 2019–02134 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] 202799 for OMONTYS (peginesatide) Injection, held by Takeda BILLING CODE 4164–01–C [Docket No. FDA–2019–N–0361] Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. (Takeda Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc.; USA). Takeda Development Center Withdrawal of Approval of a New Drug America, Inc., on behalf of Takeda USA, Application for OMONTYS requested withdrawal of approval of this (peginesatide) Injection application under relevant FDA regulations and, in so doing, has waived AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, its opportunity for a hearing. HHS. DATES: Approval is withdrawn as of ACTION: Notice. February 13, 2019.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES EN13FE19.010 3796 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (clotrimazole) topical solution, 1%, was Healthcare Products Inc., and initially Kristiana Brugger, Office of Regulatory not withdrawn from sale for reasons of approved on February 3, 1975. Policy, Center for Drug Evaluation and safety or effectiveness. This LOTRIMIN is indicated for the topical Research, Food and Drug determination means that FDA will not treatment of candidiasis due to Candida Administration, 10903 New Hampshire begin procedures to withdraw approval albicans and tinea versicolor due to Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6262, Silver Spring, of abbreviated new drug applications Malassezia furfur. MD 20993, 301–796–3600. (ANDAs) that refer to this drug product, LOTRIMIN (clotrimazole) topical SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NDA and it will allow FDA to continue to solution, 1%, is currently listed in the 202799 for OMONTYS (peginesatide) approve ANDAs that refer to the ‘‘Discontinued Drug Product List’’ Injection, 1 milligram (mg)/0.5 milliliter product as long as they meet relevant section of the Orange Book. In a letter (mL), 2 mg/0.5 mL, 3 mg/0.5 mL, 4 mg/ legal and regulatory requirements. dated August 31, 2005, Schering 0.5 mL, 5 mg/0.5 mL, 6 mg/0.5 mL, 10 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Corporation requested withdrawal of mg/mL, and 20 mg/2 mL, was received Stacy Kane, Center for Drug Evaluation NDA 017613 for LOTRIMIN on May 8, 2011, under section 505(b) of and Research, Food and Drug (clotrimazole). In the Federal Register of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Administration, 10903 New Hampshire November 7, 2007 (72 FR 62858), FDA Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(b)). FDA Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6236, Silver Spring, announced that it was withdrawing approved NDA 202799 on March 27, MD 20993–0002, 301–796–8363. approval of NDA 017613, effective 2012, for treatment of anemia due to December 7, 2007. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1984, Arent Fox LLP submitted a citizen chronic kidney disease in adult patients Congress enacted the Drug Price petition dated September 21, 2018 on dialysis. Competition and Patent Term (Docket No. FDA–2018–P–3597), under On February 23, 2013, Affymax, Inc. Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98–417) 21 CFR 10.30, requesting that the and Takeda voluntarily recalled all lots (the 1984 amendments), which Agency determine whether LOTRIMIN of OMONTYS and suspended its authorized the approval of duplicate (clotrimazole) topical solution, 1%, was marketing as a result of postmarketing versions of drug products under an withdrawn from sale for reasons of reports of serious hypersensitivity ANDA procedure. ANDA applicants safety or effectiveness. reactions, including anaphylaxis, which must, with certain exceptions, show that After considering the citizen petition can be life-threatening or fatal. the drug for which they are seeking and reviewing Agency records and Takeda subsequently requested that approval contains the same active based on the information we have at this FDA withdraw approval of NDA 202799 ingredient in the same strength and time, FDA has determined under under 21 CFR 314.150(d) (§ 314.150(d)) dosage form as the ‘‘listed drug,’’ which § 314.161 that LOTRIMIN (clotrimazole) and waived its opportunity for a is a version of the drug that was topical solution, 1%, was not hearing. Accordingly, under previously approved. ANDA applicants withdrawn for reasons of safety or § 314.150(d), approval of NDA 202799, do not have to repeat the extensive effectiveness. The petitioner has and all amendments and supplements clinical testing otherwise necessary to identified no data or other information thereto, is withdrawn. Distribution of gain approval of a new drug application suggesting that LOTRIMIN OMONTYS (peginesatide) Injection, 1 (NDA). (clotrimazole) topical solution, 1%, was mg/0.5 mL, 2 mg/0.5 mL, 3 mg/0.5 mL, The 1984 amendments include what withdrawn for reasons of safety or 4 mg/0.5 mL, 5 mg/0.5 mL, 6 mg/0.5 is now section 505(j)(7) of the Federal effectiveness. We have carefully mL, 10 mg/mL, and 20 mg/2 mL, Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. reviewed our files for records without an approved application is 355(j)(7)), which requires FDA to concerning the withdrawal of illegal and subject to regulatory action publish a list of all approved drugs. LOTRIMIN (clotrimazole) topical (see sections 505(a) and 301(d) of the FDA publishes this list as part of the solution, 1%, from sale. We have also FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355(a) and 331(d)). ‘‘Approved Drug Products With independently evaluated relevant Dated: February 8, 2019. Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,’’ literature and data for possible Lowell J. Schiller, which is known generally as the postmarketing adverse events. We have Acting Associate Commissioner for Policy. ‘‘Orange Book.’’ Under FDA regulations, found no information that would drugs are removed from the list if the indicate that this drug product was [FR Doc. 2019–02146 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Agency withdraws or suspends withdrawn from sale for reasons of BILLING CODE 4164–01–P approval of the drug’s NDA or ANDA safety or effectiveness. for reasons of safety or effectiveness or Accordingly, the Agency will DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND if FDA determines that the listed drug continue to list LOTRIMIN HUMAN SERVICES was withdrawn from sale for reasons of (clotrimazole) topical solution, 1%, in safety or effectiveness (21 CFR 314.162). the ‘‘Discontinued Drug Product List’’ Food and Drug Administration A person may petition the Agency to section of the Orange Book. The determine, or the Agency may ‘‘Discontinued Drug Product List’’ [Docket No. FDA–2018–P–3597] determine on its own initiative, whether delineates, among other items, drug products that have been discontinued Determination That LOTRIMIN a listed drug was withdrawn from sale from marketing for reasons other than (Clotrimazole) Topical Solution, 1%, for reasons of safety or effectiveness. safety or effectiveness. FDA will not Was Not Withdrawn From Sale for This determination may be made at any begin procedures to withdraw approval Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness time after the drug has been withdrawn from sale but must be made prior to of approved ANDAs that refer to this AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, approving an ANDA that refers to the drug product. In addition, FDA will HHS. listed drug (§ 314.161 (21 CFR 314.161)). continue to approve ANDAs for this ACTION: Notice. FDA may not approve an ANDA that drug product as long as they meet all does not refer to a listed drug. other legal and regulatory requirements SUMMARY: The Food and Drug LOTRIMIN (clotrimazole) topical for the approval of ANDAs. If the Administration (FDA or Agency) has solution, 1%, is the subject of NDA Agency determines that labeling for this determined that LOTRIMIN 017613, held by Schering-Plough drug product should be revised to meet

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3797

current standards, the Agency will SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: required. Please visit the ACHDNC advise ANDA applicants to submit such NACRHHS provides advice and website for information on registration: labeling. recommendations to the Secretary of https://www.hrsa.gov/advisory- Dated: February 8, 2019. HHS on policy, program development, committees/heritable-disorders/ Lowell J. Schiller, and other matters of significance index.html. The deadline for online concerning both rural health and rural Acting Associate Commissioner for Policy. registration is 5:00 p.m. ET on March human services. 20, 2019. Instructions on how to access [FR Doc. 2019–02139 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] During the April 2019 meeting, the meeting via webinar will be BILLING CODE 4164–01–P NACRHHS will discuss the issues of provided upon registration. Cancer Prevention and Control in Rural FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: America along with Supportive Services DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Alaina Harris, Maternal and Child and Caregiving for the Rural Elderly. HUMAN SERVICES Health Bureau (MCHB), HRSA, 5600 Agenda items are subject to change as Fishers Lane, Room 18W66, Rockville, Health Resources and Services priorities dictate. Refer to the Maryland 20857; 301–443–0721; or Administration NACRHHS website for any updated [email protected]. information concerning the meeting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ACHDNC Members of the public will have the Meeting of the National Advisory provides advice and recommendations opportunity to provide comments. Committee on Rural Health and Human to the Secretary of HHS (Secretary) on Public participants may submit written Services the development of newborn screening statements in advance of the scheduled activities, technologies, policies, AGENCY: Health Resources and Services meeting. Oral comments will be guidelines, and programs for effectively Administration (HRSA), Department of honored in the order they are requested reducing morbidity and mortality in Health and Human Services (HHS). and may be limited as time allows. newborns and children having, or at risk ACTION: Notice. Requests to submit a written statement for, heritable disorders. ACHDNC’s or make oral comments to NACRHHS SUMMARY: The Secretary’s National recommendations regarding inclusion of should be sent to Steven Hirsch, using Advisory Committee on Rural Health additional conditions for screening, the contact information above at least 3 and Human Services (NACRHHS) has following adoption by the Secretary, are scheduled a public meeting. Information business days prior to the meeting. Individuals who plan to attend and evidence-informed preventive health about NACRHHS and the agenda for this need special assistance or another services provided for in the meeting can be found on the NACRHHS comprehensive guidelines supported by website at https://www.hrsa.gov/ reasonable accommodation should notify Steven Hirsch at the address and HRSA through the Recommended advisory-committees/rural-health/ Uniform Screening Panel (RUSP) index.html. phone number listed above at least 10 business days prior to the meeting. pursuant to section 2713 of the Public DATES: Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg– April 3, 2019, 8:30 a.m.–5:15 p.m. John R. Womack, 13). Under this provision, non- Pacific Time (PT). Acting Deputy Director, Division of the grandfathered group health plans and April 4, 2019, 8:30 a.m.–5:15 p.m. PT. Executive Secretariat. health insurance issuers offering group April 5, 2019, 8:30 a.m.–11:15 a.m. [FR Doc. 2019–02207 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] or individual health insurance are PT. BILLING CODE 4165–15–P required to provide insurance coverage ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in without cost-sharing (a co-payment, co- person. On April 3, the meeting will be insurance, or deductible) for preventive held at The Residence Inn, Sacramento DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND services for plan years (i.e., policy years) Downtown, 1121 15th Street, HUMAN SERVICES beginning on or after the date that is one year from the Secretary’s adoption of the Sacramento, California 95814. Health Resources and Services On the morning of April 4, NACRHHS condition for screening. Administration will break into subcommittees. One During the March 2019 meeting, subcommittee will travel to Northern Advisory Committee on Heritable ACHDNC will hear from experts in the Valley Indian Health Clinic, 207 N Butte Disorders in Newborns and Children fields of public health, medicine, St., Willows, California 95988. The heritable disorders, rare disorders, and other subcommittee will travel to Sierra AGENCY: Health Resources and Services newborn screening. Tentative agenda Nevada Memorial Hospital, 155 Glasson Administration (HRSA), Department of topics include: (1) The condition Way, Grass Valley, California 95945. In Health and Human Services (HHS). nomination and evidence review the afternoon at approximately 4:00 ACTION: Notice. process, (2) rare disease registries, and p.m. PT, NACRHHS will reconvene at (3) implementation of conditions on the The Residence Inn, Sacramento SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on RUSP. Agenda items are subject to Downtown, 1121 15th Street, Heritable Disorders in Newborns and change as priorities dictate and the final Sacramento, California 95814. Children (ACHDNC) has scheduled a meeting agenda will be available on On April 5, the meeting will be held public meeting. Information about the ACHDNC’s website: https:// at The Residence Inn, Sacramento ACHDNC and the agenda for this www.hrsa.gov/advisory-committees/ Downtown, 1121 15th Street, meeting can be found on the ACHDNC heritable-disorders/index.html. Sacramento, California 95814. website at https://www.hrsa.gov/ Information about ACHDNC, a roster of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: advisory-committees/heritable- members, as well as past meeting Steven Hirsch, Administrative disorders/index.html. summaries are also available on the Coordinator at the Federal Office of DATES: March 22, 2019, 10:00 a.m.–3:00 ACHDNC website. Rural Health Policy, HRSA, 5600 p.m. ET. Members of the public will have the Fishers Lane, 17W59D, Rockville, ADDRESSES: This meeting will be held opportunity to provide comments, Maryland 20857; 301–443–7322; or via webinar. While this meeting is open which are part of the official committee [email protected]. to the public, advance registration is record. To submit written comments or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3798 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

request time for an oral comment during Place: Hotel Monaco, 700 F Street NW, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND the meeting, please register online by Washington, DC 20001. HUMAN SERVICES 12:00 p.m. ET on March 18, 2019. Visit Contact Person: Karen Gavin-Evans, Ph.D., the ACHDNC website for information on Scientific Review Officer, Division of National Institutes of Health Extramural Activities, National Institute of registration at https://www.hrsa.gov/ Mental Health, NIH Neuroscience Center, Office of the Director, National advisory-committees/heritable- 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6153, MSC disorders/index.html. Oral comments 9606, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–451–2356, Institutes of Health; Notice of Closed will be honored in the order they are [email protected]. Meeting requested and may be limited as time Name of Committee: National Institute of allows. Individuals associated with Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; Pursuant to section 10(d) of the groups or who plan to provide Computational Approaches for Validating Federal Advisory Committee Act, as comments on similar topics may be Dimensional Constructs of Relevance to amended, notice is hereby given of the asked to combine their comments and Psychopathology (R01). following meeting. Date: April 2, 2019. present them through a single The meeting will be closed to the representative. No audiovisual Time: 12:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. public in accordance with the presentations are permitted. Written Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. provisions set forth in sections comments should identify the Place: National Institutes of Health, 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., individual’s name, address, email, Neuroscience Center Building (NSC), 6001 as amended. The grant applications and telephone number, professional or Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 0852, organization affiliation, background or (Virtual Meeting). the discussions could disclose area of expertise (i.e., parent, family Contact Person: Rebecca Steiner Garcia, confidential trade secrets or commercial member, researcher, clinician, public Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of property such as patentable material, health, etc.), and the topic/subject Extramural Activities, National Institute of and personal information concerning matter. Mental Health, NIH Neuroscience Center, individuals associated with the grant 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6149, MSC 9608, applications, the disclosure of which John R. Womack, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–443–4525, would constitute a clearly unwarranted [email protected]. Acting Deputy Director, Division of the invasion of personal privacy. Executive Secretariat. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance [FR Doc. 2019–02208 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Program No. 93.242, Mental Health Research Name of Committee: Scientific and Grants, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Technical Review Board on Biomedical and BILLING CODE 4165–15–P Dated: February 7, 2019. Behavioral Research Facilities. Melanie J. Pantoja, Date: March 27, 2019. Time: 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory HUMAN SERVICES Committee Policy. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. [FR Doc. 2019–02121 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] National Institutes of Health Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 National Institute of Mental Health; (Telephone Conference Call). Notice of Closed Meetings DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Contact Person: Ross D Shonat, Ph.D., Pursuant to section 10(d) of the HUMAN SERVICES Scientific Review Officer, Center for Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Scientific Review, National Institutes of amended, notice is hereby given of the National Institutes of Health Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6196, following meetings. MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– National Cancer Institute; Amended The meetings will be closed to the 2786, [email protected]. Notice of Meeting public in accordance with the (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance provisions set forth in sections Notice is hereby given of a change in Program Nos. 93.14, Intramural Research 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., the meeting of the National Cancer Training Award; 93.22, Clinical Research as amended. The grant applications and Institute Special Emphasis Panel, March Loan Repayment Program for Individuals the discussions could disclose 1, 2019, 11:00 a.m. to March 1, 2019, from Disadvantaged Backgrounds; 93.232, confidential trade secrets or commercial 2:00 p.m., National Cancer Institute Loan Repayment Program for Research property such as patentable material, Shady Grove Campus, Rockville, MD Generally; 93.39, Academic Research and personal information concerning 20850 which was published in the Enhancement Award; 93.936, NIH Acquired individuals associated with the grant Federal Register on February 5, 2019, Immunodeficiency Syndrome Research Loan applications, the disclosure of which 84 FR 1768. Repayment Program; 93.187, Undergraduate would constitute a clearly unwarranted This meeting notice is amended to Scholarship Program for Individuals from invasion of personal privacy. change the meeting time on March 1, Disadvantaged Backgrounds, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Name of Committee: National Institute of 2019 to 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. The Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; meeting is closed to the public. Dated: February 7, 2019. NIMH Clinical Trials: Effectiveness of Dated: February 7, 2019. Melanie J. Pantoja, Treatment, Preventive, and Services Melanie J. Pantoja, Interventions. Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Date: April 1, 2019. Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Committee Policy. [FR Doc. 2019–02123 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2019–02128 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Agenda: To review and evaluate grant BILLING CODE 4140–01–P applications. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3799

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND comments to the IACC must notify the permitted, but web links or citations for HUMAN SERVICES Contact Person listed on this notice by any copyrighted works cited may be 5:00 p.m. ET on Thursday, April 4, 2019 provided. National Institutes of Health with their request to present oral Individuals may also submit public comments at the meeting, and a written/ comments to the IACC via a Live National Institute of Mental Health; electronic copy of the oral presentation/ Feedback Form accessible from the Notice of Meeting statement must be submitted by 5:00 webcast page on the day of the meeting Pursuant to section 10(a) of the p.m. ET on Tuesday, April 9, 2019. A from 9:00 a.m. ET to 11:00 a.m. ET. No Federal Advisory Committee Act, as limited number of slots for oral pre-registration required. The link will amended, notice is hereby given of an comment are available, and in order to be accessible on the NIH Videocast Interagency Autism Coordinating ensure that as many different website at https://videocast.nih.gov/ Committee (IACC or Committee) individuals are able to present summary.asp?live=31473 and meeting. throughout the year as possible, any instructions are available on the IACC The purpose of the IACC meeting is given individual only will be permitted website: https://iacc.hhs.gov/meetings/ to discuss business, agency updates, and to present oral comments once per iacc-meetings/live-feedback.shtml. This issues related to autism spectrum calendar year (2019). Only one format is best suited for brief questions disorder (ASD) research and services representative of an organization will be and comments for the committee. activities. The meeting will be open to allowed to present oral comments in Submissions will be provided to the the public and will be accessible by any given meeting; other representatives IACC and will become a part of the webcast and conference call. Close of the same group may provide written public record. captioning is provided; for other comments. If the oral comment session In the 2016–2017 IACC Strategic Plan, the IACC listed the ‘‘Spirit of disabilities accommodations see below. is full, individuals who could not be Collaboration’’ as one of its core values, Name of Committee: Interagency Autism accommodated are welcome to provide written comments instead. Comments to stating that, ‘‘We will treat others with Coordinating Committee. respect, listen with open minds to the Type of meeting: Open Meeting. be read or presented in the meeting will Date: Wednesday, April 17, 2019. be assigned a 3–5 minute time slot diverse views of people on the autism Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.* Eastern Time depending on the number of comments, spectrum and their families, * Approximate end time. but a longer version may be submitted thoughtfully consider community input, Agenda: To discuss business, updates, and in writing for the record. Commenters and foster discussions where issues related to ASD research and services participants can comfortably where activities. going beyond their allotted time in the meeting may be asked to conclude participants can comfortably offer Place: Neuroscience Center, 6001 opposing opinions.’’ In keeping with immediately in order to allow other Executive Blvd., Conference Room C and D, this core value, the IACC and the NIMH comments and presentations to proceed Rockville, MD 20892. Office of Autism Research Coordination Webcast Live: https://videocast.nih.gov/ on schedule. (OARC) ask that members of the public summary.asp?live=31473. Any interested person may submit Conference Call Access: Dial: 800–369– who provide public comments or 3337 Access code: 9975399. written public comments to the IACC participate in meetings of the IACC also Cost: The meeting is free and open to the prior to the meeting by emailing the seek to treat others with respect and public. comments to IACCPublicInquiries@ consideration in their communications Registration: A registration web link will mail.nih.gov or by submitting comments and actions, even when discussing be posted on the IACC website at the web link: https://iacc.hhs.gov/ issues of genuine concern or (www.iacc.hhs.gov) prior to the meeting. Pre- meetings/public-comments/submit/ registration is recommended to expedite disagreement. index.jsp by 5:00 p.m. ET on Tuesday, Remote Access: The meeting will be check-in. Seating in the meeting room is April 9, 2019. The comments should limited to room capacity and on a first come, open to the public through a conference first served basis.Onsite registration will also include the name, address, telephone call phone number and webcast live on be available. number, and when applicable, the the internet. Members of the public who Deadlines: Notification of intent to present business or professional affiliation of participate using the conference call oral comments: Thursday, April 4, 2019 by the interested person. NIMH anticipates phone number will be able to listen to 5:00 p.m. ET. Submission of written/ written public comments received by the meeting but will not be heard. If you electronic statement for oral comments: 5:00 p.m. ET on Tuesday, April 9, 2019 experience any technical problems with Tuesday, April 9, 2019 by 5:00 p.m. ET. will be presented to the Committee prior the webcast or conference call, please Submission of written comments: Tuesday, to the meeting for the Committee’s April 9, 2019 by 5:00 p.m. ET. Webcast Live send an email to IACCPublicInquiries@ Feedback Public comments: No consideration. Any written comments mail.nih.gov or call 240–668–0302. preregistration required. For instructions, see received after the 5:00 p.m. ET, April 9, Disability Accommodations: All IACC https://iacc.hhs.gov/meetings/iacc-meetings/ 2019 deadline through April 16, 2019 Full Meetings provide Closed live-feedback.shtml. For IACC Public will be provided to the Committee Captioning through the NIH videocast Comment guidelines please see: https:// either before or after the meeting, website. Remote CART is provided iacc.hhs.gov/meetings/public-comments/ depending on the volume of comments through a web application and will be guidelines/. received and the time required to available at all meetings; the application Access: White Flint Metro Station (Red process them in accordance with Line). can be used on a laptop computer or Contact Person: Ms. Angelice Mitrakas, privacy regulations and other applicable mobile device. For details please inquire Office of Autism Research Coordination, Federal policies. All written public with the Contact Person listed on the National Institute of Mental Health, NIH, comments and oral public comment notice. 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6182A, statements received by the deadlines for Individuals whose full participation Bethesda, MD 20892–9669, Phone: 301–435– both oral and written public comments in the meeting will require special 9269, Email: IACCPublicInquiries@ will be provided to the IACC for their accommodations (e.g., sign language, or mail.nih.gov. consideration and will become part of interpreting services, etc.) must submit Public Comments: Any member of the the public record. Attachments of a request to the Contact Person listed on public interested in presenting oral copyrighted publications are not the notice at least seven (7) business

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3800 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

days prior to the meeting. Such requests the Director, National Institutes of Health, 1 Agenda: To review and evaluate grant should include a detailed description of Center Drive, Room 160, Bethesda, MD applications. the accommodation needed and a way 20892, [email protected], Phone: (301) Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 for the IACC to contact the requester if 496–1921, Fax: (301) 402–4273. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Information is also available on the Office (Virtual Meeting). more information is needed to fill the Contact Person: Karen Nieves Lugo, Ph.D., request. Special requests should be of Intramural Research home page: http:// sourcebook.od.nih.gov/. Scientific Review Officer, Center for made as early as possible; last minute In the interest of security, NIH has Scientific Review, National Institutes of requests may be made but may not be instituted stringent procedures for entrance Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, possible to accommodate. onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, [email protected]. Security: Visitors will be asked to sign including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles Name of Committee: Center for Scientific in and show one form of identification will be inspected before being allowed on Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member (for example, a government-issued campus. Visitors will be asked to show one Conflict: AIDS and Related Research. photo ID, driver’s license, or passport) at form of identification (for example, a Date: March 29, 2019. Time: 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. the meeting registration desk during the government-issued photo ID, driver’s license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their Agenda: To review and evaluate grant check-in process. Pre-registration is visit. applications. recommended. Seating will be limited Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 to the room capacity and seats will be Dated: February 7, 2019. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, on a first come, first served basis, with Melanie J. Pantoja, (Virtual Meeting). expedited check-in for those who are Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Contact Person: Karen Nieves Lugo, Ph.D., pre-registered. Committee Policy. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Meeting schedule subject to change. [FR Doc. 2019–02129 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, Information about the IACC is BILLING CODE 4140–01–P [email protected]. available on the website: http:// Name of Committee: Biology of www.iacc.hhs.gov. Development and Aging Integrated Review DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Dated: February 7, 2019. Group; International and Cooperative HUMAN SERVICES Melanie J. Pantoja, Projects—1 Study Section. Date: April 2–3, 2019. Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory National Institutes of Health Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Committee Policy. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant [FR Doc. 2019–02125 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Center for Scientific Review; Notice of applications. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Closed Meetings Place: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Road NW, Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Washington, DC 20015. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Contact Person: Seetha Bhagavan, Ph.D., HUMAN SERVICES amended, notice is hereby given of the Scientific Review Officer, Center for following meetings. Scientific Review, National Institutes of National Institutes of Health The meetings will be closed to the Health, 701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5194, public in accordance with the MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 237– Office of the Director, National provisions set forth in sections 9838, [email protected]. Institutes of Health; Notice of Meeting 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Name of Committee: Center for Scientific as amended. The grant applications and Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR16–366: Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Research in Biomedicine and Agriculture. the discussions could disclose Date: April 2, 2019. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as confidential trade secrets or commercial amended (5 U.S.C. App.) notice is Time: 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. property such as patentable material, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant hereby given of a meeting of the Board and personal information concerning applications. of Scientific Counselors Chairs Meeting, individuals associated with the grant Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 National Institutes of Health. applications, the disclosure of which Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, The meeting will be open to the would constitute a clearly unwarranted (Virtual Meeting). public, with attendance limited to space invasion of personal privacy. Contact Person: Raul Rojas, Ph.D., available. Individuals who plan to Scientific Review Officer, Center for attend and need special assistance, such Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Scientific Review, National Institutes of as sign language interpretation or other Review Special Emphasis Panel; RFA–MH– Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6185, 19–412: Reducing Intersectional Stigma to Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 451–6319, rojasr@ reasonable accommodations, should Improve the HIV/AIDS Prevention mail.nih.gov. notify the Contact Person listed below Continuum. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific in advance of the meeting. Date: March 27, 2019. Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Conflict: Cardiovascular Sciences. Counselors, National Institutes of Health. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Date: April 3, 2019. Date: May 17, 2019. applications. Time: 12:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Time: 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: The meeting will include a Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. applications. discussion of policies and procedures that Contact Person: Shalanda A. Bynum, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 apply to the regular review of NIH intramural Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, scientists and their work. Scientific Review, National Institutes of (Virtual Meeting). Place: National Institutes of Health, 1 Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3206, Contact Person: Chee Lim, Ph.D., Scientific Center Drive, Building 1, 3rd Floor, Wilson Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–755–4355, Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, Hall, Bethesda, MD 20892. [email protected]. National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Conference Line Access: Dial: 1–888–233– Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Drive, Room 4128, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301– 9215 Participant Passcode: 58358. Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member 435–1850, [email protected]. Contact Person: Margaret McBurney, Conflict: AIDS and Related Research. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Program Specialist, Office of the Deputy Date: March 28, 2019. Review Special Emphasis Panel; Immunology Director for Intramural Research, Office of Time: 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. AREA Review.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3801

Date: April 3, 2019. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4188, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Time: 12:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– applications. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 1203, [email protected]. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: (Telephone Conference Call). Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Mammalian Models for Translational Contact Person: Jasenka Borzan, Ph.D., (Virtual Meeting). Research. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Contact Person: Liying Guo, Ph.D., Date: April 5, 2019. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Scientific Review Officer, Center for Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4214, Scientific Review, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892–7814, 301– Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4016F, applications. 435–1787, [email protected]. Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435–0908, lguo@ Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Name of Committee: Center for Scientific mail.nih.gov. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Name of Committee: Center for Scientific (Telephone Conference Call). Conflict: Cancer Prevention. Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: Contact Person: Jeffrey Smiley, Ph.D., Date: April 11, 2019. Cancer Health Disparities. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Time: 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Date: April 4–5, 2019. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6194, applications. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–594– Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 applications. 7945, [email protected]. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Place: Hilton Washington/Rockville, 1750 Name of Committee: Center for Scientific (Telephone Conference Call). Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Contact Person: Syed M Quadri, Ph.D., Contact Person: Ola Mae Zack Howard, Conflict: Cancer Immunopathology, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Immunotherapy and Cancer Biomarkers. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Scientific Review, National Institutes of Date: April 10, 2019. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6210, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4192, Time: 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–451– Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 1211, [email protected]. 4467, [email protected]. applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD Conflicts: Respiratory Sciences. Conflict: Neurodegeneration. 20892,(Telephone Conference Call). Date: April 17, 2019. Date: April 4, 2019. Contact Person: Zhang-Zhi Hu, MD, Time: 12:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Time: 10:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6186, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 437– Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 8135, [email protected]. (Telephone Conference Call). (Telephone Conference Call). Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Ghenima Dirami, Ph.D., Contact Person: Carole L. Jelsema, Ph.D., Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Scientific Review Officer, Center for Chief and Scientific Review Officer, Center Conflict: Molecular, Cellular and Biophysical Scientific Review, National Institutes of for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Neuroscience. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4122, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4176, Date: April 10, 2019. MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 240–498– MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Time: 1:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. 7546, [email protected]. 1248, [email protected]. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Name of Committee: Center for Scientific applications. Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR: Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Conflict: Glial Function in Neurological Extracellular Vesicles and Substance Use Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Disorders and Development. Disorders. (Telephone Conference Call). Date: April 18, 2019. Date: April 4, 2019. Contact Person: Christine A Piggee, Ph.D., Time: 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4186, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 0657, [email protected]. (Virtual Meeting). (Telephone Conference Call). Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Carol Hamelink, Ph.D., Contact Person: Peter B. Guthrie, Ph.D., Review Special Emphasis Panel; RFA: CA– Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review Officer, Center for 049 Fusion Oncoproteins in Pediatric Cancer. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Scientific Review, National Institutes of Date: April 11–12, 2019. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4192, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4142, Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 213– MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 9887, [email protected]. 1239, [email protected]. applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Place: Embassy Suites by Hilton Review Special Emphasis Panel; RFA–CA– Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Alexandria Old Town, 1900 Diagonal Rd, 19–003: Pediatric Immunotherapy Discovery Conflict: Neurodegeneration and Brain Alexandria, VA 22314. and Development Network (PI–DDN) U54 Injury. Contact Person: Charles Morrow, MD, Review. Date: April 4, 2019. Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Date: April 19, 2019. Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6202, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–451– applications. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 4467, [email protected]. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call). Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member (Telephone Conference Call). Contact Person: Laurent Taupenot, Ph.D., Conflict: Sex Differences and Sleep. Contact Person: Lawrence Ka-Yun Ng, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Date: April 11, 2019. Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Scientific Review, National Institutes of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3802 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6152, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5184, Dated: February 7, 2019. MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Melanie J. Pantoja, 1719, [email protected]. 1242, [email protected]. Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Committee Policy. Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; Review Special Emphasis Panel; Drug Abuse [FR Doc. 2019–02122 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, Dissertation Research. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, Date: March 14, 2019. 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Institutes of Health, HHS) Agenda: To review and evaluate grant DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Dated: February 7, 2019. applications. HUMAN SERVICES Melanie J. Pantoja, Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20814. Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory National Institutes of Health Committee Policy. Contact Person: Jingsheng Tuo, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for National Institute of Mental Health; [FR Doc. 2019–02124 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Scientific Review, National Institutes of BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5207, Notice of Meeting Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–451–8754, tuoj@ Pursuant to section 10(a) of the nei.nih.gov. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Name of Committee: Center for Scientific HUMAN SERVICES amended, notice is hereby given of an Review Special Emphasis Panel; Overflow: Interagency Autism Coordinating Emerging Imaging Technologies in National Institutes of Health Committee (IACC or Committee) Neuroscience. meeting. Date: March 14, 2019. The purpose of the IACC meeting is Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Time: 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Closed Meetings Agenda: To review and evaluate grant to discuss business, agency updates, and applications. issues related to autism spectrum Pursuant to section 10(d) of the disorder (ASD) research and services Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892. activities. The meeting will be open to amended, notice is hereby given of the Contact Person: Yvonne Bennett, Ph.D., the public and will be accessible by following meetings. Scientific Review Officer, Center for webcast and conference call. The meetings will be closed to the Scientific Review, National Institutes of Close captioning is provided; for other public in accordance with the Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5199, disabilities accommodations see below. provisions set forth in sections MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–379– Name of Committee: Interagency Autism 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., 3793, [email protected]. as amended. The grant applications and Coordinating Committee (IACC). Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Type of meeting: Open Meeting. the discussions could disclose Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Date: Wednesday, July 24, 2019. confidential trade secrets or commercial Business: Hematology. Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.* Eastern Time. property such as patentable material, Date: March 14–15, 2019. * Approximate end time. and personal information concerning Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Agenda: To discuss business, updates, and individuals associated with the grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant issues related to ASD research and services applications, the disclosure of which applications. activities. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Place: Neuroscience Center, 6001 invasion of personal privacy. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Executive Blvd., Conference Room C and D, (Virtual Meeting). Rockville, MD 20892. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Katherine M. Malinda, Webcast Live: https://videocast.nih.gov. Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR–16– Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Conference Call Access: Dial: 888–677– 089: Imaging and Biomarkers for Early Scientific Review, National Institutes of 5726, Access code: 2077198. Cancer Detection (U01). Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4140, Cost: The meeting is free and open to the Date: March 7, 2019. MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– public. Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 0912, [email protected]. Registration: A registration web link will Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Center for Scientific be posted on the IACC website applications. Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: (www.iacc.hhs.gov) prior to the meeting. Pre- Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems registration is recommended to expedite Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 check-in. Seating in the meeting room is (Virtual Meeting). (ENDS): Population, Clinical and Applied Prevention Research. limited to room capacity and on a first come, Contact Person: Xiang-Ning Li, MD, Ph.D., first served basis. Onsite registration will also Scientific Review Officer, Center for Date: March 14, 2019. Time: 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. be available. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Deadlines: Notification of intent to present Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5112, oral comments: Friday, July 12, 2019 by 5:00 applications. MSC 7854, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– p.m. ET. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 1744, [email protected]. Submission of written/electronic statement Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific for oral comments: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 by Contact Person: Miriam Mintzer, Ph.D., Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: 5:00 p.m. ET. BRAIN Initiative: Targeted BRAIN Circuits Scientific Review Officer, Center for Submission of written comments: Tuesday, Projects. Scientific Review, National Institutes of July 16, 2019 by 5:00 p.m. ET. Date: March 14–15, 2019. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3108, Webcast Live Feedback Public comments: Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–523–0646, No preregistration required. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant [email protected]. For instructions, see https://iacc.hhs.gov/ applications. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance meetings/iacc-meetings/live-feedback.shtml. Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; For IACC Public Comment guidelines Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, please see: https://iacc.hhs.gov/meetings/ Contact Person: Kirk Thompson, Ph.D., 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, public-comments/guidelines/. Scientific Review Officer, Center for 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Access: White Flint Metro Station (Red Scientific Review, National Institutes of Institutes of Health, HHS) Line).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3803

Contact Person: Ms. Angelice Mitrakas, applicable Federal policies. All written with the Contact Person listed on the Office of Autism Research Coordination, public comments and oral public notice. National Institute of Mental Health, NIH, comment statements received by the Individuals whose full participation 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6182A, deadlines for both oral and written in the meeting will require special Bethesda, MD 20892–9669, Phone: 301–435– 9269, Email: IACCPublicInquiries@ public comments will be provided to accommodations (e.g., sign language, or mail.nih.gov. the IACC for their consideration and interpreting services, etc.) must submit will become part of the public record. a request to the Contact Person listed on Public Comments: Any member of the Attachments of copyrighted the notice at least seven (7) business public interested in presenting oral publications are not permitted, but web days prior to the meeting. Such requests comments to the IACC must notify the links or citations for any copyrighted should include a detailed description of Contact Person listed on this notice by works cited may be provided. the accommodation needed and a way 5:00 p.m. ET on Friday, July 12, 2019 for the IACC to contact the requester if with their request to present oral Individuals may also submit public more information is needed to fill the comments at the meeting, and a written/ comments to the IACC via a Live request. Special requests should be electronic copy of the oral presentation/ Feedback Form accessible from the made as early as possible; last minute statement must be submitted by 5:00 webcast page on the day of the meeting requests may be made but may not be p.m. ET on Tuesday, July 16, 2019. from 9:00 a.m. ET to 11:00 a.m. ET. No A limited number of slots for oral pre-registration required. The link will possible to accommodate. Security: Visitors will be asked to sign comment are available, and in order to be accessible on the NIH Videocast in and show one form of identification ensure that as many different website at https://videocast.nih.gov and (for example, a government-issued individuals are able to present instructions are available on the IACC photo ID, driver’s license, or passport) at throughout the year as possible, any website: https://iacc.hhs.gov/meetings/ the meeting registration desk during the given individual only will be permitted iacc-meetings/live-feedback.shtml. This check-in process. Pre-registration is to present oral comments once per format is best suited for brief questions recommended. Seating will be limited calendar year (2019). Only one and comments for the committee. to the room capacity and seats will be representative of an organization will be Submissions will be provided to the on a first come, first served basis, with allowed to present oral comments in IACC and will become a part of the expedited check-in for those who are any given meeting; other representatives public record. pre-registered. of the same group may provide written In the 2016–2017 IACC Strategic Plan, the IACC listed the ‘‘Spirit of Meeting schedule subject to change. comments. If the oral comment session Information about the IACC is is full, individuals who could not be Collaboration’’ as one of its core values, stating that, ‘‘We will treat others with available on the website: http:// accommodated are welcome to provide www.iacc.hhs.gov. written comments instead. Comments to respect, listen with open minds to the be read or presented in the meeting will diverse views of people on the autism Dated: February 7, 2019. be assigned a 3–5 minute time slot spectrum and their families, Melanie J. Pantoja, depending on the number of comments, thoughtfully consider community input, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory but a longer version may be submitted and foster discussions where Committee Policy. in writing for the record. Commenters participants can comfortably where [FR Doc. 2019–02127 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] going beyond their allotted time in the participants can comfortably offer BILLING CODE 4140–01–P meeting may be asked to conclude opposing opinions.’’ In keeping with immediately in order to allow other this core value, the IACC and the NIMH comments and presentations to proceed Office of Autism Research Coordination DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND on schedule. (OARC) ask that members of the public HUMAN SERVICES Any interested person may submit who provide public comments or written public comments to the IACC participate in meetings of the IACC also National Institutes of Health prior to the meeting by emailing the seek to treat others with respect and National Cancer Institute; Notice of comments to IACCPublicInquiries@ consideration in their communications Closed Meetings mail.nih.gov or by submitting comments and actions, even when discussing at the web link: https://iacc.hhs.gov/ issues of genuine concern or Pursuant to section 10(d) of the meetings/public-comments/submit/ disagreement. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as index.jsp by 5:00 p.m. ET on Tuesday, Remote Access: The meeting will be amended, notice is hereby given of the July 16, 2019. The comments should open to the public through a conference following meetings. include the name, address, telephone call phone number and webcast live on The meetings will be closed to the number, and when applicable, the the internet. Members of the public who public in accordance with the business or professional affiliation of participate using the conference call provisions set forth in sections the interested person. NIMH anticipates phone number will be able to listen to 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., written public comments received by the meeting but will not be heard. If you as amended. The grant applications 5:00 p.m. ET on Tuesday, July 16, 2019 experience any technical problems with and/or contract proposals and the will be presented to the Committee prior the webcast or conference call, please discussions could disclose confidential to the meeting for the Committee’s send an email to IACCPublicInquiries@ trade secrets or commercial property consideration. Any written comments mail.nih.gov or call 240–668–0302. such as patentable material, and received after the 5:00 p.m. ET, Disability Accommodations: All IACC personal information concerning Tuesday, July 16, 2019 deadline through Full Meetings provide Closed individuals associated with grant Tuesday, July 23, 2019 will be provided Captioning through the NIH videocast applications and/or contract proposals, to the Committee either before or after website. Remote CART is provided the disclosure of which would the meeting, depending on the volume through a web application and will be constitute a clearly unwarranted of comments received and the time available at all meetings; the application invasion of personal privacy. required to process them in accordance can be used on a laptop computer or Name of Committee: National Cancer with privacy regulations and other mobile device. For details please inquire Institute Special Emphasis Panel; PREVENT:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3804 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

cGMP Production of Vaccines and an application from Cyanotech Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The Biologicals. (applicant) for a renewal of an applicant is requesting renewal of an Date: March 27, 2019. incidental take permit (ITP) under the ITP to authorize incidental take of the Time: 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Endangered Species Act. The applicant endangered Hawaiian stilt (Himantopus Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals. is requesting renewal of their ITP and mexicanus knudseni), hereafter referred Place: National Cancer Institute, Shady their 2002 habitat conservation plan to as the covered species or Hawaiian Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room (HCP) for Hawaiian stilt at the stilt. If renewed, the ITP would 7W260, Rockville, MD 20850 (Telephone Cyanotech aquaculture facility at authorize take of the covered species Conference Call). Keahole Point, Hawaii. If renewed, the that may occur incidental to the Contact Person: Nadeem Khan, Ph.D., ITP would authorize the take of the operation and maintenance of the Scientific Review Officer, Research Hawaiian stilt that may occur incidental Cyanotech aquaculture facility for an Technology and Contract Review Branch, to the operation and maintenance of the additional 19 years, until 2035. The ITP Division of Extramural Activities, National aquaculture facility. The ITP application application includes a HCP renewal Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W260, Bethesda, MD 20892– includes a HCP renewal document document describing the actions and 9750, 240–276–5856, [email protected]. describing the actions and measures the measures the applicant will implement Name of Committee: National Cancer applicant will implement to avoid, to avoid, minimize, mitigate, and Institute Special Emphasis Panel; R13 minimize, mitigate, and monitor monitor incidental take of the covered Conference Grant Review. incidental take of the species. We are species. We are making the ITP Date: March 27, 2019. making the HCP renewal and the NEPA application, including the NEPA Time: 12:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. environmental action statement for environmental action statement for a Agenda: To review and evaluate grant categorical exclusion, available for categorical exclusion available for applications. public review and comment. public review and comment. Place: National Cancer Institute, Shady DATES: To ensure consideration, please Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room Background send your written comments by March 7W554, Rockville, MD 20850, (Telephone Section 9 of the ESA prohibits the Conference Call). 15, 2019. Contact Person: Christopher L. Hatch, ADDRESSES: To request further take of fish and wildlife species listed Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Program information or submit written as endangered or threatened under Coordination and Referral Branch, Division comments, please use one of the section 4 of the ESA. Under the ESA, of Extramural Activities, National Cancer following methods, and note that your the term ‘‘take’’ means to harass, harm, Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, information request or comments are in pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, Room 7W554, Bethesda, MD 20892–9750, reference to the Cyanotech HCP and the capture, or collect, or to attempt to 240–276–6454, [email protected]. proposed renewal of the ITP: engage in any such conduct (16 U.S.C. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance • Internet: Documents may be viewed 1532(19)). The term ‘‘harm,’’ as defined Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; in our regulations, includes significant 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention on the internet at http://www.fws.gov/ pacificislands/. habitat modification or degradation that Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and • _ results in death or injury to listed Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Email: pifwo [email protected]. Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Include ‘‘Cyanotech HCP’’ in the subject species by significantly impairing Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; line of the message. essential behavioral patterns, including 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, • U.S. Mail: Field Supervisor, U.S. breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific 17.3). HHS) Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, 300 However, under specified Dated: February 7, 2019. Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 3–122, circumstances, the Service may issue Honolulu, HI 96850. permits that authorize take of federally Melanie J. Pantoja, • Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Fax: 808–792–9581, Attn: Field listed species, provided the take is Committee Policy. Supervisor. Include ‘‘Cyanotech HCP’’ incidental to, but not the purpose of, an in the subject line of the message. otherwise lawful activity. Regulations [FR Doc. 2019–02126 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] • In-Person Drop-off, Viewing, or governing permits for endangered and BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Pickup: Comments and materials threatened species are at 50 CFR 17.22 received will be available for public and 17.32, respectively. Section inspection, by appointment, during 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA contains DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR normal business hours at the Pacific provisions for issuing such incidental Islands Fish and Wildlife Office Fish and Wildlife Service take permits to non-Federal entities for (address above). Written comments can the take of endangered and threatened [FWS–R1–ES–2018–N077; be dropped off during regular business species, provided the following criteria FXES11140100000–189–FF01E00000] hours on or before the closing date of are met: the public comment period (see DATES). (1) The taking will be incidental; Request for Renewal of the Incidental FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jodi (2) The applicant will prepare a Take Permit and Habitat Conservation Charrier, Endangered Species Biologist, conservation plan that, to the maximum Plan for Incidental Take of Hawaiian by mail at the address in ADDRESSES; by extent practicable, identifies the steps Stilts; Cyanotech Aquaculture Facility, telephone at 808–792–9400; or by email the applicant will take to minimize and Hawaii at [email protected]. If you use a mitigate the impact of such taking; AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, telecommunications device for the deaf, (3) The applicant will ensure that Interior. please call the Federal Relay Service at adequate funding for the plan will be 800–877–8339. ACTION: Notice of availability; request provided; for comments. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The (4) The taking will not appreciably Service has received an ITP application reduce the likelihood of the survival SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and from Cyanotech in accordance with the and recovery of the species in the wild; Wildlife Service (Service), have received requirements of the Endangered Species and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3805

(5) The applicant will carry out any on the species covered in the HCP. activities intended to enhance the other measures that the Service may Therefore, we determined that the propagation or survival of endangered require as being necessary or proposed HCP permit renewal qualifies or threatened species under the appropriate for the purposes of the plan. for a categorical exclusion under NEPA, Endangered Species Act. We invite the as provided by the Department of the public and local, State, Tribal, and Proposed Action Interior NEPA regulations (43 CFR part Federal agencies to comment on these The Service proposes to issue the 46). applications. Before issuing any of the requested ITP based on the applicant’s requested permits, we will take into Public Availability of Comments commitment to implement the renewed consideration any information that we 2002 HCP for Hawaiian stilt at the All comments and materials we receive during the public comment Cyanotech aquaculture facility, Keahole receive become part of the public record period. Point, Hawaii. On March 18, 2002, the associated with this action. Before DATES: We must receive your written Service approved Cyanotech’s HCP and including your address, phone number, comments on or before March 15, 2019. issued an ITP with a duration of 3 years email address, or other personally for take of the endangered Hawaiian stilt identifiable information in your ADDRESSES: Document availability and incidental to ongoing operations and comments, you should be aware that comment submission: Submit requests maintenance activities of the your entire comment—including your for copies of the applications and aquaculture facility. In September 2006, personally identifiable information— related documents and submit any the Service permitted a 10-year may be made publicly available at any comments by one of the following extension of the ITP, which expired in time. While you can ask us in your methods. All requests and comments March 2016. The 2006 ITP authorizes comment to withhold your personally should specify the applicant name(s) take of the covered species so long as identifiable information from public and application number(s) (e.g., the total number of stilts fledged at off- TEXXXXXX). review, we cannot guarantee that we • site locations is greater than the number Email: [email protected]. will be able to do so. All submissions • U.S. Mail: Daniel Marquez, of stilts incidentally taken over the ten- from organizations or businesses, and year permit term. In October 2015, Endangered Species Program Manager, from individuals identifying themselves U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region Cyanotech submitted an application for as representatives or officials of renewal of the ITP and the HCP for an 8, 2800 Cottage Way, Room W–2606, organizations or businesses, will be Sacramento, CA 95825. additional 19 years, until 2035. This made available for public disclosure in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: request is being considered pursuant to their entirety. Comments and materials section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA. we receive, as well as supporting Daniel Marquez, via phone at 760–431– Cyanotech proposes to continue documentation, will be available for 9440, via email at [email protected], normal microalgae operations, daily public inspection by appointment, or via the Federal Relay Service at 1– monitoring and maintenance at its during normal business hours, at our 800–877–8339 for TTY assistance. aquaculture facility, and Pacific Islands Field Office (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the implementation of minimization ADDRESSES). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, invite measures described in their 2002 HCP the public to comment on applications and 2006 HCP amendment until 2035. Authority for permits under section 10(a)(1)(A) of All provisions for reporting, monitoring, We provide this notice in accordance the Endangered Species Act, as adaptive management, and funding with the requirements of section 10(c) of amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). assurances from the original HCP will the ESA and its implementing The requested permits would allow the be maintained. Cyanotech currently has regulations (50 CFR 17.22 and 17.32) applicants to conduct activities a net mitigation offset of 32 fledglings, and NEPA and its implementing intended to promote recovery of species and incidental take is not expected to regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). that are listed as endangered or exceed 1 stilt fledgling per year. threatened under the ESA. Therefore, it is expected that the current Katherine B. Hollar, Background offset of 32 fledglings is sufficient to Acting Deputy Regional Director, Pacific compensate for take of an additional 20 Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. With some exceptions, the ESA Hawaiian stilt fledglings over the 19- [FR Doc. 2019–02163 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] prohibits activities that constitute take year permit renewal term. No additional BILLING CODE 4333–15–P of listed species unless a Federal permit compensatory mitigation is being is issued that allows such activity. The proposed. ESA’s definition of ‘‘take’’ includes such DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR activities as pursuing, harassing, National Environmental Policy Act trapping, capturing, or collecting in Fish and Wildlife Service Compliance addition to hunting, shooting, harming, The proposed issuance of an ITP is a [FWS–R8–ES–2018–N144; wounding, or killing. Federal action that triggers the need for FXES11130800000–178–FF08E00000] A recovery permit issued by us under compliance with NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA et seq). Pursuant to NEPA, we prepared Endangered and Threatened Species; authorizes the permittee to conduct an Environmental Action Statement Receipt of Recovery Permit activities with endangered or threatened (EAS) to analyze the environmental Applications species for scientific purposes that impacts of the proposed Federal action AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, promote recovery or for enhancement of of issuing the requested ITP and Interior. propagation or survival of the species. implementation of the conservation ACTION: Notice of receipt of permit These activities often include such program under the HCP. applications; request for comments. prohibited actions as capture and Based on the EAS, we have collection. Our regulations preliminarily determined that the SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and implementing section 10(a)(1)(A) for proposed renewal of the ITP and HCP Wildlife Service, have received these permits are found in the Code of would have minor or negligible effects applications for permits to conduct Federal Regulations at 50 CFR 17.22 for

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3806 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

endangered wildlife species, 50 CFR Permit Applications Available for Accordingly, we invite local, State, 17.32 for threatened wildlife species, 50 Review and Comment Tribal, and Federal agencies and the CFR 17.62 for endangered plant species, public to submit written data, views, or and 50 CFR 17.72 for threatened plant Proposed activities in the following arguments with respect to these species. permit requests are for the recovery and applications. The comments and enhancement of propagation or survival recommendations that will be most of the species in the wild. The ESA useful and likely to influence agency requires that we invite public comment decisions are those supported by before issuing these permits. quantitative information or studies.

Application No. Applicant, city, state Species Location Activity Type of take Permit action

TE–817400 ...... East Bay Regional Park • Salt marsh harvest CA Survey, mark, track, Capture, handle, insert Renew and Amend. District, Oakland, mouse nest monitor, collect PIT tags, collect California. (Reithrodontomys vouchers. vouchers, monitor raviventris). nests.

• California least tern (Sternula antillarum browni (Sterna a. browni)), • California clapper rail ((Rallus longirostris obsoletus), • Conservancy fairy shrimp (Branchinecta conservatio), • Longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna), • San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), • Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), • Vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi). TE–102310 ...... Mitchell Dallas, Morro • Conservancy fairy CA Survey, collect soil, Capture, handle, re- Renew. Bay, California. shrimp (Branchinecta identify branchiopod lease, collect vouch- conservatio), eggs. ers, and collect soil. • Longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna), • San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), • Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), • Vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi). TE–14749C ...... Lorena Bernal, San • Conservancy fairy CA Survey ...... Capture, handle, re- New. Diego, California. shrimp (Branchinecta lease, and collect conservatio), vouchers. • Longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna), • San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), • Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), • Vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi). TE–237061 ...... Daniel Chase, San • Tidewater goby CA Survey and collect Capture, handle, re- Renew. Francisco, California. (Eucyclogobius vouchers. lease, and collect newberryi). vouchers. TE–012973 ...... Ecorp Consulting, • San Bernardino CA Survey ...... Capture, handle, and Amend. Rocklin, California. Merriam’s kangaroo release. rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus). TE–08086D ...... Santa Clara Valley • California clapper rail CA Survey ...... Survey ...... New. Water District, San (Rallus longirostris Jose, California. obsoletus).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:33 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3807

Application No. Applicant, city, state Species Location Activity Type of take Permit action

TE–41182B ...... Karen Pope, Arcata, • Sierra Nevada yellow- CA Survey and research Capture, handle, take Renew and Amend. California. legged frog (Rana studies. skin swabs, insert PIT sierrae). tags, collect vouch- ers, salvage, and test for disease. TE–094893 ...... Santa Barbara Botanic • Hoffmann’s rock- CA Remove/reduce to pos- Collect, bank seeds ...... Renew and Amend. Garden, Santa Bar- cress (Arabis session from lands bara, California. hoffmannii). under Federal juris- • Santa Rosa Island diction. manzanita (Arctostaphylos confertiflora) • Marsh Sandwort (Arenaria paludicola) • Clara Hunt’s milk- vetch (Astragalus claranus) • Ventura Marsh milk- vetch (Astragalus pycnostachyus var. lanosissimus) • Braunton’s milk-vetch (Astragalus brauntonii) • Coastal dunes milk- vetch (Astragalus tener var. titi) • Nevin’s barberry (Berberis nevinii) • Island Barberry (Berberis pinnata ssp. insularis) • Tiburon paintbrush (Castilleja affinis ssp. neglecta) • Soft-leaved paint- brush (Castilleja mollis) • California jewelflower (Caulanthus californicus) • Coyote ceanothus (Ceanothus ferrisiae) • Catalina Island moun- tain-mahogany (Cercocarpus traskiae) • Chorro Creek bog thistle (Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense) • La Graciosa thistle (Cirsium loncholepis) • Presidio clarkia (Clarkia franciscana) • Vine Hill clarkia (Clarkia imbricata) • Pismo clarkia (Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata) • Soft bird’s-beak (Cordylanthus mollis ssp. mollis) • Salt marsh bird’s- beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus) • Gaviota Tarplant (Deinandra increscens ssp. villosa) • San Clemente Island larkspur (Delphinium variegatum ssp. kinkiense) • Vandenberg monkeyflower (Diplacus vandenbergensis) • Santa Clara Valley dudleya (Dudleya setchellii)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3808 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

Application No. Applicant, city, state Species Location Activity Type of take Permit action

• Santa Barbara Island liveforever (Dudleya traskiae) • Kern mallow (Eremalche kernensis) • Indian Knob mountainbalm (Eriodictyon altissimum) • Lompoc yerba santa (Eriodictyon capitatum) • Loch Lomond coyote thistle (Eryngium constancei) • San Diego button-cel- ery (Eryngium aristulatum var. parishii) • Menzies’ wallflower (Erysimum menziesii) • Island bedstraw (Galium buxifolium) • Monterey gilia (Gilia tenuiflora ssp. arenaria) • Hoffmann’s slender- flowered gilia (Gilia tenuiflora ssp. hoffmannii) • Contra Costa gold- fields (Lasthenia conjugens) • Burke’s goldfields (Lasthenia burkei) • Beach layia (Layia carnosa) • San Joaquin wooly- threads (Monolopia (=Lembertia) congdonii) • Sebastopol meadowfoam (Limnanthes vinculans) • San Clemente Island woodland-star (Lithophragma max- imum) • Nipomo Mesa lupine (Lupinus nipomensis) • San Clemente Island bush-mallow (Malacothamnus clementinus) • Santa Cruz Island bush-mallow (Malacothamnus fasciculatus var. nesioticus) • Island malacothrix (Malacothrix squalida) • Santa Cruz Island malacothrix (Malacothrix indecora) • Bakersfield cactus (Opuntia treleasei) • California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica) • Lyon’s pentachaeta (Pentachaeta lyonii) • Island phacelia (Phacelia insularis ssp. insularis) • Yadon’s piperia (Piperia yadonii) • Calistoga allocarya (Plagiobothrys strictus)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3809

Application No. Applicant, city, state Species Location Activity Type of take Permit action

• San Diego mesa-mint (Pogogyne abramsii) • Otay mesa-mint (Pogogyne nudiuscula) • Gambel’s watercress (Rorippa gambellii) • Santa Cruz Island rockcress (Sibara filifolia) • Keck’s Checker-mal- low (Sidalcea keckii) • California seablite (Suaeda californica) • Santa Cruz Island fringepod (Thysanocarpus conchuliferus). TE–797999 ...... Merkel & Associates, • Conservancy fairy CA Survey ...... Survey, Capture, han- Renew. Inc., San Diego, Cali- shrimp (Branchinecta dle, release, and col- fornia. conservatio), lect vouchers. • Longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna), • San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), • Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), • Vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi), • Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), • Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) • Light-footed clapper rail (light-footed Ridgway’s r.) (Rallus longirostris levipes) (R. obsoletus l.) • Unarmored threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni) • Tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi). TE–11825D ...... Autumn Skimin, • Conservancy fairy CA Survey ...... Capture, handle, re- New. Georgetown, Cali- shrimp (&), lease, and collect fornia. • Longhorn fairy shrimp vouchers. (Branchinecta longiantenna), • San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), • Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), • Vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi). TE–11840D ...... Josh Weinik, Long • El Segundo blue but- CA Survey ...... Survey ...... New. Beach, California. terfly (Euphilotes battoides allyni), • Palos Verdes blue butterfly (Glaucopsyche lygdamus palosverdesensis). TE–821967 ...... Paul Galvin, Irvine, Cali- • Conservancy fairy CA, NV Survey and nest mon- Survey, nest monitor, Renew. fornia. shrimp (Branchinecta itor. Capture, handle, re- conservatio), lease, and collect • Longhorn fairy shrimp vouchers. (Branchinecta longiantenna), • San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis),

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:33 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3810 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

Application No. Applicant, city, state Species Location Activity Type of take Permit action

• Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), • Vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi), • Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), • Least Bell’s vireo (Vireo belli pusillus). TE–05665B ...... Lisa Achter, Grass Val- • California tiger sala- CA Survey ...... Capture, handle, and Amend. ley, California. mander (Sonoma release. County Distinct Popu- lation Segment (DPS)) (Ambystoma californiense). TE–12771D ...... Lynn Sweet ...... • Triple-ribbed milk- CA Remove/reduce to pos- Collect tissue and New. vetch (Astragalus session from lands whole plants. tricarinatus). under Federal juris- diction.

Public Availability of Comments DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR • Telephone: Alfredo Begazo, at 772– 469–4234. Written comments we receive become Fish and Wildlife Service • _ part of the administrative record Email: alfredo [email protected]. associated with this action. Before [FWS–R4–ES–2018–N134; • U.S. mail: Alfredo Begazo, South including your address, phone number, FXES11140400000–178–FF04EF2000] Florida Ecological Services Office; Attn: email address, or other personal ‘‘Florida Bramingham, Inc. Permit-TE Endangered and Threatened Wildlife identifying information in your 94080C–0’’ and/or ‘‘Palmetto Lake and Plants; Availability of Two Habitat Wales-Hwy 60, LLC Permit-TE comment, you should be aware that Conservation Plans for Sand Skink and your entire comment—including your 94085C–0,’’ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Blue-Tailed Mole Skink, Osceola and Service; 1339 20th Street; Vero Beach, personal identifying information—may Polk Counties, FL be made publicly available at any time. FL 32960–3559. While you can request in your comment AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, • In-person review: The documents that we withhold your personal Interior. are available for public inspection by identifying information from public ACTION: Notice of availability; request appointment during normal business review, we cannot guarantee that we for comments and information. hours at the above address. Please call will be able to do so. All submissions to make an appointment. from organizations or businesses, and SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), have received two FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. from individuals identifying themselves Alfredo Begazo, Fish and Wildlife as representatives or officials of applications for incidental take permits (ITP) under the Endangered Species Act. Biologist, South Florida Ecological organizations or businesses, will be Florida Bramingham, Inc. (Permit Services Office (see ADDRESSES). made available for public disclosure in TE94080C–0) and Palmetto Lake Wales- their entirety. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the Hwy 60, LLC (Permit 94085C–0) Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), Next Steps (applicants) are requesting individual have received two applications for ITPs for take of sand skink and blue- incidental take permits (ITPs) under the If we decide to issue permits to any tailed mole skink. We request public Endangered Species Act of 1973, as of the applicants listed in this notice, comments on these permit applications, amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). we will publish a notice in the Federal each of which includes a habitat Florida Bramingham, Inc. is requesting Register. conservation plan (HCP), and our a 30-year ITP, and Palmetto Lake Wales- preliminary determinations that these Hwy 60, LLC is requesting a 5-year ITP Authority HCPs qualify as low effect under the for the take of the federally listed sand National Environmental Policy Act We publish this notice under section skink (Neoseps reynoldsi) and (NEPA). To make these determinations, 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of threatened blue-tailed mole skink we used our environmental action 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et (Eumeces egregious) (skinks). We statements and low-effect screening seq.). request public comment on these permit forms, which are also available for applications, habitat conservation plans Angela Picco, review. (HCPs), and on our preliminary Acting Chief of Ecological Services, Pacific DATES: We must receive your written determinations that these HCPs qualify Southwest Region, Sacramento, California. comments on or before March 15, 2019. as categorical exclusions under the [FR Doc. 2019–02103 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] ADDRESSES: National Environmental Policy Act BILLING CODE 4333–15–P Obtaining Documents: You may (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). To make obtain copies of the documents by any these determinations, we used our of the following methods. Be sure to environmental action statement and specify clearly the ITP applications for low-effect screening forms, which are which you want documents. also available for review.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3811

Public Comments in its HCP. Therefore, issuance of either under the Endangered Species Act. The of the ITPs would be a ‘‘low-effect’’ existing ITP expired on June 6, 2018. If Submitting Comments action and qualify as a categorical granted, the renewed ITP would extend If you wish to comment on any of the exclusion under the NEPA, as provided authorization for take of the federally documents, you may do so via any one by 43 CFR 46.205 and 46.210. A low- threatened sand skink and blue-tailed of the following methods. Be sure to effect HCP is one involving: (1) Minor mole skink (skinks) incidental to the specify clearly the ITP applications on or negligible effects on federally listed, construction of a single-family which you are commenting. proposed, and candidate species and residential development located in • Email, U.S. mail, or In-person drop- their habitats; (2) minor or negligible Osceola County, Florida. The co- off: See ADDRESSES. effects on other environmental values or applicants are JKAF Investments, LLC, • Fax: Alfredo Begazo, 772–562– resources; and, (3) impacts that, when and Kathryn Kendrick Davidow Trust. 4288. considered together with the impacts of We request public comments on the Public Availability of Comments other past, present, and reasonably permit application, the habitat foreseeable similarly situated projects, conservation plan (HCP), and our Before including your address, phone would not result over time in preliminary determination that this HCP number, email address, or other cumulative effects to environmental qualifies as low effect under the personal identifying information in your values or resources that would be National Environmental Policy Act comments, you should be aware that considered significant. (NEPA). To make this determination, we your entire comment—including your used our environmental action Next Steps personal identifying information—may statement and low-effect screening form, be made publicly available at any time. We will evaluate each HCP and the which is also available for review. While you may ask us in your comment comments we receive to determine DATES: We must receive your written to withhold your personal identifying whether the ITP application meets the comments on or before March 15, 2019. information from public review, we requirements of section 10(a)(1)(B) of ADDRESSES: cannot guarantee that we will be able to the ESA. We will also conduct an intra- do so. Obtaining Documents: You may Service consultation on each obtain copies of the documents by any Applicants’ Proposed Projects application to evaluate take of the of the following methods: skinks in accordance with section 7 of • Each applicant requests a permit Telephone: Alfredo Begazo, 772– the ESA. We will use the results of these 469–4234 (telephone). under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the consultations, in combination with the • _ Endangered Species Act. If we issue Email: alfredo [email protected]. above findings, in our analysis of • U.S. mail: Alfredo Begazo, South either permit, the applicant anticipates whether or not to issue each ITP. If the Florida Ecological Services Office; Attn: taking sand skink and blue-tailed mole requirements are met, we will issue ITP JKAF Investments, LLC, and Kathryn skink incidental to land preparation and number TE94080C–0 to Florida Kendrick Davidow Trust Permit TE construction. The amount of habitat loss Bramingham, Inc. and TE94085C–0 to 8166B–1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife for each proposed project is as follows: Palmetto Lake Wales-Hwy 60, LLC. • Florida Bramingham, Inc. Service, 1339 20th Street, Vero Beach, (TE94080C–0) anticipates destroying Authority FL 32960–3559. • In-person review: The documents 13.1 acres of species feeding, breeding, We provide this notice under Section are available for public inspection by and sheltering habitat incidental to land 10 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) appointment during normal business preparation and construction in Section and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). hours at the above address. Please call 14, Township 25 South, and Range 27 to make an appointment. East, in Osceola County, Florida. Roxanna Hinzman, • Fax: Alfredo Begazo, 772–562– • Palmetto Lake Wales-Hwy 60, LLC Field Supervisor, South Florida Ecological 4288. (TE94085C–0) anticipates destroying Services Office. Submitting Comments: If you wish to 1.13 acres of species feeding, breeding, [FR Doc. 2019–02192 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] comment on any of the documents, you and sheltering habitat incidental to land BILLING CODE 4333–15–P may do so by submitting your comment preparation and construction in in writing to the email address, U.S. Sections 7 and 8, Township 30 South, mail address (mail or hand-carrying), or and Range 29 East, in Polk County, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR fax number above. Please also see Public Florida. Fish and Wildlife Service Availability of Comments in Each applicant proposes to mitigate SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. for impacts to the species by purchasing [FWS–R4–ES–2018–N143; credits from a Service-approved FXES11140400000–178–FF04EF2000] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. conservation bank as follows: Alfredo Begazo, Fish and Wildlife Renewal of Incidental Take Permit for • Florida Bramingham, Inc. proposes Biologist, South Florida Ecological Sand Skink and Blue-Tailed Mole to purchase the equivalent of 26.2 acres Services Office (see ADDRESSES), 772– Skink, Osceola County, FL of credits. 469–4234 (telephone). • Palmetto Lake Wales-Hwy 60, LLC AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the proposes to purchase the equivalent of Interior. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), 2.26 acres of credits. ACTION: Notice of availability; request announce receipt of an application for for comments and information. the renewal of an existing ITP under the Our Preliminary Determination Endangered Species Act of 1973, as The Service has made a preliminary SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). determination that each applicant’s Service, announce receipt of an The co-applicants are JKAF project, including the minimization and application for the renewal of an Investments, LLC, and Kathryn mitigation measures, will individually existing incidental take permit (ITP). Kendrick Davidow Trust, and they seek and cumulatively have a minor or The applicants are requesting a 5-year a 5-year renewal of an ITP that expired negligible effect on the species covered renewal of their existing 2-year ITP on June 29, 2018. Renewal would give

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3812 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

them the authority to take the federally (3) impacts that, when considered Control Number 1076–0143 in the listed sand skink (Neoseps reynoldsi) together with the impacts of other past, subject line of your comments. and threatened blue-tailed mole skink present, and reasonable foreseeable FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To (Eumeces egregious) (hereafter, skinks) similarly situated projects, would not request additional information about in Osceola County, Florida. We request result over time in cumulative effects to this ICR, contact Ms. Sharee M. Freeman public comment on this permit renewal environmental values or resources that by email at [email protected], or application and habitat conservation would be considered significant. by telephone at (202) 219–0240. plan (HCP), and on our preliminary Next Step SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In determination that this HCP qualifies as accordance with the Paperwork categorical exclusion under the National We will evaluate the HCP and the Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the Environmental Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. comments we receive to determine general public and other Federal 4321 et seq.). To make this whether the ITP application meets the agencies with an opportunity to determination, we used our requirements of section 10(a)(1)(B) of comment on new, proposed, revised, environmental action statement and the ESA. We will also conduct an intra- and continuing collections of low-effect screening form, which are Service consultation on the application information. This helps us assess the also available for review. to evaluate take of the skinks in impact of our information collection accordance with section 7 of the ESA. Public Availability of Comments requirements and minimize the public’s We will use the results of the reporting burden. It also helps the Before including your address, phone consultation, in combination with the number, email address, or other public understand our information above findings, in our analysis of collection requirements and provide the personal identifying information in your whether or not to issue the ITP. If the comment, you should be aware that requested data in the desired format. requirements are met, we will issue ITP We are soliciting comments on the your entire comment—including your number TE8166B–1 to JKAF personal identifying information—may proposed ICR that is described below. Investments, LLC, and Kathryn We are especially interested in public be made publicly available at any time. Kendrick Davidow Trust. While you may ask us in your comment comment addressing the following to withhold your personal identifying Authority issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the BIA; (2) will information from public review, we We provide this notice under section this information be processed and used cannot guarantee that we will be able to 10(c) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate do so. and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). of burden accurate; (4) how might the Applicants’ Proposed Project Roxanna Hinzman, BIA enhance the quality, utility, and JKAF Investments, LLC, and Kathryn Field Supervisor, South Florida Ecological clarity of the information to be Kendrick Davidow Trust request a Services Office. collected; and (5) how might the BIA renewal of an expired permit under [FR Doc. 2019–02191 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] minimize the burden of this collection section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered BILLING CODE 4333–15–P on the respondents, including through Species Act. If we issue the permit, the the use of information technology. applicants anticipated taking sand skink Comments that you submit in and blue-tailed mole skink incidental to DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR response to this notice are a matter of land preparation and construction on public record. We will include or 0.5 acres of occupied skinks habitat for Bureau of Indian Affairs summarize each comment in our request the residential development in Section [190A2100DD/AAKC001030/ to OMB to approve this ICR. Before 30, Township 25 South, and Range 27 A0A501010.999900 253G; OMB Control including your address, phone number, East, in Osceola County, Florida. The Number 1076–0143] email address, or other personal applicants proposes to mitigate for the identifying information in your take resulting from this project by Agency Information Collection comment, you should be aware that purchasing and protecting 1 acre of Activities; Tribal Self-Governance your entire comment—including your skink-occupied habitat at a Service- Program personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. approved mitigation bank prior to any AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, While you can ask us in your comment clearing activities. Interior. to withhold your personal identifying Our Preliminary Determination ACTION: Notice of information collection; information from public review, we The Service has made a preliminary request for comment. cannot guarantee that we will be able to determination that the applicants’ SUMMARY: In accordance with the do so. project, including the mitigation Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, Abstract: The Self-Governance measures, will individually and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) are program is authorized by the Tribal Self- cumulatively have a minor or negligible proposing to renew an information Governance Act of 1994, Public Law effect on the species covered in its HCP. collection. 103–413 (the Act), as amended. Indian Therefore, we have determined that the Tribes interested in entering into Self- renewal of the expired ITP for this DATES: Interested persons are invited to Governance must submit certain project would be ‘‘low effect’’ and submit comments on or before April 15, information as required by the Act. In qualify for categorical exclusions under 2019. addition, those Tribes and Tribal the NEPA, as provided by 43 CFR ADDRESSES: Send your comments on consortia that have entered into Self- 46.205 and 46.210. A low-effect HCP is this information collection request (ICR) Governance funding agreements will be one involving: (1) Minor or negligible by mail to Ms. Sharee M. Freeman, requested to submit certain information effects on federally listed, proposed, and Director, Office of Self-Governance, as described in 25 CFR 1000. This candidate species and their habitats; (2) 1849 C Street NW, MS–2071, information will be used to justify a minor or negligible effects on other Washington, DC 20240; telephone: (202) budget request submission on their environmental values or resources; and 219–0240. Please reference OMB behalf and to comport with section 405

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3813

of the Act that calls for the Secretary to Gaming, Bureau of Indian Affairs, MS– DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR submit an annual report to the Congress. 3657 MIB, 1849 C Street NW, Title of Collection: Tribal Self- Washington, DC 20240, telephone (202) Bureau of Indian Affairs Governance Program. 219–4066. [190A2100DD/AAKC001030/ OMB Control Number: 1076–0143. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A0A51010.999900] Form Number: Annual Self- This notice is published in the exercise of Governance Report Form. Proclaiming Certain Lands as authority delegated by the Secretary of Type of Review: Extension of a Reservation for the Shakopee the Interior to the Principal Deputy currently approved collection. Mdewakanton Sioux Community of Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs by Respondents/Affected Public: Minnesota Federally recognized Indian Tribes and 209 Departmental Manual 8.1, and is Tribal consortia participating in or published to comply with the AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, wishing to enter into Tribal Self- requirements of 25 CFR 151.12(c)(2)(ii) Interior. Governance. that notice of the decision to acquire ACTION: Notice. Total Estimated Number of Annual land in trust be promptly provided in SUMMARY: This notice informs the public Respondents: 75. the Federal Register. Total Estimated Number of Annual On December 21, 2018, the Principal that the Assistant Secretary—Indian Responses: 84. Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs proclaimed approximately 93.34 Estimated Completion Time per Affairs issued a decision to accept 6.3 acres, more or less, an addition to the Response: Completion times vary from acres, more or less, of land in trust for reservation of the Shakopee 30 minutes to 400 hours, with an the Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Mdewakanton Sioux Community of average of approximately 43 hours. Reservation, Wyoming, (Tribe) under Minnesota on December 21, 2018. Total Estimated Number of Annual the authority of the Act of July 27, 1939, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Burden Hours: 4,443 hours. 53 Stat. 1128–1130, as amended by Sharlene M. Round Face, Bureau of Respondent’s Obligation: Required to Public Law 103–435, 15, 108 Stat. 4573 Indian Affairs, Division of Real Estate Obtain or Retain a Benefit. (Nov. 2, 1994) (formerly codified at 25 Services, 1849 C Street NW, MS–4642– Frequency of Collection: On occasion U.S.C. 571–581). The Principal Deputy MIB, Washington, DC 20240, telephone or annually. Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs (202) 208–3615. Total Estimated Annual Nonhour determined that the Tribe’s request also SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Burden Cost: $10,500. meets the requirements of the Indian notice is published in the exercise of An agency may not conduct or Gaming Regulatory Act’s ‘‘within authority delegated by the Secretary of sponsor and a person is not required to reservation boundaries exception,’’ 25 the Interior to the Assistant Secretary— respond to a collection of information U.S.C. 2719(a)(1), to the general Indian Affairs by part 209 of the unless it displays a currently valid OMB prohibition contained in 25 U.S.C. Departmental Manual. control number. 2719(a) on gaming on lands acquired in A proclamation was issued according The authority for this action is the trust after October 17, 1988. to the Act of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 986; Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 The Principal Deputy Assistant 25 U.S.C. 5110) for the lands described U.S.C. 3501 et seq). Secretary—Indian Affairs, on behalf of below. The land was proclaimed to be part of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Elizabeth K. Appel, the Secretary of the Interior, will immediately acquire title to the 6.3 Sioux Community of Minnesota Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs and Reservation in Scott County, Minnesota. Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs. acres, more or less, in the name of the [FR Doc. 2019–02178 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] United States of America in trust for the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community Tribe upon fulfillment of Departmental of Minnesota Reservation, Fifth Principal BILLING CODE 4337–15–P requirements. Meridian, Scott County, Minnesota, Legal Descriptions Containing 93.34 Acres, More The site submitted for gaming and or Less DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR other purposes is comprised of 6.3 acres, more or less, located in Lot 14, Canhdaka Parcel, 411–T–1022 Bureau of Indian Affairs Section 10, Township 1 South, Range 4 YMCA Parcel 1: The South Half of the [190A2100DD/A0A501010.999900 253G] East, Wind River Meridian, Fremont Northwest Quarter, Section 23, Township County, Wyoming, more particularly 115 North, Range 22 West, of the Fifth Land Acquisitions; Arapaho Tribe of described as follows: Principal Meridian, Scott County, Minnesota. the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming AND Beginning at the NW corner of Lot 14, said The South 200 feet of the East 33 feet of ° ′ AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Section 10, thence N 89 38 E, along the the North Half of the Northwest Quarter of Interior. North line of said Lot 14, 488.17 feet to the Section 23, Township 115 North, Range 22 Westerly right-of-way line of State Highway West, of the Fifth Principal Meridian, Scott ACTION: Notice. 789; thence S 23°14′30″ West along said County, Minnesota. right-of-way line, 1227.94 feet to the West YMCA Parcel 2: Outlot C, Titus 1st SUMMARY: The Principal Deputy ° ′ Addition, according to the recorded plat Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs line of said Lot 14; thence N 0 11 W, along said West line 1125.17 feet to the point of thereof, and situate in Scott County, made a final agency determination to beginning of this description. Containing Minnesota. acquire 6.3 acres, more or less, of land 6.30 acres, more or less. Mazario Parcel: That part of the North Half within the boundaries of the Wind River of the Northwest Quarter of Section 23, Reservation in trust for the Arapaho Dated: December 21, 2018. Township 115 North, Range 22 West of the Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, John Tahsuda, 5th P.M., Scott County, Minnesota described as follows: Wyoming, for gaming and other Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Affairs. purposes on December 21, 2018. North Half of the Northwest Quarter; thence FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. [FR Doc. 2019–02187 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] on an assumed bearing of North 01 degrees Paula L. Hart, Director, Office of Indian BILLING CODE 4337–15–P 00 minutes 36 seconds East along the West

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3814 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

line of said North Half of the Northwest DATES: Interested persons are invited to was designed by Congress to help local Quarter a distance of 660.20 feet; thence submit comments on or before April 15, governments recover some of the North 89 degrees 47 minutes 07 seconds East 2019. expenses they incur in providing a distance of 658.93 feet; thence South 01 services on public lands. These local degrees 00 minutes 36 seconds West parallel ADDRESSES: Send your comments on with the West line of said North Half of the this information collection request (ICR) governments receive funds under Northwest Quarter a distance of 662.38 feet by mail to the Office of Budget, Office various Federal land payment programs more or less to the South line of said North of the Secretary, Attn: Dionna Kiernan, such as the National Forest Revenue Half of the Northwest Quarter; thence 1849 C Street NW, MS 7413 MIB, Act, the Mineral Lands Leasing Act, and westerly along said South line a distance of Washington, DC 20240 or by email to the Taylor Grazing Act. PILT payments 658.89 feet more or less to the point of [email protected]. Please supplement the payments local beginning. reference OMB Control Number 1093– governments receive under these other Except that part of the North Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 23, Township 0005 in the subject line of your programs. 115 North, Range 22 West of the 5th P.M., comments. The PILT Act requires the Governor of Scott County, Minnesota, which is denoted FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To each state to furnish the Department of and shown as Parcel 3 and Parcel 3A on Scott request additional information about the Interior with a listing of payments County Right of Way Plat No. 59, according disbursed to local governments by the to the recorded plat thereof, on file in the this ICR, contact Dionna Kiernan by email at [email protected], or States on behalf of the Federal Office of the County Recorder, Scott County, Government under 12 statutes described Minnesota. by telephone at 202–513–7783. in Section 6903 of 31 U.S.C. The Subject to an easement for drainage and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In utility purposes over, under and across that accordance with the Paperwork Department of the Interior uses the part of the North Half of the Northwest Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the amounts reported by States to reduce Quarter of Section 23, Township 115 North, general public and other Federal PILT payments to units of general local Range 22 West of the 5th P.M., Scott County, agencies with an opportunity to governments from that which they Minnesota, which is denoted as Drainage and might otherwise receive. If such listings Utility Easement Parcel 3 and shown by the comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of were not furnished by the Governor of symbol (‘‘D.U.E. 3’’) on Scott County Right of each affected State, the Department Way Plat No. 59, according to the recorded information. This helps us assess the plat thereof, on file in the Office of the impact of our information collection would not be able to compute the PILT County Recorder, Scott County, Minnesota. requirements and minimize the public’s payments to units of general local reporting burden. It also helps the government within the States in The above described lands contain a question. total of 93.34 acres, more or less, which public understand our information collection requirements and provide the In fiscal year 2004, administrative are subject to all valid rights, authority for the PILT program was reservations, rights-of-way, and requested data in the desired format. We are soliciting comments on the transferred from the Bureau of Land easements of record. Management to the Office of the This proclamation does not affect title proposed ICR that is described below. Secretary of the Department of the to the lands described above, nor does We are especially interested in public Interior. Applicable DOI regulations it affect any valid existing easements for comment addressing the following pertaining to the PILT program to be public roads, highways, public utilities, issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to administered by the Office of the railroads and pipelines, or any other the proper functions of the Office of Secretary were published as a final rule valid easements or rights-of-way or Budget; (2) will this information be in the Federal Register on December 7, reservations of record. processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; 2004 (69 FR 70557). The Office of Dated: December 21, 2018. (4) how might the Office of Budget Budget, Office of the Secretary is now Tara Sweeney, enhance the quality, utility, and clarity planning to extend the information Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. of the information to be collected; and collection approval authority in order to [FR Doc. 2019–02188 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] (5) how might the Office of Budget enable the Department of the Interior to BILLING CODE 4337–15–P minimize the burden of this collection continue to comply with the PILT Act. on the respondents, including through Title of Collection: Payments in Lieu the use of information technology. of Taxes (PILT) Act, Statement of DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Comments that you submit in Federal Lands Payments. response to this notice are a matter of OMB Control Number: 1093–0005. Office of the Secretary public record. We will include or Form Number: None. [199D1114PT DS62100000 DPTA00000; summarize each comment in our request Type of Review: Extension of a OMB Control Number 1093–0005] to OMB to approve this ICR. Before currently approved collection. including your address, phone number, Respondents/Affected Public: State Agency Information Collection email address, or other personal governments. Activities; Payments in Lieu of Taxes identifying information in your Total Estimated Number of Annual (PILT) Act, Statement of Federal Lands comment, you should be aware that Respondents: 49. Payments your entire comment—including your Total Estimated Number of Annual AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Office personal identifying information—may Responses: 49. of Budget Interior. be made publicly available at any time. Estimated Completion Time per Response: 46 hours. ACTION: Notice of information collection; While you can ask us in your comment request for comment. to withhold your personal identifying Total Estimated Number of Annual information from public review, we Burden Hours: 2,254 hours. SUMMARY: In accordance with the cannot guarantee that we will be able to Respondent’s Obligation: Required to Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, do so. Obtain or Retain a Benefit. the Office of Budget, Office of the Abstract: Public Law 97–258 (31 Frequency of Collection: Annually. Secretary are proposing to renew an U.S.C. 6901–6907), as amended, the Total Estimated Annual Nonhour information collection. Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) Act, Burden Cost: None.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3815

An agency may not conduct or Conservation, proposed the BOSH Any challenge to this decision must sponsor and a person is not required to Project to treat up to 617,000 acres of be brought in the Federal District Court respond to a collection of information early-stage western juniper and is subject to 42 U.S.C. 4370m–6. unless it displays a currently valid OMB encroachment in southwestern Idaho. Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10. control number. The conversion of sagebrush-steppe The authority for this action is the communities to juniper woodlands is a Joseph R. Balash, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 major threat to greater sage-grouse in Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals U.S.C. 3501 et seq). southwestern Idaho. As junipers Management. encroach into sagebrush habitat, [FR Doc. 2019–02095 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Jeffrey Parrillo, sagebrush-steppe vegetation eventually BILLING CODE 4310–GG–P Departmental Information Collection dies because it is unable to compete Clearance Officer. with junipers for water, nutrients, space [FR Doc. 2019–02201 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] and sunlight. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BILLING CODE 4334–63–P The BLM will use several treatment Bureau of Land Management methods to remove early-stage western DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR juniper, include hand-cutting, [LLWO260000.L10600000PC0000.19X.LXSIA prescribed fire and mastication. DVSBD00.241A] Bureau of Land Management The BLM began meeting with internal groups and external collaborators to Call for Nominations for the National [19XL LLIDB00100 LF1000000.HT0000 Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board LXSIOVHD0000 241A 4500129955] discuss and develop the project proposal in 2013. The BLM held a 30- AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Notice of Availability of the Record of day public scoping period from January Interior. Decision for the Bruneau-Owyhee 20 to February 20, 2015, to collect ACTION: Notice of call for nominations. Sage-Grouse Habitat Project, Idaho comment and feedback that would aid the BLM in project development. AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is Comments concerned effects to wildlife Interior. to solicit public nominations for three habitat (especially sage-grouse and positions on the Wild Horse and Burro ACTION: Notice of availability. migratory birds), soils, native plant Advisory Board (Board) that will SUMMARY: In accordance with the communities, sensitive plants, spread of become vacant on March 21, 2019. The National Environmental Policy Act of noxious and invasive weeds, hydrology Board provides advice concerning the 1969, as amended, and the Federal Land and riparian areas, fisheries, wilderness management, protection, and control of Policy and Management Act of 1976, as values, visual resources, Areas of wild free-roaming horses and burros on amended, the Bureau of Land Critical Environmental Concern, public lands administered by the Management (BLM) announces the recreation, cultural resources and social Department of the Interior, through the availability of the Record of Decision values. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and (ROD) for the Bruneau-Owyhee Sage- The BLM published the Draft EIS for the Department of Agriculture, through grouse Habitat (BOSH) Project. BOSH on November 18, 2016. The BLM the U.S. Forest Service. ADDRESSES: Copies of the Bruneau- considered and incorporated comments DATES: Nominations must be post Owyhee Sage-grouse Habitat Project into the Final EIS. Public comments marked or submitted to the following ROD are available for public inspection resulted in clarifications, but did not addresses no later than April 1, 2019. at the BLM Boise District Office, 3948 S significantly change alternatives ADDRESSES: All mail sent via the U.S. Development Avenue, Boise, Idaho, and considered. Postal Service should be addressed as at the BLM Owyhee Field Office, 20 In response to public comment, the follows: Division of Wild Horses and First Avenue West, Marsing, Idaho. BLM (1) modified focal treatment areas Burros, U.S. Department of the Interior, Interested persons may also review the to reflect updated vegetation data and to Bureau of Land Management, 1849 C ROD at goo.gl/eNFS9K. remove some Areas of Critical Street NW, Room 2134 LM; Attn: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Environmental Concern; (2) developed Dorothea Boothe, WO–260, Washington, Mike McGee, Resource Coordinator, Alternative C1, which expanded project DC 20240. telephone (208) 384–3300; address 3948 boundaries to increase connectivity All packages that are sent via FedEx S Development Ave. Boise, ID, 83705; between treatment areas and include or UPS should be addressed as follows: email blm_id_ additional habitat; (3) removed all Wild Horse and Burro Division, U.S. [email protected]. wilderness areas from treatment Department of the Interior, Bureau of Persons who use a telecommunications boundaries, and (4) added a carbon Land Management, 20 M Street SE, device for the deaf (TDD) may call the sequestration analysis. Room 2134 LM, Attn: Dorothea Boothe, Federal Relay Service (FRS) at (800) The BLM released the Final EIS for Washington, DC 20003. 877–8339 to contact Mr. McGee. The the BOSH Project on February 9, 2018. You may also email PDF documents FRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days On February 5, 2019, Joseph R. Balash, to Ms. Boothe at [email protected]. a week, to leave a message or question the Department of the Interior’s FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: with Mr. McGee. You will receive a Assistant Secretary for Land and Dorothea Boothe, Acting Wild Horse reply during normal business hours. Minerals Management, signed a Record and Burro Program Coordinator, 202– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Boise of Decision selecting Alternative C1 for 912–7654, [email protected]. Persons District BLM, in collaboration with the implementation. That approval who use a telecommunications device Idaho Department of Fish and Game, the constitutes the final decision of the for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Natural Resources Conservation Service, Department and, in accordance with the Relay Service (FRS) at 1–800–877–8339 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the regulations at 43 CFR 4.410, is not to contact the above individual during Idaho Department of Lands, and the subject to appeal under Departmental normal business hours. The FRS is Idaho Governor’s Office of Species regulations found in 43 CFR part 4. available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3816 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

You will receive a reply during normal 13. Indication of whether the lobbyists are ineligible to serve on all business hours. individual is a federally registered FACA and non-FACA boards, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Members lobbyist; and committees, or councils in an individual of the Board serve without 14. Explanation of interest in serving capacity. The term ‘‘individual compensation. However, while away on the Board. capacity’’ refers to individuals who are from their homes or regular places of Provide at least one letter of reference appointed to exercise their own business, Board and subcommittee sent from special interest groups or individual best judgment on behalf of members engaged in Board or organizations the individual may the government, such as when they are subcommittee business, approved by the represent. References may also include designated Special Government Designated Federal Official (DFO), may business associates, friends, co-workers, Employees, rather than being appointed be allowed travel expenses, including local, State, and/or Federal Government to represent a particular interest. per diem in lieu of subsistence, in the representatives, or members of Pursuant to Section 7 of the Wild same manner as persons employed Congress. Include any other information Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, intermittently in government service that is relevant to the individual’s members of the Board cannot be qualifications. under Section 5703 of Title 5 of the employed by the State or Federal As appropriate, certain Board United States Code. Nominations for a Government. members may be appointed as special term of 3 years are needed to represent government employees. Special (Authority: 43 CFR 1784.4–1) the following categories of interest: government employees serve on the • Kristin Bail, Humane Advocacy Board without compensation and are • Assistant Director, Resources and Planning. Livestock Management subject to financial disclosure • [FR Doc. 2019–02094 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Wildlife Management requirements in the Ethics in The Board will meet one to four times Government Act and 5 CFR 2634. BILLING CODE 4310–84–P annually. The DFO may call additional Nominations are to be sent to the meetings in connection with special address listed under ADDRESSES. needs for advice. Individuals may Privacy Act Statement: The authority INTERNATIONAL TRADE nominate themselves or others. Any to request this information is contained COMMISSION individual or organization may in 5 U.S.C. 301, the Federal Advisory [Investigation No. 337–TA–1074] nominate one or more persons to serve Committee Act (FACA), and 43 CFR part on the Board. Nominations will not be 1784. The appointment officer uses this Certain Industrial Automation Systems accepted without a complete resume. information to determine education, and Components Thereof Including The following information must training, and experience related to Control Systems, Controllers, accompany all nominations for the possible service on a BLM advisory Visualization Hardware, Motion and individual to be considered for a council. If you are appointed as an Motor Control Systems, Networking position: advisor, the information will be retained Equipment, Safety Devices, and Power 1. The position(s) for which the by the appointing official for as long as Supplies; Notice of Commission individual wishes to be considered; you serve. Otherwise, it will be Determination To Extend the Target 2. The individual’s first, middle, and destroyed 2 years after termination of Date last name; your membership or returned (if 3. Business and home addresses and requested) following announcement of AGENCY: U.S. International Trade telephone numbers; the Board’s appointments. Submittal of Commission. 4. Email address; this information is voluntary. However, ACTION: Notice. 5. Present occupation/title and failure to complete any or all items will employer; inhibit fair evaluation of your SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 6. Education: Colleges, degrees, and qualifications and could result in you the U.S. International Trade major field of study; not receiving full consideration for Commission has determined to extend 7. Career Highlights: Significant appointment. the target date by six weeks, from related experience, civic and Membership Selection: Individuals February 25, 2019, to April 8, 2019. As professional activities, elected offices shall qualify to serve on the Board set forth below, the Commission also (include prior advisory committee because of their education, training, or extends the deadlines for filing written experience or career achievements experience that enables them to give submissions and reply submissions on related to the interest to be represented). informed and objective advice regarding the issues of remedy, the public interest, Attach additional pages, if necessary; the interest they represent. They should and bonding. 8. Qualifications: Education, training, demonstrate experience or knowledge of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and experience that qualify you to serve the area of their expertise and a Houda Morad, Office of the General on the Board; commitment to collaborate in seeking Counsel, U.S. International Trade 9. Experience or knowledge of wild solutions to resource management Commission, 500 E Street SW, horse and burro management; issues. The Board is structured to Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 10. Experience or knowledge of horses provide fair membership and balance, 708–4716. Copies of non-confidential or burros: Equine health, training, and both geographic and interest specific, in documents filed in connection with this management; terms of the functions to be performed investigation are or will be available for 11. Experience in working with and points of view to be represented. inspection during official business disparate groups to achieve Members are selected with the objective hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the collaborative solutions (e.g., civic of providing representative counsel and Office of the Secretary, U.S. organizations, planning commissions, advice about public land and resource International Trade Commission, 500 E school boards, etc.); planning. No person is to be denied an Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, 12. Identification of any BLM opportunity to serve because of race, telephone (202) 205–2000. General permits, leases, or licenses held by the age, sex, religion, or national origin. information concerning the Commission individual or his or her employer; Individuals who are federally registered may also be obtained by accessing its

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3817

internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. GreySolution, KBS, EuoSource, T-Tide, submitting the following information The public record for this investigation SoBuy, Suzhou, Yaspro and Can Electric collection request to the Office of may be viewed on the Commission’s (collectively, ‘‘the Defaulted Management and Budget (OMB) for electronic docket (EDIS) at https:// Respondents’’). See Order No. 17 (Feb. review and approval in accordance with edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired 1, 2018), unreviewed, Comm’n Notice the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. persons are advised that information on (Feb. 26, 2018); Order No. 32 (June 28, DATES: The purpose of this notice is to this matter can be obtained by 2018), unreviewed, Comm’n Notice (July allow for 60 days for public comment contacting the Commission’s TDD 24, 2018). In addition, five unserved April 15, 2019. terminal on (202) 205–1810. respondents (Capnil, Dahong, Huang, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If PLC–VIP, and Sparker) were terminated SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The you have comments especially on the from the investigation and one Commission instituted this investigation estimated public burden or associated respondent (Radwell) was terminated on October 16, 2017, based on a response time, suggestions, or need a based on the entry of a consent order. complaint filed by Complainant copy of the proposed information See Order No. 41 (July 17, 2018), Rockwell Automation, Inc. of collection instrument with instructions unreviewed, Comm’n Notice (Aug. 13, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. See 82 FR or additional information, please 2018); Order No. 42 (July 20, 2018), 48113–15 (Oct. 16, 2017). The contact Lashon M. Hilliard, Department unreviewed, Comm’n Notice (Aug. 15, complaint, as supplemented, alleges of Justice Office of Community Oriented 2018). violations of section 337 based on the Policing Services, 145 N Street NE, infringement of certain registered On October 23, 2018, the Administrative Law Judge issued a final Washington, DC 20530. trademarks and copyrights and on Written comments and/or suggestions unfair methods of competition and initial determination (‘‘FID’’) finding a violation of section 337 by the Defaulted can also be directed to the Office of unfair acts in the importation or sale of Management and Budget, Office of certain industrial automation systems Respondents. On December 20, 2018, the Commission determined not to Information and Regulatory Affairs, and components thereof including Attention Department of Justice Desk control systems, controllers, review the FID. See 83 FR 67346–48 (Dec. 28, 2018). The Commission also Officer, Washington, DC 20530 or sent visualization hardware, motion and to [email protected]. motor control systems, networking requested written submissions and reply equipment, safety devices, and power submissions on the issues of remedy, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Written supplies, the threat or effect of which is public interest, and bonding. See id. comments and suggestions from the to destroy or substantially injure an In view of the lapse in government public and affected agencies concerning industry in the United States. See id. appropriations and partial government the proposed collection of information The notice of investigation identifies shutdown, the Commission has are encouraged. Your comments should fifteen respondents: Can Electric determined to extend the target date by address one or more of the following Limited of Guangzhou, China (‘‘Can six weeks, from February 25, 2019, to four points: Electric’’); Capnil (HK) Company April 8, 2019. Under this schedule, —Evaluate whether the proposed Limited of Hong Kong (‘‘Capnil’’); written submissions on remedy, the collection of information is necessary Fractioni (Hongkong) Ltd. of Shanghai, public interest, and bonding are now for the proper performance of the China (‘‘Fractioni’’); Fujian Dahong due on February 15, 2019, and reply functions of the agency, including Trade Co. of Fujian, China (‘‘Dahong’’); submissions on those issues are now whether the information will have GreySolution Limited d/b/a Fibica of due on February 22, 2019. practical utility; Hong Kong (‘‘GreySolution’’); Huang The authority for the Commission’s —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s Wei Feng d/b/a A–O–M Industry of determination is contained in section estimate of the burden of the Shenzhen, China (‘‘Huang’’); KBS 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as proposed collection of information, Electronics Suzhou Co, Ltd. of amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in part including the validity of the Shanghai, China (‘‘KBS’’); PLC–VIP 210 of the Commission’s Rules of methodology and assumptions used; Shop d/b/a VIP Tech Limited of Hong Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part —Enhance the quality, utility, and Kong (‘‘PLC–VIP’’); Radwell 210). clarity of the information to be International, Inc. d/b/a PLC Center of By order of the Commission. collected; and Willingboro, New Jersey (‘‘Radwell’’); Issued: February 7, 2019. —Minimize the burden of the collection Shanghai EuoSource Electronic Co., Ltd Lisa Barton, of information on those who are to of Shanghai, China (‘‘EuoSource’’); Secretary to the Commission. respond, including through the use of ShenZhen T-Tide Trading co., Ltd. of [FR Doc. 2019–02109 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] appropriate automated, electronic, Shenzhen, China (‘‘T-Tide’’); SoBuy BILLING CODE 7020–02–P mechanical, or other technological Commercial (HK) Co. Limited of Hong collection techniques or other forms Kong (‘‘SoBuy’’); Suzhou Yi Micro of information technology, e.g., Optical Co., Ltd., d/b/a Suzhou Yiwei DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE permitting electronic submission of Guangxue Youxiangongsi, d/b/a Easy responses. Microoptics Co. LTD. of Jiangsu, China [OMB Number 1103–0100] Overview of This Information (‘‘Suzhou’’); Wenzhou Sparker Group Collection Co. Ltd., d/b/a Sparker Instruments of Agency Information Collection Wenzhou, China (‘‘Sparker’’); and Activities: Extension Requested; (1) Type of Information Collection: Yaspro Electronics (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. Comments Requested; Monitoring Extension of a currently approved of Shanghai, China (‘‘Yaspro’’). See id. Information Collections collection. The Office of Unfair Import ACTION: 60-Day notice. (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Investigations is also a party in this Monitoring Information Collections. investigation. See id. SUMMARY: The Department of Justice (3) Agency Form Number: 1103–0100 Nine respondents were found in (DOJ) Office of Community Oriented U.S. Department of Justice Office of default, namely, Fractioni, Policing Services (COPS) will be Community Oriented Policing Services.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3818 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

(4) Affected public who will be asked a proposed temporary one-year invited to submit comments and/or or required to respond, as well as a brief individual exemption from certain of hearing requests to EBSA via email or abstract: the prohibited transaction restrictions of FAX. Any such comments or requests Primary: COPS Office hiring grantees the Employee Retirement Income should be sent either by email to: that are selected for in-depth monitoring Security Act of 1974 (ERISA or the Act) [email protected], or by FAX to (202) 693– of their grant implementation and and/or the Internal Revenue Code of 8474 by the end of the scheduled equipment grantees that report using 1986 (the Code). If this proposed comment period. The application for COPS funds to implement a criminal exemption is granted, certain entities exemption and the comments received intelligence system will be required to with specified relationships to UBS will will be available for public inspection in respond. The Monitoring Information not be precluded from relying on the the Public Documents Room of the Collections include two types of exemptive relief provided by Prohibited Employee Benefits Security information collections: The Monitoring Transaction Class Exemption 84–14. Administration, U.S. Department of Request for Documentation and the 28 DATES: If there is a judgment in the Labor, Room N–1515, 200 Constitution CFR part 23 Monitoring Kit. French First Instance Court against UBS Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210. (5) An estimate of the total number of and/or UBS France and that judgment Warning: All comments received will respondents and the amount of time constitutes a conviction under Section be included in the public record estimated for an average respondent to I(g) of PTE 84–14, this exemption will without change and may be made respond/reply: It is estimated that 150 be in effect for one year from the date available online at http:// respondents annually will complete the of that judgment. www.regulations.gov, including any Monitoring Request for Documentation Written comments and requests for a personal information provided, unless at 3 hours per respondent. public hearing on the proposed the comment includes information (6) An estimate of the total public exemption should be submitted to the claimed to be confidential or other burden (in hours) associated with the Department by February 19, 2019. information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. If you submit a collection: There are an estimated 450 ADDRESSES: Comments should state the comment, EBSA recommends that you total annual burden hours associated nature of the person’s interest in the include your name and other contact with this collection. proposed exemption and the manner in information in the body of your If additional information is required which the person would be adversely comment, but DO NOT submit contact: Melody Braswell, Department affected by the exemption, if granted. A information that you consider to be Clearance Officer, United States request for a hearing can be requested confidential, or otherwise protected Department of Justice, Justice by any interested person who may be (such as Social Security number or an Management Division, Policy and adversely affected by an exemption. A unlisted phone number) or confidential Planning Staff, Two Constitution request for a hearing must state: (1) The business information that you do not Square, 145 N Street NE, Washington, name, address, telephone number, and want publicly disclosed. However, if DC 20530. email address of the person making the EBSA cannot read your comment due to Dated: February 7, 2019 request; (2) the nature of the person’s technical difficulties and cannot contact interest in the exemption and the Melody Braswell, you for clarification, EBSA might not be manner in which the person would be Department Clearance Officer, PRA, U.S. able to consider your comment. adversely affected by the exemption; Department of Justice. Additionally, the http:// and (3) a statement of the issues to be [FR Doc. 2019–02097 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] www.regulations.gov website is an addressed and a general description of BILLING CODE 4410–AT–P ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which the evidence to be presented at the means EBSA will not know your hearing. The Department will grant a identity or contact information unless request for a hearing made in DEPARTMENT OF LABOR you provide it in the body of your accordance with the requirements above comment. If you send an email directly where a hearing is necessary to fully Employee Benefits Security to EBSA without going through http:// explore material factual issues Administration www.regulations.gov, your email identified by the person requesting the address will be automatically captured [Exemption Application No. D–11988] hearing. A notice of such hearing shall and included as part of the comment be published by the Department in the Proposed Exemption Involving UBS that is placed in the public record and Federal Register. The Department may Assets Management (Americas) Inc.; made available on the internet. UBS Realty Investors LLC; UBS Hedge decline to hold a hearing where: (1) The request for the hearing does not meet FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Fund Solutions LLC; UBS O’Connor Brian Mica of the Department at (202) LLC; and Certain Future Affiliates in the requirements above; (2) the only issues identified for exploration at the 693–8402. (This is not a toll-free UBS’s Asset Management and Global number.) Wealth Management U.S. Divisions hearing are matters of law; or (3) the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (collectively, the Applicants or the UBS factual issues identified can be fully In March QPAMs) Located in Chicago, Illinois; explored through the submission of 2017, UBS and UBS France were Hartford, Connecticut; New York, New evidence in written (including charged with offenses under French law York; and Chicago, Illinois, electronic) form. arising out of their cross-border banking All written comments and requests for Respectively business. A trial was held in 2018, and a hearing (at least three copies) should the French court announced that it AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security be sent to the Employee Benefits would issue a judgment on February 20, Administration, Labor. Security Administration (EBSA), Office 2019. This judgment (the Potential 2019 ACTION: Notice of proposed exemption. of Exemption Determinations, U.S. French Judgment Against UBS/UBS Department of Labor, 200 Constitution France) may be adverse to UBS and/or SUMMARY: This document contains Avenue NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC UBS France. UBS recently requested notice of pendency before the 20210. Attention: Application No. D– that the Department issue an advisory Department of Labor (the Department) of 11988. Interested persons are also opinion that an adverse judgment from

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3819

the French court would not disqualify relationship with an entity covered by event of such a conviction, the UBS asset managers from acting as the proposed exemption. Applicants would no longer be able to QPAMs under PTE 84–14 (described rely on PTE 2017–07, which permits Summary of Facts and below) pursuant to the criminal them to avail themselves of PTE 84–14. Representations 2 disqualification set forth in Section I(g) This exemption, if granted, would of PTE 84–14. UBS requested that, if the 1. UBS AG (UBS) is a Swiss-based provide relief for the UBS QPAMs to Department was not prepared to issue global financial services company rely on PTE 84–14, notwithstanding the the opinion, the Department issue a organized under the laws of 2013 Conviction, the 2018 Conviction, temporary exemption. The Department Switzerland. UBS has banking divisions and the Potential 2019 French Judgment may not issue an Advisory Opinion and subsidiaries throughout the world, Against UBS/UBS France for a one-year before possible conviction and is with its United States headquarters period while the Department decides proposing this temporary exemption. located in New York, New York and what, if any, additional action is Certain UBS affiliates are acting as Stamford, Connecticut. UBS itself does appropriate. QPAMs pursuant to an individual not provide investment management 4. Potential 2019 French Judgment exemption granted on December 29, services to client plans that are subject Against UBS/UBS France. In 2013, 2017, which addresses prior to Part 4 of Title I of ERISA (ERISA France opened an investigation into convictions.1 This proposal uses the plans) or section 4975 of the Code UBS, UBS France, and certain former term ‘‘Potential 2019 French Judgment (IRAs), or otherwise exercise employees of UBS France S.A. The Against UBS/UBS France’’ to describe discretionary control over ERISA assets. investigation centered on the an adverse judgment issued by a French All ERISA assets are managed by U.S. maintenance of foreign (‘‘cross-border’’) court regarding case Number affiliates of UBS. UBS bank accounts held for private 1105592033. The Department is 2. UBS Asset Management (Americas) citizens. The investigating judges closed proposing this exemption to protect Inc., UBS Realty Investors LLC, UBS the investigation in February 2016. UBS plans and IRAs that use UBS asset Hedge Fund Solutions LLC, and UBS and UBS France received the National managers, from the costs and expenses O’Connor LLC 3 are currently the four Financial Prosecutor’s recommendation that may arise in that instance, as UBS affiliates that rely on PTE 84–14. (‘‘requisitoire’’) in July 2016 that charges represented by the Applicant. The Collectively, these UBS QPAMs have be filed. The investigating judges issued temporary nature of this exemption total ERISA assets under management of the trial order (‘‘Ordonnance de renvoi’’) gives the Department the opportunity to approximately $11.5 billion as of June in March 2017 that set out the precise determine whether a longer term 30, 2018, excluding ERISA assets charges against UBS, UBS France, and exemption is necessary and/or invested in pooled funds that are not the individual former employees. UBS appropriate, including whether plan asset funds. was charged with (1) ‘‘illicit additional conditions are warranted. 3. UBS Securities Japan was solicitation,’’ based on the alleged Comments received in response to previously convicted of a crime that solicitation of French clients within this proposed one year temporary violated PTE 84–14’s Section I(g), the French territory from 2004–2011 by 4 exemption will also be considered in anti-criminal provision. This crime was Swiss-based UBS client advisors connection with the Department’s described in detail in PTE 2013–09 without authorization to conduct such determination whether or not to grant (September 13, 2013). UBS itself was business in France; and (2) money any subsequent exemption. No relief previously convicted of a crime that laundering, based on UBS’s alleged from a violation of any other law would violated PTE 84–14’s Section I(g). That assistance from 2004 to 2012 to French be provided by this exemption. crime was described in detail in PTE taxpayers in opening bank accounts Furthermore, the Department cautions 2017–07 (December 29, 2017). Those outside of France to conceal their individual exemptions allowed UBS that the relief in this exemption would identities from relevant authorities for QPAMs to continue to rely on PTE 84– terminate immediately if, among other the purposes of alleged tax evasion. UBS 14, notwithstanding the convictions, as things, an entity within the UBS disputes the charges. corporate structure is convicted of a long as a number of conditions were 5. The UBS QPAMs represent they are crime described in Section I(g) of PTE met. separate entities from the entities One of those conditions requires that 84–14 (other than the 2013 Conviction, involved in alleged misconduct that UBS or any of its affiliates may not be 2018 Conviction, and the Potential 2019 may lead to the Potential 2019 French further convicted of a crime described French Judgment Against UBS/UBS Judgment Against UBS/UBS France and in Section I(g) of PTE 84–14.5 In the France) or is convicted in a foreign none of the UBS QPAMs (including jurisdiction for a crime described in their officers, directors, agents other 2 The Summary of Facts and Representations is Section I(g) of PTE 84–14, during the based on the Applicants’ representations, unless than UBS, and employees) knew of, had Exemption Period. indicated otherwise. reason to know of, or participated in the While an entity could apply for a new 3 UBS Asset Management (Americas) Inc. and alleged conduct that is the subject of the exemption in that circumstance, the UBS Realty Investors LLC are wholly owned by French charges. The UBS QPAMs Department would not be obligated to UBS Americas, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of UBS AG. UBS Hedge Fund Solutions LLC (formerly represent that no UBS QPAMs grant the exemption. The terms of this UBS Alternative and Quantitative Investments, (including their officers, directors, proposed exemption have been LLC) and UBS O’Connor LLC are wholly owned by agents other than UBS, and employees) specifically designed to permit Covered UBS Americas Holding LLC, a wholly owned received direct compensation, or Plans, defined below, to terminate their subsidiary of UBS AG. 4 Section I(g) of PTE 84–14 generally provides knowingly received indirect relationships in an orderly and cost- that ‘‘[n]either the QPAM nor any affiliate thereof compensation, in connection with the effective fashion in the event of an . . . nor any owner . . . of a 5 percent or more alleged conduct underlying the additional conviction or a determination interest in the QPAM is a person who within the Potential 2019 French Judgment Against that it is otherwise prudent for a 10 years immediately preceding the transaction has been either convicted or released from UBS/UBS France. Additionally, the UBS Covered Plan to terminate its imprisonment, whichever is later, as a result of’’ certain criminal activity therein described. expectation that a QPAM, and those who may be 1 See PTE 2017–07, 82 FR 61916 (December 29, 5 The Department notes that Section I(g) was in a position to influence its policies, maintain a 2017). included in PTE 84–14, in part, based on the high standard of integrity.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3820 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

QPAMs represent that no UBS QPAM based on the essential premise that costs of holding cash pending exercised authority over the assets of broad relief could be afforded for all investment by the new asset manager, any plan in a manner that it knew or types of transactions in which a plan and lost investment opportunities in should have known would further the engages only if the commitments and connection with a change of asset alleged conduct underlying the French the investments of plan assets and the managers. The UBS QPAMs claim that charges or otherwise cause any UBS negotiations leading thereto are the sole losing the ability to use PTE 84–14 QPAMs, their affiliates, or related responsibility of an independent, would make it difficult, costly, and parties to directly or indirectly profit discretionary, manager.10 Section I(g) of impracticable to enter into many from the alleged conduct underlying the PTE 84–14 generally provides that transactions that are in the best interests French charges. ‘‘[n]either the QPAM nor any affiliate of client plans, reducing plan choices, 6. The Department notes that the rules thereof . . . nor any owner . . . of a 5 especially among large institutional set forth in section 406 of ERISA and percent or more interest in the QPAM is financial banks. section 4975(c) of the Code proscribe a person who within the 10 years The UBS QPAMs represent further certain ‘‘prohibited transactions’’ immediately preceding the transaction that if the requested exemption is not between plans and related parties with has been either convicted or released granted, ERISA plan clients may be respect to those plans, known as from imprisonment, whichever is later, effectively prohibited from entering into ‘‘parties in interest.’’ 6 Under section as a result of’’ certain criminal activity certain transactions, either because no 3(14) of ERISA, parties in interest with therein described, such as felonies other exemption is available or the respect to a plan include, among others, arising out of the conduct of the counterparty is not willing to enter into the plan fiduciary, a sponsoring business of a broker, dealer, investment the transaction without the protections employer of the plan, service providers adviser or bank, or income tax evasion. provided by PTE 84–14. The UBS with respect to the plan, and certain of 8. Section 408(a) of ERISA provides, QPAMS state that these transactions their affiliates. The prohibited in part, that the Department may not would include those not covered by transaction provisions under section grant an exemption unless the other exemptions such as a purchase or 406(a) of ERISA prohibit, in relevant Department finds that such exemption sale from a party in interest of a security part, sales, leases, loans or the provision is administratively feasible, in the without a readily ascertainable fair of services between a party in interest interest of affected plans and of their market value. The UBS QPAMs claim and a plan (or an entity whose assets are participants and beneficiaries, and that the loss of the ability to utilize PTE deemed to constitute the assets of a protective of the rights of such 84–14 could significantly delay or even plan), as well as the use of plan assets participants and beneficiaries. make impossible transactions that by or for the benefit of, or a transfer of 9. In the interest of. The Department would be beneficial for the ERISA plans plan assets to, a party in interest.7 has tentatively determined that the because other statutory and class Under section 408(a) of ERISA and proposed exemption is in the interests prohibited transaction exemptions are section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, the of the participants and beneficiaries of not broad enough to cover such routine Department has the authority to grant each affected ERISA plan and IRA. It is transactions entered at the direction of exemptions from such ‘‘prohibited the Department’s understanding, based the UBS QPAMs. The UBS QPAMs also transactions’’ in accordance with the on representations from the UBS represent that counterparties could seek procedures set forth in 29 CFR part QPAMs, that if the requested exemption to terminate contracts for certain 2570, subpart B (76 FR 66637, 66644, were denied, the UBS QPAMs may be outstanding transactions (including October 27, 2011). unable to effectively manage plan assets swaps) that require the UBS QPAMs to 7. PTE 84–14 8 exempts certain subject to ERISA or the prohibited represent that they are QPAMs and/or prohibited transactions between a party transaction provisions of the Code. The utilize PTE 84–14 and additionally, in interest and an ‘‘investment fund’’ (as UBS QPAMs state that this would cause pursuant to these contracts, swap defined in Section VI (b) of PTE 84–14) 9 client ERISA plans to question the transactions with certain counterparties in which a plan has an interest, if the prudence of retaining the UBS QPAMs could automatically and immediately be investment manager satisfies the as a manager of choice and client ERISA terminated without any notice or action definition of ‘‘qualified professional plans who otherwise want to retain the of such counterparties, even if other asset manager’’ (QPAM) and satisfies UBS QPAMs could feel compelled to prohibited transaction exemptions are additional conditions for the exemption. find other managers who could manage available. The UBS QPAMs further PTE 84–14 was developed and granted their assets without having to either claim that such a termination could forgo transactions or rely on other more result in significant losses for the client 6 For purposes of the Summary of Facts and complex prohibited transaction ERISA plans that would be avoided if Representations, references to specific provisions of exemptions. the exemption were granted. Title I of ERISA, unless otherwise specified, refer The UBS QPAMs have represented also to the corresponding provisions of the Code. 10. Protective of. The Department has 7 The prohibited transaction provisions also that if client ERISA plans were to move tentatively determined that the include certain fiduciary prohibited transactions to new asset managers they could incur exemption, as proposed, will be under section 406(b) of ERISA. These include transition costs including the costs protective of the rights of participants transactions involving fiduciary self-dealing, associated with identifying an asset fiduciary conflicts of interest, and kickbacks to and beneficiaries of affected plans. The fiduciaries. manager (such as the costs and proposal is for one year, and has 8 49 FR 9494 (March 13, 1984), as corrected at 50 management time required in a Request essentially the same conditions as PTE FR 41430 (October 10, 1985), as amended at 70 FR for Proposal process, consultant fees 2017–07.11 However, the Department 49305 (August 23, 2005), and as amended at 75 FR and other due diligence expenses), has determined to revise certain of those 38837 (July 6, 2010). brokerage and other transaction costs 9 An ‘‘investment fund’’ includes single customer conditions so that it can make its and pooled separate accounts maintained by an associated with the sale of portfolio required finding that the proposed one- insurance company, individual trusts and common, investments to accommodate the year exemption will be protective of the collective or group trusts maintained by a bank, and investment policies and strategy of the any other account or fund to the extent that the rights of participants and beneficiaries disposition of its assets (whether or not in the new asset manager, the opportunity custody of the QPAM) is subject to the discretionary 11 If longer term relief is warranted, the authority of the QPAM. 10 See 75 FR 38837, 38839 (July 6, 2010). exemption may contain additional conditions.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3821

of affected plans and IRAs and are with respect to one of more Covered officers, the head of compliance and the sufficient to protect plans subject to Part Plans, to enter into any transaction with General Counsel (or their functional 4 of Title I of ERISA (an ERISA-covered UBS, UBS Securities Japan, or UBS equivalent), and the independent plan) or plans subject to section 4975 of France, or engage UBS, UBS Securities auditor responsible for reviewing the Code (an IRA), in each case, with Japan, or UBS France to provide any compliance with the Policies and a respect to which a UBS QPAM relies on service to such investment fund, for a fiduciary of any affected Covered Plan PTE 84–14, or with respect to which a direct or indirect fee borne by such where such fiduciary is independent of UBS QPAM (or any UBS affiliate) has investment fund, regardless of whether UBS. expressly represented that the manager such transaction or service may This proposal mandates training qualifies as a QPAM or relies on the otherwise be within the scope of relief (Training), which is similar to the QPAM class exemption (PTE 84–14) provided by an administrative or training required under PTE 2017–07. In (Covered Plans).12 statutory exemption. this regard, all relevant UBS QPAM This proposed exemption, if granted, If granted, the exemption will asset/portfolio management, trading, is effective for period of one year from terminate if UBS or any of its affiliates legal, compliance, and internal audit a judgment, if any, against UBS or UBS are convicted of any additional crimes personnel must be trained during the France by the French First Instance described in Section I(g) of PTE 84–14, Exemption Period. Among other things, Court in case Number 1105592033. As or if any of the other conditions of PTE the Training must, at a minimum, cover noted above, relief is necessary to the 84–14 have not been met. Also, with the Policies, ERISA and Code extent the judgment in the French First very limited exceptions, UBS, UBS compliance, ethical conduct, the Instance Court constitutes a conviction Securities Japan, and UBS France may consequences for not complying with under Section I(g) of PTE 84–14. If the not act as a fiduciary within the the conditions of this exemption Applicant submits an exemption request meaning of section 3(21)(A)(i) or (iii) of (including any loss of exemptive relief for longer term relief, and the ERISA, or section 4975(e)(3)(A) and (C) provided herein), and the requirement Department subsequently determines of the Code, with respect to ERISA- for prompt reporting of wrongdoing. that longer term relief is warranted, the covered plan and IRA assets. The Training must be conducted by a effective period of this exemption will The proposal requires each UBS professional who has been prudently end on the earlier of one year from the QPAM to update, implement and follow selected and who has appropriate date of judgment by the French First certain written policies and procedures technical training and proficiency with Instance Court or the effective date of (the Policies). These Policies are similar ERISA and the Code. the subsequent exemption. Several of to the policies and procedures Under this proposal, as in PTE 2017– the conditions are aimed at ensuring mandated by PTE 2017–07. In general 07, each UBS QPAM must submit to an that the UBS QPAMs were not involved terms, the Policies must require, and audit conducted by an independent must be reasonably designed to ensure 14 in the conduct that gave rise to any of auditor. Among other things, the that, among other things: The asset the Convictions and the Potential 2019 auditor must test a sample of each UBS management decisions of the UBS French Judgment Against UBS/UBS QPAM’s transactions involving Covered QPAMs are conducted independently of France. Accordingly, the proposal Plans, sufficient in size and nature to the corporate management and business generally precludes relief to the extent afford the auditor a reasonable basis to activities of UBS, UBS Securities Japan, the UBS QPAMs and any other party determine such QPAM’s operational and UBS France; the UBS QPAMs fully engaged on behalf of such QPAMs who compliance with the Policies and comply with ERISA’s fiduciary duties, had responsibility for, or exercised Training. The auditor’s conclusions and with ERISA and the Code’s authority in connection with the cannot be based solely on the prohibited transaction provisions; the Exemption Report created by the management of plan assets, were aware UBS QPAMs do not knowingly of, participated in, approved of, Compliance Officer, described below, in participate in any other person’s lieu of independent determinations and furthered, benefitted, or profited from, violation of ERISA or the Code with FX misconduct, the misconduct that is testing performed by the auditor. respect to Covered Plans; any filings or The Audit Report must be certified by the subject of the 2013 and 2018 statements made by the UBS QPAMs to Convictions and the Potential 2019 the General Counsel or one of the three regulators, on behalf of or in relation to most senior executive officers of the French Judgment Against UBS/UBS Covered Plans, are materially accurate 13 UBS QPAM to which the Audit Report France. Further, the UBS QPAMs may and complete; the UBS QPAMs do not not employ or knowingly engage any of applies. A copy of the Audit Report make material misrepresentations or must be provided to the Risk Committee the individuals that participated in the omit material information in its conduct attributable to the Convictions of UBS’s Board of Directors. Among communications with such regulators other things, UBS must submit to the or the Potential 2019 French Judgment with respect to Covered Plans; or make Against UBS/UBS France. Office of Exemption Determinations material misrepresentations or omit (OED), any engagement agreement with The proposal further provides that no material information in its UBS QPAM will use its authority or an auditor to perform the audit required communications with Covered Plans; under the terms of this exemption that influence to direct an ‘‘investment the UBS QPAMs comply with the terms fund’’ that is subject to ERISA or the of this exemption; and any violation of, 14 Audits covering time periods prior to the date Code and managed by such UBS QPAM or failure to comply with any of these of a judgment, if any, against UBS or UBS France items, is corrected as soon as reasonably by the French First Instance Court must be 12 For purposes of this exemption, a Covered Plan possible upon discovery, or as soon after completed in accordance with the requirements of does not include an ERISA-covered plan or IRA to PTE 2017–07, as applicable. Accordingly, the last the extent the UBS QPAM has expressly disclaimed the UBS QPAM reasonably should have audit performed pursuant to PTE 2017–07 will reliance on QPAM status or PTE 84–14 in entering known of the noncompliance cover the period beginning January 10, 2018 and into a contract, arrangement, or agreement with the (whichever is earlier). Any such ending on the date a judgment, if any, is issued ERISA-covered plan or IRA. violation or compliance failure not so against UBS or UBS France by the French First 13 For clarity, references to the UBS QPAMs Instance Court. The corresponding Audit Report include any individual employed by or engaged to corrected must be reported, upon the must be completed within six months of the date work on behalf of these QPAMs during or after the discovery of such failure to so correct, of any such judgment and submitted to the period of misconduct. in writing, to appropriate corporate Department within 45 days of completion.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3822 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

is entered subsequent to the Potential 84–14 and/or PTE 2017–07, to each Officer during the previous year; (ii) any 2019 French Judgment Against UBS/ sponsor and beneficial owner of a material change in the relevant business UBS France, no later than two (2) Covered Plan, or the sponsor of an activities of the UBS QPAMs; and (iii) months after the execution of such investment fund in any case where a any change to ERISA, the Code, or agreement; UBS QPAM acts as a sub-advisor to the regulations that may be applicable to the This proposal requires that, as of the investment fund in which such ERISA- activities of the UBS QPAMs. date of a judgment, if any, against UBS covered plan and IRA invests. All The Compliance Officer must prepare or UBS France by the French First prospective Covered Plans that enter a written report (an Exemption Report) Instance Court, and throughout the into a written asset or investment that summarizes his or her material Exemption Period, with respect to any management agreement with a UBS activities during the Exemption Period arrangement, agreement, or contract QPAM on or after the date of the Initial between a UBS QPAM and a Covered Notice must receive a copy of the and sets forth any instance of Plan, the UBS QPAM must agree and exemption, the Summary, and the noncompliance discovered during the warrant: (i) To comply with ERISA and Statement prior to, or Exemption Period, and any related the Code, as applicable with respect to contemporaneously with, the Covered corrective action. In each Exemption such Covered Plan; and (ii) to refrain Plan’s receipt of a written asset Report, the Compliance Officer must from engaging in prohibited transactions management agreement from the UBS certify in writing that to his or her that are not otherwise exempt (and to QPAM. The notice requirements shall knowledge the report is accurate and the promptly correct any inadvertent operate in tandem to ensure that all UBS QPAMs have complied with the prohibited transactions). The UBS Covered Plan clients receive either the Policies and Training, and/or corrected QPAMs must further agree and warrant Initial Notice or a subsequent notice. (or are correcting) any instances of to comply with the standards of Disclosures may be delivered noncompliance. prudence and loyalty set forth in section electronically. The Exemption Report must be 404 of ERISA with respect to each such The proposal requires that each UBS provided to the appropriate corporate ERISA-covered plan. Each UBS QPAM QPAM maintain records necessary to officers of UBS and each UBS QPAM to must also agree and warrant to demonstrate that the conditions of this which such report relates and to the indemnify and hold harmless such exemption have been met, for six (6) head of compliance and the General Covered Plan for any actual losses years following the date of any Counsel (or their functional equivalent) resulting directly from any of the transaction for which such UBS QPAM of the relevant UBS QPAM. The following: (a) A UBS QPAM’s violation relies upon the relief in the exemption. Exemption Report must be made of ERISA’s fiduciary duties, as The proposal mandates that UBS unconditionally available to the applicable, and/or the prohibited continue to designate a senior transaction provisions of ERISA and the independent auditor. The Exemption compliance officer (the Compliance Review, including the Compliance Code, as applicable; (b) a breach of Officer) who will be responsible for contract by the UBS QPAM; or (c) any Officer’s written Exemption Report, compliance with the Policies and must be completed within three (3) claim arising out of the failure of such Training requirements described herein. UBS QPAM to qualify for the exemptive months following the end of the period The Compliance Officer must conduct to which it relates. relief provided by PTE 84–14 as a result an exemption review (the Exemption of a violation of Section I(g) of PTE 84– Review) for the period beginning on the UBS must also immediately disclose 14 other than the Conviction. This date of a judgment, if any, against UBS to the Department any Deferred condition applies only to actual losses or UBS France by the French First Prosecution Agreement (a DPA) or Non- caused by the UBS QPAM. As noted Instance Court 15 to determine the Prosecution Agreement (an NPA) with above, the Applicant has identified a adequacy and effectiveness of the the U.S. Department of Justice, entered wide range of potential harm and costs implementation of the Policies and into by UBS or any of its affiliates (as that may be incurred by plans and IRAs Training. The Compliance Officer must defined in Section VI(d) of PTE 84–14) if the UBS QPAMs were no longer able be a professional with extensive in connection with conduct described in to rely on PTE 84–14. The Department relevant experience with a reporting Section I(g) of PTE 84–14 or section 411 views actual losses arising from line within UBS’s Compliance and of ERISA. UBS must also immediately unwinding transactions with third Operational Risk Control function to the provide the Department with any parties, and from transitioning Covered Head of Compliance and Operational information requested by the Plan assets to third parties, to be Rick Control, Asset Management. At a Department, as permitted by law, ‘‘direct’’ results of violating the terms of minimum, the Exemption Review must regarding the agreement and/or conduct this provision. include review of the following items: and allegations that led to the This exemption contains specific (i) Any compliance matter related to the agreement. notice requirements. In this regard, by Policies or Training that was identified 60 days after the date of a judgment, if The proposal mandates that, among by, or reported to, the Compliance any, against UBS or UBS France by the other things, each UBS QPAM clearly French First Instance Court, each UBS and prominently informs Covered Plan 15 Pursuant to PTE 2017–07 the Compliance clients of their right to obtain a copy of QPAM will provide a notice of the Officer must conduct and exemption review exemption, along with a separate (annual review) for each period corresponding to the Policies or a description (Summary summary describing the facts that led to the audit periods set forth in Section I(i)(1) of PTE Policies) which accurately summarizes the Conviction (the Summary), which 2017–07 and the Compliance officer’s written report key components of the UBS QPAM’s submitted to the Department within three (3) written Policies developed in have been submitted to the Department, months of the end of the period to which it relates. and a prominently displayed statement Accordingly, the final exemption review pursuant connection with this exemption. If the (the Statement) (collectively, Initial to PTE 2017–07 must cover the period January 10, Policies are thereafter changed, each Notice) that the Convictions and the 2018 through the date of a judgment, if any, against Covered Plan client must receive a new UBS or UBS France by the French First Instance disclosure within six (6) months Potential 2019 French Judgment Against Court, and the corresponding Compliance Officer’s UBS/UBS France each separately result written report must be submitted within three (3) following the end of the calendar year in a failure to meet a condition in PTE months of the date of such a judgment. during which the Policies were

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3823

changed.16 With respect to this General Information Effective December 31, 1978, section requirement, the description may be The attention of interested persons is 102 of Reorganization Plan No. 4 of continuously maintained on a website, directed to the following: 1978, 5 U.S.C. App. 1 (1996), transferred provided that such website link to the (1) The fact that a transaction is the the authority of the Secretary of the Policies or Summary Policies is clearly subject of an exemption under section Treasury to issue exemptions of the type and prominently disclosed to each 408(a) of the Act and/or section requested to the Secretary of Labor. Covered Plan. 4975(c)(2) of the Code does not relieve Therefore, this notice of proposed The proposal requires that UBS a fiduciary or other party in interest or exemption is issued solely by the QPAMs must comply with each disqualified person from certain other Department. condition of PTE 84–14, as amended, provisions of the Act and/or the Code, Section I. Covered Transactions with the sole exception of the violations including any prohibited transaction of Section I(g) of PTE 84–14 that are provisions to which the exemption does If the proposed one year temporary attributable to the Convictions and the not apply and the general fiduciary exemption is granted, certain entities Potential 2019 French Judgment Against responsibility provisions of section 404 with specified relationships to UBS UBS/UBS France. If, during the of the Act, which, among other things, (hereinafter, the UBS QPAMs, as Exemption Period, an entity within the require a fiduciary to discharge his defined in Sections II(e)) will not be UBS corporate structure is convicted of duties respecting the plan solely in the precluded from relying on the a crime described in Section I(g) of PTE interest of the participants and exemptive relief provided by Prohibited 84–14, (other than the 2013 Conviction, Transaction Class Exemption 84–14 beneficiaries of the plan and in a 18 2018 Conviction, and the Potential 2019 prudent fashion in accordance with (PTE 84–14 or the QPAM Exemption), French Judgment Against UBS/UBS section 404(a)(1)(b) of the Act; nor does notwithstanding the 2013 Conviction of France), or is convicted in a foreign it affect the requirement of section UBS Securities Japan Co., Ltd., the 2018 jurisdiction for a crime described in 401(a) of the Code that the plan must Conviction of UBS (collectively the Section I(g) of PTE 84–14, relief in this operate for the exclusive benefit of the Convictions, as defined in Section II(a)), proposed exemption would terminate employees of the employer maintaining and the Potential 2019 French Judgment immediately. the plan and their beneficiaries; Against UBS/UBS France (as defined in 11. Administratively Feasible. The (2) Before an exemption may be Section II(b)) during the Exemption granted under section 408(a) of the Act Period, provided that the following Department has tentatively determined 19 that the proposal is administratively and/or section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, conditions are satisfied: (a) The UBS QPAMs (including their feasible since, among other things, a the Department must find that the officers, directors, agents other than qualified independent auditor will be exemption is administratively feasible, in the interests of the plan and of its UBS, UBS Securities Japan, and UBS required to perform an in-depth audit France), and employees of such UBS covering, among other things, each UBS participants and beneficiaries, and protective of the rights of participants QPAMs and any other party engaged on QPAM’s compliance with the behalf of such UBS QPAMs who had exemption, and a corresponding written and beneficiaries of the plan; (3) The proposed exemption, if responsibility for, or exercised authority audit report will be provided to the in connection with the management of Department and available to the public. granted, will be supplemental to, and not in derogation of, any other plan assets did not know of, did not Notice to Interested Persons provisions of the Act and/or the Code, have reason to know of, or participate in: (1) The FX Misconduct; (2) the Notice to interested persons is by including statutory or administrative criminal conduct of UBS Securities publication of this notice of proposed exemptions and transitional rules. Furthermore, the fact that a transaction Japan and UBS that is the subject of the temporary one-year exemption in the Convictions; or (3) the alleged criminal Federal Register. All written comments is subject to an administrative or statutory exemption is not dispositive of conduct of UBS and UBS France that is and/or requests for a hearing must be the subject of the Potential 2019 French whether the transaction is in fact a received by the Department within three Judgment Against UBS/UBS France. For prohibited transaction; and days of the date of publication of this purposes of this exemption, ‘‘participate proposed exemption in the Federal (4) The proposed exemption, if granted, will be subject to the express in’’ refers not only to active Register. participation in the FX Misconduct, the All comments will be made available condition that the material facts and representations contained in each misconduct underlying the Convictions, to the public. Warning: If you submit a and the alleged misconduct underlying comment, EBSA recommends that you application are true and complete, and that each application accurately the Potential 2019 French Judgment include your name and other contact Against UBS/UBS France, but also to describes all material terms of the information in the body of your knowing approval of that misconduct, transaction which is the subject of the comment, but DO NOT submit or knowledge of such misconduct information that you consider to be exemption. confidential, or otherwise protected Proposed Exemption Title I of the Act, unless otherwise specified, should (such as a Social Security number or an be read to refer as well to the corresponding unlisted phone number) or confidential The Department is considering provisions of section 4975 of the Code. business information that you do not granting a one-year temporary 18 49 FR 9494 (March 13, 1984), as corrected at want publicly disclosed. All comments exemption under the authority of 50 FR 41430, (October 10, 1985), as amended at 70 section 408(a) of the Act (or ERISA) and FR 49305(August 23, 2005), and as amended at 75 may be posted on the internet and can FR 38837 (July 6, 2010), hereinafter referred to as be retrieved by most internet search section 4975(c)(2) of the Internal ‘‘PTE 84–14’’ or the ‘‘QPAM Exemption.’’ engines. Revenue Code (or Code), and in 19 Section I(g) of PTE 84–14 generally provides accordance with the procedures set that ‘‘[n]either the QPAM nor any affiliate thereof . . . nor any owner . . . of a 5 percent or more 16 forth in 29 CFR part 2570, subpart B (76 In the event Applicant meets this disclosure 17 interest in the QPAM is a person who within the requirement through Summary Policies, changes to FR 66637, 66644, October 27, 2011). 10 years immediately preceding the transaction has the Policies shall not result in the requirement for been either convicted or released from a new disclosure unless the Summary Policies are 17 For purposes of this proposed one year imprisonment, whichever is later, as a result of’’ no longer accurate because of the changes. temporary exemption, references to section 406 of certain criminal activity therein described.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3824 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

without taking active steps to prohibit Misconduct, the criminal conduct that information in its communications with such conduct, such as reporting the is the subject of the Convictions, or the such regulators with respect to Covered conduct to supervisors, including the alleged criminal conduct that is the Plans, or make material Board of Directors; subject of the Potential 2019 French misrepresentations or omit material (b) The UBS QPAMs (including their Judgment Against UBS/UBS France; information in its communications with officers, directors, agents other than (g) Other than with respect to Covered Plans; UBS, UBS Securities Japan, and UBS employee benefit plans maintained or (vi) The UBS QPAM complies with France, and employees of such UBS sponsored for its own employees or the the terms of this exemption; QPAMs and any other parties engaged employees of an affiliate, UBS, UBS (2) Any violation of, or failure to on behalf of such UBS QPAMs) did not Securities Japan, and UBS France will comply with an item in subparagraphs receive direct compensation, or not act as fiduciaries within the (h)(1)(ii) through (h)(1)(vi), is corrected knowingly receive indirect meaning of section 3(21)(A)(i) or (iii) of as soon as reasonably possible upon compensation, in connection with the ERISA, or section 4975(e)(3)(A) and (C) discovery, or as soon after the QPAM (1) the FX Misconduct; (2) the criminal of the Code, with respect to ERISA- reasonably should have known of the conduct of UBS Securities Japan and covered plan and IRA assets; provided, noncompliance (whichever is earlier), UBS that is the subject of the however, that UBS, UBS Securities and any such violation or compliance Convictions; or (3) the alleged criminal Japan, and UBS France will not be failure not so corrected is reported, conduct of UBS and UBS France that is treated as violating the conditions of upon the discovery of such failure to so the subject of the Potential 2019 French this exemption solely because it acted as correct, in writing. Such report shall be Judgment Against UBS/UBS France; an investment advice fiduciary within made to the head of compliance and the (c) The UBS QPAMs will not employ the meaning of section 3(21)(A)(ii) of General Counsel (or their functional or knowingly engage any of the ERISA or section 4975(e)(3)(B) of the equivalent) of the relevant UBS QPAM individuals that participated in: (1) The Code; that engaged in the violation or failure, FX Misconduct; (2) the criminal (h)(1) Each UBS QPAM must continue and, the independent auditor to maintain, adjust (to the extent conduct of UBS Securities Japan and responsible for reviewing compliance UBS that is the subject of the necessary), implement, and follow with the Policies, and a fiduciary of any Convictions; or (3) the alleged criminal written policies and procedures (the affected Covered Plan where such conduct of UBS and UBS France that is Policies). The Policies must require, and fiduciary is independent of UBS. the subject of the Potential 2019 French must be reasonably designed to ensure Notwithstanding the foregoing, with Judgment Against UBS/UBS France; that: (d) At all times during the Exemption (i) The asset management decisions of respect to any Covered Plan sponsored Period, no UBS QPAM will use its the UBS QPAM are conducted by an ‘‘affiliate’’ (as defined in Section authority or influence to direct an independently of UBS’s corporate VI(d) of PTE 84–14) of UBS or ‘‘investment fund’’ (as defined in management and business activities, beneficially owned by an employee of Section VI(b) of PTE 84–14) that is including the corporate management UBS or its affiliates, such fiduciary does subject to ERISA or the Code and and business activities of the Investment not need to be independent of UBS. A managed by such UBS QPAM with Bank division, UBS Securities Japan, UBS QPAM will not be treated as respect to one or more Covered Plans (as and UBS France; this condition does not having failed to develop, implement, defined in Section II(c)) to enter into preclude a UBS QPAM from receiving maintain, or follow the Policies, any transaction with UBS, UBS publicly available research and other provided that it corrects any instance of Securities Japan, or UBS France or to widely available information from a noncompliance as soon as reasonably engage UBS, UBS Securities Japan, or UBS affiliate; possible upon discovery, or as soon as UBS France to provide any service to (ii) The UBS QPAM fully complies reasonably possible after the QPAM such investment fund, for a direct or with ERISA’s fiduciary duties, and with reasonably should have known of the indirect fee borne by such investment ERISA and the Code’s prohibited noncompliance (whichever is earlier), fund, regardless of whether such transaction provisions, in each case as and provided that it adheres to the transaction or service may otherwise be applicable with respect to each Covered reporting requirements set forth in this within the scope of relief provided by Plan, and does not knowingly subparagraph (vii); an administrative or statutory participate in any violation of these (3) Each UBS QPAM will maintain, exemption; duties and provisions with respect to adjust (to the extent necessary) and (e) Any failure of the UBS QPAMs to Covered Plans; implement a program of training during satisfy Section I(g) of PTE 84–14 arose (iii) The UBS QPAM does not the Exemption Period, to be conducted solely from the Convictions and the knowingly participate in any other during the Exemption Period, for all Potential 2019 French Judgment Against person’s violation of ERISA or the Code relevant UBS QPAM asset/portfolio UBS/UBS France; with respect to Covered Plans; management, trading, legal, compliance, (f) A UBS QPAM did not exercise (iv) Any filings or statements made by and internal audit personnel. The authority over the assets of any plan the UBS QPAM to regulators, including, Training must: subject to Part 4 of Title I of ERISA (an but not limited to, the Department, the (i) At a minimum, cover the Policies, ERISA-covered plan) or section 4975 of Department of the Treasury, the ERISA and Code compliance (including the Code (an IRA) in a manner that it Department of Justice, and the Pension applicable fiduciary duties and the knew or should have known would: Benefit Guaranty Corporation, on behalf prohibited transaction provisions), Further the FX Misconduct, the criminal of or in relation to Covered Plans, are ethical conduct, the consequences for conduct that is the subject of the materially accurate and complete, to the not complying with the conditions of Convictions, or the alleged criminal best of such QPAM’s knowledge at that this exemption (including any loss of conduct that is the subject of the time; exemptive relief provided herein), and Potential 2019 French Judgment Against (v) To the best of the UBS QPAM’s prompt reporting of wrongdoing; and UBS/UBS France; or cause the UBS knowledge at that time, the UBS QPAM (ii) Be conducted by a professional QPAM or its affiliates to directly or does not make material who has been prudently selected and indirectly profit from the FX misrepresentations or omit material who has appropriate technical training

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3825

and proficiency with ERISA and the (3) The auditor’s engagement must implemented, maintained, and followed Code; specifically require the auditor to sufficient Policies and Training must (i)(1) Each UBS QPAM submits to an determine whether each UBS QPAM has not be based solely or in substantial part audit conducted by an independent developed, implemented, maintained, on an absence of evidence indicating auditor, who has been prudently and followed the Policies in accordance noncompliance. In this last regard, any selected and who has appropriate with the conditions of this exemption, finding that a UBS QPAM has complied technical training and proficiency with and has developed and implemented with the requirements under this ERISA and the Code, to evaluate the the Training, as required herein; subparagraph must be based on adequacy of, and each UBS QPAM’s (4) The auditor’s engagement must evidence that the particular UBS QPAM compliance with, the Policies and specifically require the auditor to test has actually implemented, maintained, Training described herein. The audit each UBS QPAM’s operational and followed the Policies and Training requirement must be incorporated in the compliance with the Policies and required by this exemption. Policies. The audit must cover the Training. In this regard, the auditor Furthermore, the auditor must not Exemption Period and must be must test, for each UBS QPAM, a solely rely on the Exemption Report completed no later than six (6) months sample of such UBS QPAM’s created by the compliance officer (the after the end of the exemption period. transactions involving Covered Plans, Compliance Officer), as described in For time periods ending prior to a sufficient in size and nature to afford Section I(m) below, as the basis for the judgment, if any, against UBS or UBS the auditor a reasonable basis to auditor’s conclusions in lieu of determine such UBS QPAM’s France by the French First Instance independent determinations and testing operational compliance with the Court and covered by the audit required performed by the auditor as required by Policies and Training; pursuant to PTE 2017–07,20 the audit Section I(i)(3) and (4) above; and (5) For the audit, on or before the end (ii) The adequacy of the Exemption requirements in Section I(i) of PTE of the relevant period described in Review described in Section I(m); 2017–07 will remain in effect. The audit Section I(i)(1) for completing the audit, (6) The auditor must notify the under PTE 2017–07 covering the time the auditor must issue a written report respective UBS QPAM of any instance period from January 10, 2018 until the (the Audit Report) to UBS and the UBS of noncompliance identified by the date of a judgment, if any, against UBS QPAM to which the audit applies that auditor within five (5) business days or UBS France by the French First describes the procedures performed by after such noncompliance is identified Instance Court must be completed the auditor in connection with its by the auditor, regardless of whether the within six (6) months of the date of any examination. The auditor, at its audit has been completed as of that such judgment, and the corresponding discretion, may issue a single date; certified Audit Report must be consolidated Audit Report that covers (7) With respect to the Audit Report, submitted to the Department no later all the UBS QPAMs. The Audit Report the General Counsel, or one of the three than 45 days following the completion must include the auditor’s specific most senior executive officers of the 21 of such audit; determinations regarding: UBS QPAM to which the Audit Report (2) Within the scope of the audit and (i) The adequacy of each UBS QPAM’s applies, must certify in writing, under to the extent necessary for the auditor, Policies and Training; each UBS penalty of perjury, that the officer has in its sole opinion, to complete its audit QPAM’s compliance with the Policies reviewed the Audit Report and this and comply with the conditions for and Training; the need, if any, to exemption; that, to the best of such relief described herein, and only to the strengthen such Policies and Training; officer’s knowledge at the time, such extent such disclosure is not prevented and any instance of the respective UBS UBS QPAM has addressed, corrected, by state or federal statute, or involves QPAM’s noncompliance with the remedied any noncompliance and communications subject to attorney written Policies and Training described inadequacy or has an appropriate client privilege, each UBS QPAM and, in Section I(h) above. The UBS QPAM written plan to address any inadequacy if applicable, UBS, will grant the auditor must promptly address any regarding the Policies and Training unconditional access to its business, noncompliance. The UBS QPAM must identified in the Audit Report. Such including, but not limited to: Its promptly address or prepare a written certification must also include the computer systems; business records; plan of action to address any signatory’s determination, that, to the transactional data; workplace locations; determination as to the adequacy of the best of such officer’s knowledge at the training materials; and personnel. Such Policies and Training and the auditor’s time, the Policies and Training in effect access is limited to information relevant recommendations (if any) with respect at the time of signing are adequate to to the auditor’s objectives as specified to strengthening the Policies and ensure compliance with the conditions by the terms of this exemption; Training of the respective UBS QPAM. of this exemption and with the Any action taken or the plan of action applicable provisions of ERISA and the 20 82 FR 61903 (December 29, 2017). PTE 2017– to be taken by the respective UBS Code; 07 is an exemption that permits UBS QPAMs to rely QPAM must be included in an (8) The Risk Committee of UBS’s on the exemptive relief provided by PTE 84–14, addendum to the Audit Report (such Board of Directors is provided a copy of notwithstanding the 2013 and 2018 Convictions. addendum must be completed prior to the Audit Report; and a senior executive 21 Pursuant to PTE 2017–07, the initial audit period begins on January 10, 2018 and ends on the certification described in Section officer of UBS’s Compliance and March 9, 2019, and the corresponding Audit Report I(i)(7) below). In the event such a plan Operational Risk Control function must must be completed by September 9, 2019 and the of action to address the auditor’s review the Audit Report for each UBS Audit Report submitted to the Department within recommendation regarding the QPAM and must certify in writing, 45 days after completion. Accordingly, the last audit performed pursuant to PTE 2017–07 will adequacy of the Policies and Training is under penalty of perjury, that such cover the period beginning January 10, 2018 and not completed by the time of officer has reviewed the Audit Report; ending on the date of judgment, if any, against UBS submission of the Audit Report, the (9) Each UBS QPAM provides its or UBS France by the French First Instance Court. following period’s Audit Report must certified Audit Report, by regular mail The corresponding Audit Report must be completed within six months of any such judgment and state whether the plan was satisfactorily to: Office of Exemption Determinations submitted to the Department within 45 days of completed. Any determination by the (OED), 200 Constitution Avenue NW, completion. auditor that a UBS QPAM has Suite 400, Washington, DC 20210; or by

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3826 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

private carrier to: 122 C Street NW, qualify for the exemptive relief provided arising from acts outside the control of Suite 400, Washington, DC 20001–2109. by PTE 84–14 as a result of a violation the UBS QPAM; This delivery must take place no later of Section I(g) of PTE 84–14 other than (7) Within six months of the date of than 45 days following completion of the Convictions and the Potential 2019 a judgment, if any, against UBS or UBS the Audit Report. The Audit Report will French Judgment Against UBS/UBS France by the French First Instance be made part of the public record France. This condition applies only to Court, each UBS QPAM must provide a regarding this exemption. Furthermore, actual losses caused by the UBS notice of its obligations under this each UBS QPAM must make its Audit QPAM’s violations. Section I(j) to each Covered Plan. For Report unconditionally available, (3) Not to require (or otherwise cause) prospective Covered Plans that enter electronically or otherwise, for the Covered Plan to waive, limit, or into a written asset or investment examination upon request by any duly qualify the liability of the UBS QPAM management agreement with a UBS authorized employee or representative for violating ERISA or the Code or QPAM on or after the date of such a of the Department, other relevant engaging in prohibited transactions; judgment, the UBS QPAM will agree to regulators, and any fiduciary of a (4) Not to restrict the ability of such its obligations under this Section I(j) in Covered Plan; Covered Plan to terminate or withdraw an updated investment management (10) Any engagement agreement with from its arrangement with the UBS agreement between the UBS QPAM and an auditor to perform the audit required QPAM with respect to any investment such clients or other written contractual under the terms of this exemption that in a separately managed account or agreement. This condition will be is entered subsequent to the date of a pooled fund subject to ERISA and deemed met for each Covered Plan that judgment, if any, against UBS or UBS managed by such QPAM, with the received a notice pursuant to PTE 2016– France by the French First Instance exception of reasonable restrictions, 17 and/or PTE 2017–07 that meets the Court must be submitted to OED no later appropriately disclosed in advance, that terms of this condition. than two (2) months after the execution are specifically designed to ensure Notwithstanding the above, a UBS of such agreement; equitable treatment of all investors in a QPAM will not violate the condition (11) The auditor must provide the pooled fund in the event such solely because a Plan or IRA refuses to Department, upon request, for withdrawal or termination may have sign an updated investment inspection and review, access to all the adverse consequences for all other management agreement. workpapers created and utilized in (k) Within 60 days of a judgment, if investors. In connection with any such connection with the audit, provided any, against UBS or UBS France by the arrangements involving investments in such access and inspection is otherwise French First Instance Court, each UBS pooled funds subject to ERISA entered permitted by law; and QPAM will provide a notice of the (12) UBS must notify the Department into after the effective date of PTE 2017– exemption, along with a separate of a change in the independent auditor 07, the adverse consequences must summary describing the facts that led to no later than two (2) months after the relate to a lack of liquidity of the the Convictions and the Potential 2019 engagement of a substitute or underlying assets, valuation issues, or French Judgment Against UBS/UBS subsequent auditor and must provide an regulatory reasons that prevent the fund France (the Summary), which have been explanation for the substitution or from promptly redeeming an ERISA- submitted to the Department, and a change including a description of any covered plan’s or IRA’s investment, and prominently displayed statement (the material disputes between the such restrictions must be applicable to Statement) (collectively, Initial Notice) terminated auditor and UBS; all such investors and be effective no that the Convictions and the Potential (j) As of the date of a judgment, if any, longer than reasonably necessary to 2019 French Judgment Against UBS/ against UBS or UBS France by the avoid the adverse consequences; UBS France, each separately result in a French First Instance and throughout (5) Not to impose any fees, penalties, failure to meet a condition in PTE 84– the Exemption Period, with respect to or charges for such termination or 14 and PTE 2017–07, to each sponsor any arrangement, agreement, or contract withdrawal with the exception of and beneficial owner of a Covered Plan, between a UBS QPAM and a Covered reasonable fees, appropriately disclosed or the sponsor of an investment fund in Plan, the UBS QPAM agrees and in advance, that are specifically any case where a UBS QPAM acts as a warrants to Covered Plans: designed to prevent generally sub-advisor to the investment fund in (1) To comply with ERISA and the recognized abusive investment practices which such ERISA-covered plan and Code, as applicable with respect to such or specifically designed to ensure IRA invests. Effective as of the date that Covered Plan; to refrain from engaging equitable treatment of all investors in a is 60 days after the Potential 2019 in prohibited transactions that are not pooled fund in the event such French Judgment Against UBS/UBS otherwise exempt (and to promptly withdrawal or termination may have France Date, all Covered Plan clients correct any inadvertent prohibited adverse consequences for all other that enter into a written asset or transactions); and to comply with the investors, provided that such fees are investment management agreement with standards of prudence and loyalty set applied consistently and in like manner a UBS QPAM after that date must forth in section 404 of ERISA with to all such investors; and receive a copy of the exemption, the respect to each such ERISA-covered (6) Not to include exculpatory Summary, and the Statement prior to, or plan and IRA to the extent that section provisions disclaiming or otherwise contemporaneously with, the Covered 404 is applicable; limiting liability of the UBS QPAM for Plan’s receipt of a written asset (2) To indemnify and hold harmless a violation of such agreement’s terms. management agreement from the UBS the Covered Plan for any actual losses To the extent consistent with Section QPAM. Disclosures may be delivered resulting directly from: A UBS QPAM’s 410 of ERISA, however, this provision electronically; violation of ERISA’s fiduciary duties, as does not prohibit disclaimers for (l) The UBS QPAMs must comply applicable, and of the prohibited liability caused by an error, with each condition of PTE 84–14, as transaction provisions of ERISA and the misrepresentation, or misconduct of a amended, with the sole exception of the Code, as applicable; a breach of contract plan fiduciary or other party hired by violations of Section I(g) of PTE 84–14 by the QPAM; or any claim arising out the plan fiduciary who is independent that are attributable to the Convictions of the failure of such UBS QPAM to of UBS and its affiliates, or damages and the Potential 2019 French Judgment

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3827

Against UBS/UBS France. If, during the Policies or Training that was identified Conviction, and (2) comply in all Exemption Period, an entity within the by, or reported to, the Compliance material respects with the Business UBS corporate structure is convicted of Officer or others within the C&ORC Improvement Order, dated December a crime described in Section I(g) of PTE function during the previous year; the 16, 2011, issued by the Japanese 84–14, (other than the 2013 Conviction, most recent Audit Report issued Financial Services Authority; 2018 Conviction, and the Potential 2019 pursuant to this exemption or PTE (o) UBS complies in all material French Judgment Against UBS/UBS 2017–07; any material change in the respects with the audit and monitoring France), or is convicted in a foreign relevant business activities of the UBS procedures imposed on UBS by the U.S. jurisdiction for a crime described in QPAMs; and any change to ERISA, the Commodity Futures Trading Section I(g) of PTE 84–14, relief in this Code, or regulations related to fiduciary Commission Order, dated December 19, proposed exemption would terminate duties and the prohibited transaction 2012; immediately; provisions that may be applicable to the (p) Each UBS QPAM will maintain (m)(1) UBS continues to designate a activities of the UBS QPAMs; records necessary to demonstrate that senior compliance officer (the (ii) The Compliance Officer prepares the conditions of this exemption have Compliance Officer) who will be a written report for the Exemption been met, for six (6) years following the responsible for compliance with the Review (an Exemption Report) that (A) date of any transaction for which such Policies and Training requirements summarizes his or her material activities UBS QPAM relies upon the relief in the described herein. The Compliance during the Exemption Period; (B) sets exemption; Officer must conduct a review for the forth any instance of noncompliance (q) During the Exemption Period, UBS Exemption Period (the Exemption discovered during the Exemption must: (1) Immediately disclose to the Review),22 to determine the adequacy Period, and any related corrective Department any Deferred Prosecution and effectiveness of the implementation action; (C) details any change to the Agreement (a DPA) or Non-Prosecution of the Policies and Training. With Policies or Training to guard against any Agreement (an NPA) with the U.S. respect to the Compliance Officer, the similar instance of noncompliance Department of Justice, entered into by following conditions must be met: occurring again; and (D) makes UBS or any of its affiliates (as defined (i) The Compliance Officer must be a recommendations, as necessary, for in Section VI(d) of PTE 84–14) in professional who has extensive additional training, procedures, connection with conduct described in experience with, and knowledge of, the monitoring, or additional and/or Section I(g) of PTE 84–14 or section 411 regulation of financial services and changed processes or systems, and of ERISA; and (2) immediately provides products, including under ERISA and management’s actions on such the Department any information requested by the Department, as the Code; and recommendations; (ii) The Compliance Officer must have (iii) In the Exemption Report, the permitted by law, regarding the a reporting line within UBS’s Compliance Officer must certify in agreement and/or conduct and allegations that led to the agreement; Compliance and Operational Risk writing that to the best of his or her (r) Within six months from the date of Control (C&ORC) function to the Head knowledge at the time: (A) The report is a judgment, if any, against UBS or UBS of Compliance and Operational Risk accurate; (B) the Policies and Training are working in a manner which is France by the French First Instance Control, Asset Management. The Court, each UBS QPAM, in its C&ORC function is organizationally reasonably designed to ensure that the Policies and Training requirements agreements with, or in other written independent of UBS’s business disclosures provided to Covered Plans, divisions—including Asset described herein are met; (C) any known instance of noncompliance during the will clearly and prominently inform Management, the Investment Bank, and Exemption Period and any related Covered Plan clients of their right to Global Wealth Management—and is led correction taken to date have been obtain a copy of the Policies or a by the Global Head of C&ORC, who will identified in the Exemption Report; and description (Summary Policies) which report directly to UBS’s Chief Risk (D) the UBS QPAMs have complied accurately summarizes key components Officer, the head of Group Compliance, with the Policies and Training, and/or of the UBS QPAM’s written Policies Regulatory and Governance, or another corrected (or are correcting) any known developed in connection with this appropriate member of the Group instances of noncompliance in exemption. If the Policies are thereafter Executive Board; changed, each Covered Plan client must (2) With respect to the Exemption accordance with Section I(h) above; (iv) The Exemption Report must be receive a new disclosure within six (6) Review, the following conditions must provided to appropriate corporate months following the end of the be met: officers of UBS and each UBS QPAM to calendar year during which the Policies (i) The Exemption Review includes a which such report relates, and to the were changed.23 With respect to this review of the UBS QPAMs’ compliance head of compliance and the General requirement, the description may be with and effectiveness of the Policies Counsel (or their functional equivalent) continuously maintained on a website, and Training and of the following: Any of the relevant UBS QPAM; and the provided that such website link to the compliance matter related to the report must be made unconditionally Policies or Summary Policies is clearly available to the independent auditor and prominently disclosed to each 22 Pursuant to PTE 2017–07 the Compliance Officer must conduct an exemption review (annual described in Section I(i) above; Covered Plan; and review) for each period corresponding to the audit (v) The Exemption Review, including (s) A UBS QPAM will not fail to meet periods set forth in Section I(i)(1) of PTE 2017–07 the Compliance Officer’s written the terms of this exemption, solely and the Compliance officer’s written report Exemption Report, must be completed because a different UBS QPAM fails to submitted to the Department within three (3) months of the end of the period to which it relates. within three (3) months following the satisfy a condition for relief described in Accordingly, the final exemption review pursuant end of the period to which it relates; to PTE 2017–07 must cover the period January 10, (n) UBS imposes its internal 23 In the event the Applicant meets this disclosure 2018 through the date of a judgment, if any, against procedures, controls, and protocols on requirement through Summary Policies, changes to UBS or UBS France by the French First Instance the Policies shall not result in the requirement for Court, and the corresponding Compliance Officer’s UBS Securities Japan to: (1) Reduce the a new disclosure unless, as a result of changes to written report must be submitted within three (3) likelihood of any recurrence of conduct the Policies, the Summary Policies are no longer months of any such judgment. that that is the subject of the 2013 accurate.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3828 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

Sections I(c), (d), (h), (i), (j), (k), (l), (p), which a UBS QPAM relies on PTE 84– (i) All references to ‘‘the date of a or (r); or if the independent auditor 14, or with respect to which a UBS judgment, if any, by the French First described in Section I(i) fails a provision QPAM (or any UBS affiliate) has Instance Court’’ refer to any judgment of the exemption other than the expressly represented that the manager against UBS or UBS France in case requirement described in Section qualifies as a QPAM or relies on the number 1105592033; I(i)(11), provided that such failure did QPAM class exemption (PTE 84–14). A (j) The term ‘‘Exemption Period’’ not result from any actions or inactions Covered Plan does not include an means one year beginning on the date of UBS or its affiliates. ERISA-covered plan or IRA to the extent an adverse French judgment against Section II. Definitions the UBS QPAM has expressly UBS or UBS France regarding case disclaimed reliance on QPAM status or Number 1105592033; (a) The term ‘‘Convictions’’ means the PTE 84–14 in entering into a contract, (k) The term ‘‘Plea Agreement’’ means 2013 Conviction and the 2017 arrangement, or agreement with the the Plea Agreement (including Exhibits Conviction. The term ‘‘2013 ERISA-covered plan or IRA. 1 and 3 attached thereto) entered into Conviction’’ means the judgment of (d) The term ‘‘FX Misconduct’’ means between UBS and the Department of conviction against UBS Securities Japan the conduct engaged in by UBS Justice Criminal Division, on May 20, Co. Ltd. in case number 3:12–cr–00268– personnel described in Exhibit 1 of the 2015 in connection with Case Number RNC in the U.S. District Court for the Plea Agreement (Factual Basis for 3:15–cr–00076–RNC filed in the US District of Connecticut for one count of Breach) entered into between UBS and District Court for the District of wire fraud in violation of Title 18, the Department of Justice Criminal Connecticut. United States Code, sections 1343 and 2 Division, on May 20, 2015 in connection Effective Date: If granted, the in connection with submission of YEN with Case Number 3:15–cr–00076–RNC exemption discussed in this notice will London Interbank Offered Rates and filed in the US District Court for the be effective for one year from the date other benchmark interest rates. The term District of Connecticut. of judgment, if any, against UBS or UBS ‘‘2018 Conviction’’ means the judgment (e) The term ‘‘UBS QPAM’’ means France by the French First Instance of conviction against UBS in case Court in case Number 1105592033. number 3:15–cr–00076–RNC in the U.S. UBS Asset Management (Americas) Inc., District Court for the District of UBS Realty Investors LLC, UBS Hedge Signed at Washington, DC, this 8th day of Connecticut for one count of wire fraud Fund Solutions LLC, UBS O’Connor February, 2019. in violation of Title 18, United States LLC, and any future entity within the Lyssa Hall, Code, Sections 1343 and 2 in Asset Management or the Global Wealth Director, Office of Exemption Determinations, connection with UBS’s submission of Management Americas U.S. divisions of Employee Benefits Security Administration, Yen London Interbank Offered Rates UBS that qualifies as a ‘‘qualified U.S. Department of Labor. and other benchmark interest rates professional asset manager’’ (as defined [FR Doc. 2019–02218 Filed 2–11–19; 11:15 am] 24 between 2001 and 2010. For all in Section VI(a) of PTE 84–14) and BILLING CODE 4510–29–P purposes under this exemption, that relies on the relief provided by PTE ‘‘conduct’’ of any person or entity that 84–14, and with respect to which UBS is the ‘‘subject of the Convictions’’ is an ‘‘affiliate’’ (as defined in Part VI(d) NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION encompasses any conduct of UBS and/ of PTE 84–14). The term ‘‘UBS QPAM’’ or their personnel, that is described in excludes UBS securities Japan, the Agency Information Collection (i) Exhibit 3 to the Plea Agreement entity implicated in the criminal Activities: Comment Request; Grantee entered into between UBS and the conduct that is the subject of the 2013 Reporting Requirements for the Department of Justice Criminal Division, Conviction, UBS, the entity implicated Graduate Research Fellowship on May 20, 2015, in connection with in the criminal conduct that is the Program case number 3:15–cr–00076–RNC, and subject of the 2018 Conviction and AGENCY: National Science Foundation. (ii) Exhibits 3 and 4 to the Plea implicated in the alleged criminal Agreement entered into between UBS conduct that is the subject of the ACTION: Notice. Securities Japan and the Department of Potential 2019 French Judgment Against UBS/UBS France, and UBS France, the SUMMARY: The National Science Justice Criminal Division, on December Foundation (NSF) is announcing plans 19, 2012, in connection with case entity implicated in the alleged criminal conduct that is the subject of the to reinstate this collection. In number 3:12–cr–00268–RNC; accordance with the requirements of the (b) The term ‘‘Potential 2019 French Potential 2019 French Judgment Against Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we Judgment Against UBS/UBS France’’ UBS/UBS France. are providing opportunity for public includes any adverse judgment against (f) The term ‘‘UBS’’ means UBS AG. comment on this action. After obtaining UBS or UBS France regarding case (g) The term ‘‘UBS France’’ means and considering public comment, NSF Number 1105592033. For all purposes ‘‘UBS (France) S.A.,’’ a wholly-owned will prepare the submission requesting under this exemption, ‘‘conduct’’ of any subsidiary of UBS incorporated under Office of Management and Budget person or entity that is the ‘‘subject of the laws of France. (OMB) clearance of this collection for no the alleged criminal conduct that may (h) The term ‘‘UBS Securities Japan’’ longer than 3 years. be the subject of the Potential 2019 means UBS Securities Japan Co. Ltd, a DATES: Written comments on this notice French Judgment Against UBS/UBS wholly-owned subsidiary of UBS must be received by April 15, 2019 to France’’ encompasses any conduct of incorporated under the laws of Japan. UBS, its affiliates, or UBS France and/ be assured consideration. Comments received after that date will be or their personnel that is described in 24 In general terms, a QPAM is an independent any such judgment. fiduciary that is a bank, savings and loan considered to the extent practicable. (c) The term ‘‘Covered Plan’’ means a association, insurance company, or investment Send comments to address below. plan subject to Part IV of Title I of adviser that meets certain equity or net worth FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: requirements and other licensure requirements and ERISA (an ‘‘ERISA-covered plan’’) or a that has acknowledged in a written management Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance plan subject to section 4975 of the Code agreement that it is a fiduciary with respect to each Officer, National Science Foundation, (an ‘‘IRA’’), in each case, with respect to plan that has retained the QPAM. 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Suite

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3829

W18253, Alexandria, Virginia 22314; The GRFP Completion report is ACTION: Submission for OMB review; telephone (703) 292–7556; or send email proposed as a continuing component of comment request. to [email protected]. Individuals who the annual reporting requirement for the use a telecommunications device for the program. This report, submitted by the SUMMARY: The National Science deaf (TDD) may call the Federal GRFP Institution, certifies the Foundation (NSF) has submitted the Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1– completion status of Fellows at the following information collection 800–877–8339, which is accessible 24 institution (e.g., in progress, completed, requirement to OMB for review and hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a graduated, transferred, or withdrawn). clearance under the Paperwork year (including Federal holidays). The existing Completion Report, Grants Reduction Act of 1995. This is the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Roster Report, and the Program Expense second notice for public comment; the Comments: Comments are invited on Report comprise the GRFP Annual first was published in the Federal (a) whether the proposed collection of Reporting requirements from the Register, and no comments were information is necessary for the proper Grantee GRFP institution. Through received. NSF is forwarding the performance of the functions of the submission of the Completion Report to proposed reinstatement submission to NCSES, including whether the NSF GRFP institutions certify the the Office of Management and Budget information will have practical utility; current status of all GRFP Fellows at the (OMB) for clearance simultaneously (b) the accuracy of the NCSES’s estimate institution as either: In Progress, with the publication of this second of the burden of the proposed collection Graduated, Transferred, or Withdrawn. notice. The full submission may be of information; (c) ways to enhance the For Graduate Fellows with Graduated found at: http://www.reginfo.gov/public/ quality, utility, and clarity of the status, the graduation date is a required do/PRAMain. information to be collected, including reporting element. Collection of this DATES: Comments regarding these through the use of automated collection information allows the program to information collections are best assured techniques or other forms of information obtain information on the current status of having their full effect if received technology; and (d) ways to minimize of Fellows, the number and/or within 30 days of this notification. the burden of the collection of percentage of Graduate Fellowship FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: information on those who are to recipients who complete a science or Office of Information and Regulatory respond, including through the use of engineering graduate degree, and an Affairs of OMB, Attention: Desk Officer appropriate automated collection estimate of time to degree completion. for National Science Foundation, 725 techniques or other forms of information The report must be certified and 17th Street NW, Room 10235, technology. submitted by the institution’s Washington, DC 20503, and Suzanne H. Title of Collection: Grantee Reporting designated Coordinating Official (CO) Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, Requirements for the Graduate Research annually. National Science Foundation, 2415 Fellowship Program. Use of the Information: The Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA OMB Number: 3145–0223. completion report data provides NSF 22314, or send email to splimpto@ Expiration Date of Approval: March with accurate Fellow information nsf.gov. Individuals who use a 31, 2019. regarding completion of the Fellows’ Type of Request: Intent to seek telecommunications device for the deaf graduate programs. The data is used by (TDD) may call the Federal Information approval to reinstate an information NSF in its assessment of the impact of collection. Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– its investments in the GRFP, and 8339, which is accessible 24 hours a Abstract informs its program management. day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year Estimate of Burden: Overall average (including federal holidays). Proposed Project: The purpose of the time will be 15 minutes per Fellow NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Copies of the submission(s) may be (8,250 Fellows) for a total of 2,063 hours obtained by calling 703–292–7556. Program is to help ensure the vitality for all institutions with Fellows. An SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NSF may and diversity of the scientific and estimate for institutions with 12 or not conduct or sponsor a collection of engineering workforce of the United fewer Fellows will be 1 hour, information unless the collection of States. The program recognizes and institutions with 12–48 fellows will be information displays a currently valid supports outstanding graduate students 4 hours, and institutions over 48 OMB control number and the agency who are pursuing research-based Fellows will be 10 hours. master’s and doctoral degrees in Respondents: Academic institutions informs potential persons who are to science, technology, engineering, and with NSF Graduate Fellows (GRFP respond to the collection of information mathematics (STEM) and in STEM Institutions). that such persons are not required to education. The GRFP provides three Estimated Number of Responses per respond to the collection of information years of support, to be used during a Report: One from each of the 271 unless it displays a currently valid OMB five-year fellowship period, for the current GRFP institutions. control number. graduate education of individuals who Comments regarding (a) whether the have demonstrated their potential for Dated: February 7, 2019. collection of information is necessary significant research achievements in Suzanne H. Plimpton, for the proper performance of the STEM and STEM education. Reports Clearance Officer, National Science functions of the agency, including The Graduate Research Fellowship Foundation. whether the information will have Program uses several sources of [FR Doc. 2019–02098 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the information in assessing and BILLING CODE 7555–01–P agency’s estimate of burden including documenting program performance and the validity of the methodology and impact. These sources include reports assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance from program evaluation, the GRFP NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION the quality, utility and clarity of the Committee of Visitors, and data Agency Information Collection information to be collected; (d) ways to compiled from the applications. In Activities: Comment Request minimize the burden of the collection of addition, GRFP Fellows submit annual information on those who are to activity reports to NSF. AGENCY: National Science Foundation. respond, including through the use of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3830 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

appropriate automated, electronic, Dated: February 7, 2019. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: mechanical, or other technological Suzanne H. Plimpton, I. Obtaining Information and collection techniques or other forms of Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Submitting Comments information technology should be Foundation. addressed to the points of contact in the [FR Doc. 2019–02102 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] A. Obtaining Information FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT BILLING CODE 7555–01–P Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018– section. 0203 when contacting the NRC about Title of Collection: Grantee Reporting the availability of information for this Requirements for the Research NUCLEAR REGULATORY action. You may obtain publicly- Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) COMMISSION available information related to this Program. [NRC–2018–0203] action by any of the following methods: OMB Number: 3145–0224. • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to Type of Request: Intent to seek Information Collection: Environmental http://www.regulations.gov and search approval extend, with revisions, an Protection Regulations for Domestic for Docket ID NRC–2018–0203. information collection. Licensing and Related Regulatory • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Functions Access and Management System Abstract (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- AGENCY: Overview of this information Nuclear Regulatory available documents online in the collection: The Research Experiences for Commission. ADAMS Public Documents collection at Undergraduates (REU) Reporting ACTION: Renewal of existing information http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ Module is a component of the NSF collection; request for comment. adams.html. To begin the search, select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For Project Reports System that is designed SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory to gather information about students problems with ADAMS, please contact Commission (NRC) invites public the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) participating in REU Sites and comment on the renewal of Office of Supplements projects. All NSF reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– Management and Budget (OMB) 415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@ Principal Investigators are required to approval for an existing collection of submit annual and final project reports nrc.gov. The supporting statement and information. The information collection burden spreadsheet are available in through Research.gov. If NSF cannot is entitled, ‘‘Environmental Protection collect information about undergraduate ADAMS under Accession Nos. Regulations for Domestic Licensing and ML18311A242 and ML18311A238. participants in undergraduate research Related Regulatory Functions.’’ experiences, NSF will have no other • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and DATES: means to consistently document the Submit comments by April 15, purchase copies of public documents at number and diversity of participants, 2019. Comments received after this date the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One types of participant involvement in the will be considered if it is practical to do White Flint North, 11555 Rockville research, and types of institutions so, but the Commission is able to ensure Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. represented by the participants. consideration only for comments • NRC’s Clearance Officer: A copy of received on or before this date. NSF is committed to providing the collection of information and related ADDRESSES: program stakeholders with formation You may submit comments instructions may be obtained without regarding the expenditure of taxpayer by any of the following methods: charge by contacting NRC’s Clearance • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to funds on these types of activities, which Officer, David Cullison, Office of the http://www.regulations.gov and search provide authentic research experiences Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear for Docket ID NRC–2018–0138. Address and related training for postsecondary Regulatory Commission, Washington, questions about docket IDs in students in STEM fields. DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– Regulations.gov to Krupskaya Castellon; 2084; email: Infocollects.Resource@ Background: All NSF Principal telephone: 301–287–9221; email: nrc.gov. Investigators are required to use the [email protected]. For project reporting functionality in technical questions, contact the B. Submitting Comments Research.gov to report on progress, individual listed in the FOR FURTHER Please include Docket ID NRC–2018– accomplishments, participants, and INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 0203 in the subject line of your activities annually and at the conclusion document. comment submission, in order to ensure of their project. Information from annual • Mail comments to: David Cullison, that the NRC is able to make your and final reports provides yearly Office of the Chief Information Officer, comment submission available to the updates on project inputs, activities, Mail Stop: T–6 A10M, U.S. Nuclear public in this docket. and outcomes for agency reporting Regulatory Commission, Washington, The NRC cautions you not to include purposes. If project participants include DC 20555–0001. identifying or contact information in undergraduate students supported by For additional direction on obtaining comment submissions that you do not the Research Experiences for information and submitting comments, want to be publicly disclosed in your Undergraduates (REU) Sites Program or see ‘‘Obtaining Information and comment submission. The NRC will by an REU Supplement, then the Submitting Comments’’ in the post all comment submissions at http:// Principal Investigator and his or her SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of www.regulations.gov as well as enter the students are required to complete the this document. comment submissions into ADAMS, REU Reporting Module. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and the NRC does not routinely edit Respondents: Individuals (Principal David Cullison, Office of the Chief comment submissions to remove Investigators and REU undergraduate Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear identifying or contact information. student participants). Regulatory Commission, Washington, If you are requesting or aggregating Number of Principal Investigator DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– comments from other persons for Respondents: 2,300. 2084; email: Infocollects.Resource@ submission to the NRC, then you should Burden on the Public: 383 total hours. nrc.gov. inform those persons not to include

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3831

identifying or contact information that properly perform its functions? Does the Submitting Comments’’ in the they do not want to be publicly information have practical utility? SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of disclosed in their comment submission. 2. Is the estimate of the burden of the this document. Your request should state that the NRC information collection accurate? FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: does not routinely edit comment 3. Is there a way to enhance the David Cullison, Office of the Chief submissions to remove such information quality, utility, and clarity of the Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear before making the comment information to be collected? Regulatory Commission, Washington, submissions available to the public or 4. How can the burden of the DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– entering the comment into ADAMS. information collection on respondents 2084; email: Infocollects.Resource@ be minimized, including the use of II. Background nrc.gov. automated collection techniques or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the Paperwork other forms of information technology? Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day I. Obtaining Information and Chapter 35), the NRC is requesting of February 2019. Submitting Comments public comment on its intention to For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. request the OMB’s approval for the A. Obtaining Information information collection summarized David C. Cullison, Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2019– below. NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief 0032 when contacting the NRC about 1. The title of the information Information Officer. the availability of information for this collection: 10 CFR part 51, [FR Doc. 2019–02196 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] action. You may obtain publicly- ‘‘Environmental Protection Regulations BILLING CODE 7590–01–P available information related to this for Domestic Licensing and Related action by any of the following methods: Regulatory Functions.’’ • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 2. OMB approval number: 3150–0021. NUCLEAR REGULATORY http://www.regulations.gov and search 3. Type of submission: Extension. COMMISSION for Docket ID NRC–2019–0032. A copy 4. The form number, if applicable: [NRC–2019–0032] of the collection of information and Not applicable. related instructions may be obtained 5. How often the collection is required Information Collection: Pre-Application without charge by accessing Docket ID or requested: Environmental Reports are Communication and Scheduling for NRC–2019–0032 on this website. required upon submittal of an Accident Tolerant Fuel Submittals • NRC’s Agencywide Documents application for a combined license, Access and Management System AGENCY: construction permit, operating license, Nuclear Regulatory (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- operating license renewal, early site Commission. available documents online in the permit, design certification, ACTION: Proposed information ADAMS Public Documents collection at decommissioning or license termination collection; request for comment. http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ review, or manufacturing license, or adams.html. To begin the search, select upon submittal of a petition for SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) invites public ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For rulemaking. problems with ADAMS, please contact 6. Who will be required or asked to comment on this proposed collection of the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) respond: Licensees and applicants information. The information collection reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– requesting approvals for actions is entitled, ‘‘Pre-Application proposed in accordance with the Communication and Scheduling for 415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@ provisions of 10 CFR parts 30, 32, 33, Accident Tolerant Fuel Submittals.’’ nrc.gov. A copy of the collection of information and related instructions 34, 35, 36, 39, 40, 50, 52, 54, 60, 61, 70, DATES: Submit comments by April 15, and 72. may be obtained without charge by 2019. Comments received after this date accessing ADAMS Accession No. 7. The estimated number of annual will be considered if it is practical to do responses: 16.7. ML18270A019. The supporting so, but the Commission is able to ensure statement is available in ADAMS under 8. The estimated number of annual consideration only for comments respondents: 16.7. Accession No. ML18344A004. received on or before this date. • 9. The estimated number of hours NRC’s PDR: You may examine and needed annually to comply with the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments purchase copies of public documents at by any of the following methods: the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One information collection requirement or • request: 30,462. Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 10. Abstract: The NRC’s regulations at http://www.regulations.gov and search Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. 10 CFR part 51 specify information to be for Docket ID NRC–2019–0032. Address • NRC’s Clearance Officer: A copy of provided in environmental reports by questions about NRC dockets to the collection of information and related applicants and licensees so that the NRC Krupskaya Castellon; telephone: 301– instructions may be obtained without can make determinations necessary to 287–9221; email: Krupskaya.Castellon@ charge by contacting NRC’s Clearance adhere to the policies, regulations, and nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact Officer, David Cullison, Office of the public laws of the United States, which the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear are interpreted and administered in INFORMATION CONTACT section of this Regulatory Commission, Washington, accordance with the provisions set forth document. DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– • in the National Environmental Policy Mail comments to: David Cullison, 2084; email: Infocollects.Resource@ Act of 1969, as amended. Office of the Chief Information Officer, nrc.gov. Mail Stop: TWFN—06–A10M, U.S. III. Specific Requests for Comments Nuclear Regulatory Commission, B. Submitting Comments The NRC is seeking comments that Washington, DC 20555–0001. Please include Docket ID NRC–2019– address the following questions: For additional direction on obtaining 0032 in the subject line of your 1. Is the proposed collection of information and submitting comments, comment submission, in order to ensure information necessary for the NRC to see ‘‘Obtaining Information and that the NRC is able to make your

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3832 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

comment submission available to the 9. The estimated number of hours NUCLEAR REGULATORY public in this docket. needed annually to comply with the COMMISSION The NRC cautions you not to include information collection requirement or [NRC–2019–0037] identifying or contact information in request: 1,080. comment submissions that you do not 10. Abstract: Accident tolerant fuel Human-System Interface Design want to be publicly disclosed in your (ATF) development is a joint effort Review Guidelines comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http:// between the U.S. nuclear industry and AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory www.regulations.gov as well as enter the the U.S. Department of Energy to design Commission. and pursue approval of various fuel comment submissions into ADAMS, ACTION: Draft NUREG; request for and the NRC does not routinely edit types with enhanced accident tolerance. comment. comment submissions to remove In preparing the U.S. Nuclear identifying or contact information. Regulatory Commission (NRC) to review SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory If you are requesting or aggregating these advanced fuel designs, the agency Commission (NRC) is issuing for public comments from other persons for is conducting advanced planning, comment a draft NUREG entitled, submission to the NRC, then you should reviewing the existing regulatory ‘‘Human-System Interface Design inform those persons not to include infrastructure, and identifying needs for Review Guidelines’’ (NUREG–0700, identifying or contact information that additional analysis capabilities. The Revision 3). NUREG–0700 was first they do not want to be publicly intent of this information collection is to published in 1981 following the disclosed in their comment submission. help inform the NRC’s budget and accident at the Three Mile Island Your request should state that the NRC resource planning for the eventual Nuclear Power Plant. The NUREG does not routinely edit comment review of ATF-related applications. provided the guidance to operating submissions to remove such information Specifically, the NRC seeks ATF reactor licensees and applicants for before making the comment scheduling information for pre- operating licenses for conducting submissions available to the public or application activities, topical report detailed control room design reviews entering the comment into ADAMS. submittals, and other licensing and identifying and correcting design deficiencies in order to bring control submittals from all respondents. This II. Background rooms into compliance with human information will allow the NRC to better In accordance with the Paperwork factors engineering principles. Since Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. allocate its resources to support the that time, the NRC staff has updated Chapter 35), the NRC is requesting activities leading up to and including NUREG–0700 in 1996 and again in public comment on its intention to the review of an ATF submittal. The 2002. The current updated (Revision 3) request the OMB’s approval for the proper allocation of resources promotes is the first in over a decade and information collection summarized the efficient completion of the NRC’s represents a major revision to the below. review responsibilities. guidance document. 1. The title of the information III. Specific Requests for Comments DATES: Submit comments by April 1, collection: Pre-Application 2019. Comments received after this date Communication and Scheduling for The NRC is seeking comments that will be considered if it is practical to do Accident Tolerant Fuel Submittals. address the following questions: so, but the Commission is able to ensure 2. OMB approval number: An OMB 1. Is the proposed collection of consideration only for comments control number has not yet been received before this date. assigned to this proposed information information necessary for the NRC to ADDRESSES: collection. properly perform its functions? Does the You may submit comments information have practical utility? by any of the following methods: 3. Type of submission: New. • 4. The form number, if applicable: Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 2. Is the estimate of the burden of the http://www.regulations.gov and search Not Applicable. information collection accurate? 5. How often the collection is required for Docket ID NRC–2019–0037. Address or requested: Annually. 3. Is there a way to enhance the questions about Docket IDs in 6. Who will be required or asked to quality, utility, and clarity of the Regulations.gov to Krupskaya Castellon; respond: All fuel vendors who information to be collected? telephone: 301–287–9221; email: anticipate submitting accident tolerant 4. How can the burden of the [email protected]. For fuel (ATF) design applications. All information collection on respondents technical questions, contact the potential applicants for the fabrication, be minimized, including the use of individual(s) listed in the FOR FURTHER transportation, and storage of ATF automated collection techniques or INFORMATION CONTACT section of this under the provisions of Title 10 of the document. other forms of information technology? • Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Mail comments to: Office of Part 70, ‘‘Domestic Licensing of Special Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7– Nuclear Material,’’ 10 CFR part 71, of February 2019. A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory ‘‘Packaging and Transportation of For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Commission, Washington, DC 20555– Radioactive Material,’’ and 10 CFR part David C. Cullison, 0001, ATTN: Program Management, 72, ‘‘Licensing Requirements for the NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Announcements and Editing Staff. Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Information Officer. For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and [FR Doc. 2019–02199 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] see ‘‘Obtaining Information and Reactor-Related Greater than Class C BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Waste.’’ Submitting Comments’’ in the 7. The estimated number of annual SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of responses: 9. this document. 8. The estimated number of annual FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: respondents: 9. Stephen A. Fleger, Office of Nuclear

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3833

Regulatory Research, telephone: 301– before making the comment For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 415–2409, email: Stephen.Fleger@ submissions available to the public or Sean E. Peters, nrc.gov; or DaBin Ki, Office of Nuclear entering the comment into ADAMS. Branch Chief, Human Factors and Reliability Regulatory Research, telephone: 301– II. Discussion Branch, Division of Risk Analysis, Office of 415–2358, email: [email protected]. Nuclear Regulatory Research. Both are staff of the U.S. Nuclear The NRC staff reviews the human [FR Doc. 2019–02182 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Regulatory Commission, Washington, factors engineering (HFE) aspects of BILLING CODE 7590–01–P DC 20555–0001. nuclear power plants in accordance SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: with the Standard Review Plan NUCLEAR REGULATORY (NUREG–0800, Standard Review Plan I. Obtaining Information and COMMISSION Submitting Comments for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR [NRC–2018–0062] A. Obtaining Information Edition.) The Human Factors Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2019– Engineering Program Review Model Information Collection: Physical 0037 when contacting the NRC about (NUREG–0711, Revision 3, issued Protection of Category 1 and Category the availability of information for this November 2012) contains detailed 2 Quantities of Radioactive Material action. You may obtain publicly- design review procedures. As part of the AGENCY: available information related to this Nuclear Regulatory review process, the interfaces between Commission. action by any of the following methods: plant personnel and the plant’s systems • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to ACTION: Notice of submission to the and components are evaluated for http://www.regulations.gov and search Office of Management and Budget; conformance with HFE guidelines. This for Docket ID NRC–2019–0037. request for comment. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents document, Human-System Interface SUMMARY: Access and Management System Design Review Guidelines (NUREG– The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- 0700, Revision 3), provides the Commission (NRC) has recently available documents online in the guidelines to perform this evaluation. submitted a request for renewal of an ADAMS Public Documents collection at The review guidelines address the existing collection of information to the http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ physical and functional characteristics Office of Management and Budget adams.html. To begin the search, select of human-system interfaces (HSIs). (OMB) for review. The information ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For Because these guidelines only address collection is entitled, ‘‘Physical problems with ADAMS, please contact the HFE aspects of design and not other Protection of Category 1 and Category 2 the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) related considerations, such as Quantities of Radioactive Material.’’ reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– instrumentation and control and DATES: Submit comments by March 15, 415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@ structural design, they are referred to as 2019. nrc.gov. The draft NUREG on ‘‘Human- HFE guidelines. In addition to the ADDRESSES: Submit comments directly System Interface Design Review review of actual HSIs, the NRC staff can to the OMB reviewer at: OMB Office of Guidelines’’ is available in ADAMS use the NUREG–0700 guidelines to Information and Regulatory Affairs under Accession No. ML18158A333. evaluate a design-specific HFE (3150–0214), Attn: Desk Officer for the • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and guidelines document or style guide. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 725 purchase copies of public documents at HFE guidelines are organized into four 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; _ the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One basic parts, which are further divided email: oira [email protected]. White Flint North, 11555 Rockville into sections. Part I contains guidelines FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. for the basic HSI elements: Information David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, B. Submitting Comments displays, user-interface interactions and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: Please include Docket ID NRC–2019– management, and analog displays and controls. These elements are used as 301–415–2084; email: 0037 in your comment submission. [email protected]. The NRC cautions you not to include building blocks to develop HSI systems SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: identifying or contact information that to serve specific functions. Part II you do not want to be publicly contains the guidelines for reviewing I. Obtaining Information and disclosed in your comment submission. the following HSI systems: Alarm Submitting Comments The NRC will post all comment system, safety parameter display system, submissions at http:// group-view display system, soft control A. Obtaining Information www.regulations.gov as well as enter the system, computer-based procedure Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018– comment submissions into ADAMS. system, automation system, and 0062 when contacting the NRC about The NRC does not routinely edit communication system. Part III provides the availability of information for this comment submissions to remove guidelines for the review of action. You may obtain publicly- identifying or contact information. workstations and workplaces. Part IV available information related to this If you are requesting or aggregating provides guidelines for the review of action by any of the following methods: • comments from other persons for HSI support (i.e., maintainability of Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to submission to the NRC, then you should digital systems and degraded HSI and http://www.regulations.gov and search inform those persons not to include instrumentation and control for Docket ID NRC–2018–0062. A copy identifying or contact information that conditions). of the collection of information and they do not want to be publicly related instructions may be obtained disclosed in their comment submission. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day without charge by accessing Docket ID Your request should state that the NRC of February 2019. NRC–2018–0062 on this website. does not routinely edit comment • NRC’s Agencywide Documents submissions to remove such information Access and Management System

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3834 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- not required to respond to, a collection report any attempted or actual theft or available documents online in the of information unless it displays a diversion of the radioactive material. ADAMS Public Documents collection at currently valid OMB control number. Licensees are required to keep copies of http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ The NRC published a Federal the security plan, procedures, adams.html. To begin the search, select Register notice with a 60-day comment background investigation records, ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For period on this information collection on training records, and documentation problems with ADAMS, please contact October 29, 2018 (83 FR 54382). associated with implementation of the the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) 1. The title of the information security program. The NRC uses the reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– collection: 10 CFR part 37, ‘‘Physical information required by 10 CFR part 37 415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@ Protection of Category 1 and Category 2 to fulfill its responsibilities to respond nrc.gov. The supporting statement Quantities of Radioactive Material.’’ to, investigate, and correct situations associated with the Part 37 information 2. OMB approval number: 3150–0214. that have the potential to adversely collections, burden table, and the NRC 3. Type of submission: Revision. affect public health and safety or the Form 755 are available in ADAMS 4. The form number if applicable: Not common defense and security. under Accession Nos. ML19011A456, applicable. 5. How often the collection is required Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day ML19036A793, and ML18295A594. of February 2019. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and or requested: One time for initial purchase copies of public documents at compliance notifications and For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One fingerprints for the reviewing officials; David C. Cullison, White Flint North, 11555 Rockville and as needed for implementation NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. notifications, event notifications, Information Officer. • NRC’s Clearance Officer: A copy of notifications of shipments of radioactive [FR Doc. 2019–02197 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] the collection of information and related material, and fingerprinting of new BILLING CODE 7590–01–P instructions may be obtained without employees. charge by contacting the NRC’s 6. Who will be required or asked to Clearance Officer, David Cullison, respond: Licensees that are authorized NUCLEAR REGULATORY Office of the Chief Information Officer, to possess and use category 1 or COMMISSION U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, category 2 quantities of radioactive Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: material. [NRC–2019–0036] 7. The estimated number of annual 301–415–2084; email: Information Collection: NRC Form 313, [email protected]. responses: 101,479 (4,704 reporting responses + 95,375 third party ‘‘Application for Materials License’’ and B. Submitting Comments disclosure responses + 1,400 NRC Forms 313A (RSO), 313A (AMP), The NRC cautions you not to include recordkeepers). 313A (ANP), 313A (AUD), 313A (AUT), identifying or contact information in 8. The estimated number of annual and 313A (AUS) comment submissions that you do not respondents: 5,600. AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory want to be publicly disclosed in your 9. An estimate of the total number of Commission. comment submission. All comment hours needed annually to comply with the information collection requirement ACTION: Revision of existing information submissions are posted at http:// collection; request for comment. www.regulations.gov and entered into or request: 74,043 hours (1,557 reporting ADAMS. Comment submissions are not + 48,497 third party disclosure + 23,989 SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory routinely edited to remove identifying recordkeeping). Commission (NRC) invites public or contact information. 10. Abstract: Part 37 of title 10 of the comment on the revision of Office of If you are requesting or aggregating Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Management and Budget (OMB) comments from other persons for contains security requirements for the approval for an existing collection of submission to the OMB, then you use of category 1 and category 2 information. The information collection should inform those persons not to quantities of radioactive material. is entitled, NRC Form 313, ‘‘Application include identifying or contact Licensees are required to: (1) Develop for Materials License’’ and NRC Forms information that they do not want to be procedures for the implementation of 313A (RSO), 313A (AMP), 313A (ANP), publicly disclosed in their comment the security provisions; (2) develop a 313A (AUD), 313A (AUT), and 313A submission. Your request should state security plan that describes how (AUS).’’ that comment submissions are not security is being implemented; (3) routinely edited to remove such implement security measures for the DATES: Submit comments by April 15, information before making the comment protection of the radioactive material; 2019. Comments received after this date submissions available to the public or (4) conduct training on the procedures will be considered if it is practical to do entering the comment into ADAMS. and security plan; (5) conduct so, but the Commission is able to ensure background investigations for those consideration only for comments II. Background individuals permitted unescorted access received on or before this date. Under the provisions of the to category 1 or category 2 quantities of ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 radioactive material; (6) coordinate with by any of the following methods: U.S.C. Chapter 35), the NRC recently Local Law Enforcement Agencies • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to submitted a request for renewal of an (LLEAs) so the LLEAs would be better http://www.regulations.gov and search existing collection of information to prepared to respond in an emergency; for Docket ID NRC–2019–0036. Address OMB for review entitled, ‘‘Physical and (7) conduct coordination activities questions about docket IDs in Protection of Category 1 and Category 2 before shipping category 2 radioactive Regulations.gov to Krupskaya Castellon; Quantities of Radioactive Material.’’ The material, and preplanning and telephone: 301–287–9221; email: NRC hereby informs potential coordination activities before shipping [email protected]. For respondents that an agency may not category 1 radioactive material. technical questions, contact the conduct or sponsor, and that a person is Licensees are required to promptly individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3835

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this B. Submitting Comments 313A series form to have each new document. Please include Docket ID NRC–2019– individual identified as a Radiation • Mail comments to: David Cullison, 0036 in the subject line of your Safety Officer (RSO) or Associate Office of the Chief Information Officer, comment submission, in order to ensure Radiation Safety Officer (ARSO) [NRC Mail Stop: T–2 F43, U.S. Nuclear that the NRC is able to make your Form 313A (RSO)], authorized medical Regulatory Commission, Washington, comment submission available to the physicist or ophthalmic physicist [NRC DC 20555–0001. public in this docket. Form 313A (AMP)], authorized nuclear For additional direction on obtaining The NRC cautions you not to include pharmacist [NRC Form 313A (ANP)], or authorized user [NRC Form 313A information and submitting comments, identifying or contact information in (AUD), NRC Form 313A (AUS), or NRC see ‘‘Obtaining Information and comment submissions that you do not Form 313A (AUT)] or a subsequent Submitting Comments’’ in the want to be publicly disclosed in your submittal of additional information for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of comment submission. The NRC will one of these individuals to be identified this document. post all comment submissions at http:// with a new authorization on a limited www.regulations.gov as well as enter the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: specific medical use license. David Cullison, Office of the Chief comment submissions into ADAMS, NRC Form 313A (RSO) is also used by Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear and the NRC does not routinely edit medical broad scope licensees when Regulatory Commission, Washington, comment submissions to remove identifying a new individual as an RSO, DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– identifying or contact information. a new individual as an ARSO, adding an 2084; email: Infocollects.Resource@ If you are requesting or aggregating additional RSO authorization, or adding nrc.gov. comments from other persons for an additional ARSO authorization for submission to the NRC, then you should the individual. This submittal may SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: inform those persons not to include occur when applying for a new license, I. Obtaining Information and identifying or contact information that amendment, or renewal. NRC Form Submitting Comments they do not want to be publicly 313A (ANP) is also used by commercial disclosed in their comment submission. nuclear pharmacy licensees when A. Obtaining Information Your request should state that the NRC requesting an individual be identified Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2019– does not routinely edit comment for the first time as ANP. This submittal 0036 when contacting the NRC about submissions to remove such information may occur when applying for a new the availability of information for this before making the comment license, amendment, or renewal. action. You may obtain publicly- submissions available to the public or 6. Who will be required or asked to available information related to this entering the comment into ADAMS. respond: All applicants requesting a action by any of the following methods: II. Background license, amendment or renewal of a • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to license for byproduct or source material. In accordance with the Paperwork 7. The estimated number of annual http://www.regulations.gov and search Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. for Docket ID NRC–2019–0036. responses: The number of annual Chapter 35), the NRC is requesting respondents: 8,904 (1,049 NRC licensees • NRC’s Agencywide Documents public comment on its intention to and 7,231 Agreement State licensees + Access and Management System request the OMB’s approval for the 624 Third party responses). (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- information collection summarized 8. The estimated number of annual available documents online in the below. respondents: The number of annual ADAMS Public Documents collection at 1. The title of the information respondents: 8,904 (1,049 NRC licensees http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ collection: NRC Form 313, ‘‘Application and 7,231 Agreement State licensees + adams.html. To begin the search, select for Materials License’’ and NRC Forms 624 third party respondents). ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then 313A (RSO), 313A (AMP), 313A (ANP), 9. The estimated number of hours select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS 313A (AUD), 313A (AUT), and 313A needed annually to comply with the Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, (AUS). information collection requirement or please contact the NRC’s Public 2. OMB approval number: 3150–0120. request: 35,634 (4,510 NRC and 31,093 Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 3. Type of submission: Revision. Agreement State hours + 31 third party 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by 4. The form number, if applicable: hours). email to [email protected]. The NRC Form 313, ‘‘Application for 10. Abstract: Applicants must submit supporting statement is available in Materials License’’ and NRC Forms NRC Form 313, which may include the ADAMS under Accession No. 313A (RSO), 313A (AMP), 313A (ANP), six forms in the 313A series, to obtain ML18285A311. 313A (AUD), 313A (AUT), and 313A a specific license to possess, use, or • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and (AUS). distribute byproduct or source material. purchase copies of public documents at 5. How often the collection is required These six forms in the 313A series are: the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One or requested: There is a one-time (1) NRC Form 313A (RSO), ‘‘Radiation White Flint North, 11555 Rockville submittal of the NRC Form 313 (which Safety Officer or Associate Radiation Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. may include the NRC Form 313A series Safety Officer Training, Experience and • NRC’s Clearance Officer: A copy of of forms) with information to receive a Preceptor Attestation [10 CFR 35.57, the collection of information and related license. Once a specific license has been 35.50]’’; (2) NRC Form 313A (AMP), instructions may be obtained without issued, there is a 15-year resubmittal of ‘‘Authorized Medical Physicist and charge by contacting NRC’s Clearance the NRC Form 313 (which may include Ophthalmic Physicist, Training, Officer, David Cullison, Office of the the NRC form 313A series of forms) with Experience and Preceptor Attestation Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear information for renewal of the license. [10 CFR 35.51, 35.57(a)(3), and 35.433’’; Regulatory Commission, Washington, Amendment requests are submitted as (3) NRC Form 313A (ANP), ‘‘Authorized DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– needed by the licensee. There is a one- Nuclear Pharmacist Training, 2084; email: Infocollects.Resource@ time submittal for all limited specific Experience, and Preceptor Attestation nrc.gov. medical use applicants of a NRC Form [10 CFR 35.55’’; (4) NRC Form 313A

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3836 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

(AUD), ‘‘Authorized User Training, a public forum entitled ‘‘Countering regarding privacy in the Experience and Preceptor Attestation Terrorism while Protecting Privacy and counterterrorism context. You may (for uses defined under 35.100, 35.200, Civil Liberties: Where do We Stand in submit comments with the docket and 35.500) [10 CFR 35.57, 35.190, 2019.’’ During the forum, Board number PCLOB–2019–01 by the 35.290, and 35.590’’; (5) NRC Form Members will hear from governmental following method: 313A (AUT), ‘‘Authorized User and non-governmental experts on • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to Training, Experience, and Preceptor privacy and civil liberties and on efforts http://www.regulations.gov. Please Attestation (for uses defined under to protect the nation against terrorism. search by ‘Notice PCLOB–2019–01’ and 35.300) [10 CFR 35.57, 35.390, 35.392, Members of the public in attendance follow the on-line instructions for 35.394, and 35.396]’’; and (6) NRC Form will have an opportunity to ask submitting comments. 313A (AUS), ‘‘Authorized User questions of the expert presenters. • Written comments may be Training, Experience and Preceptor DATES: The forum will be held on submitted at any time prior to the Attestation (for uses defined under Friday, February 8, 2019, from 10:00 closing of the docket at 11:59 p.m., EST, 35.400 and 35.600) [10 CFR 35.57, a.m. to 12:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard on March 8, 2019. 35.490, 35.491, and 35.690].’’ The NRC Time. Please submit comments on or All comments will be made publicly Form 313A series of forms requires before March 8, 2019. available and posted without charge. Do preceptor attestations for certain not include personal or confidential EVENT LOCATION: Ronald Reagan individuals. The preceptor attestation is information. Building, Hemisphere Room, 1300 provided by a third party and not an Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC Dated: January 31, 2019. applicant or licensee. The information is 20004. Eric Broxmeyer, reviewed by the NRC to determine whether the applicant is qualified by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jen General Counsel, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. training and experience, and has Burita, Public Affairs/Legislative Affairs equipment, facilities, and procedures Officer, 202–331–1986. [FR Doc. 2019–02204 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] which are adequate to protect the public SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BILLING CODE 6820–B5–P health and safety and minimize danger Doors open at 9:30 a.m. The forum to life or property. will begin promptly at 10:00 a.m. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE III. Specific Requests for Comments Participant List COMMISSION The Board will hear from these The NRC is seeking comments that [Investment Company Act Release No. address the following questions: experts: 33371; File No. 812–14985] 1. Is the proposed collection of • Alexander Joel—Chief, Office of Civil information necessary for the NRC to Liberties, Privacy and Transparency, Victory Capital Management Inc., et al. properly perform its functions? Does the Office of the Director of National information have practical utility? Intelligence February 8, 2019. 2. Is the estimate of the burden of the • Chris Calabrese—Vice President, AGENCY: Securities and Exchange information collection accurate? Policy, Center for Democracy & Commission (‘‘Commission’’). 3. Is there a way to enhance the Technology ACTION: Notice. quality, utility, and clarity of the • Carrie Cordero—Senior Fellow and information to be collected? General Counsel, Center for a New Notice of an application for an order 4. How can the burden of the American Security under section 6(c) of the Investment information collection on respondents • Alex Abdo—Senior Staff Attorney, Company Act of 1940 (the ‘‘Act’’) for an be minimized, including the use of Knight First Amendment Institute at exemption from sections 2(a)(32), automated collection techniques or Columbia University 5(a)(1), 22(d), and 22(e) of the Act and other forms of information technology? • Jason Matheny—Commissioner on the rule 22c–1 under the Act, under Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day National Security Commission on sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an of February 2019. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and former exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Director of the Intelligence Advanced 17(a)(2) of the Act, and under section David C. Cullison, Research Projects Activity (IARPA) for 12(d)(1)(J) for an exemption from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and 12(d)(1)(B) of NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief the Office of the Director of National Information Officer. Intelligence. the Act. The requested order would permit (a) actively-managed series of [FR Doc. 2019–02198 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Procedures for Public Observation certain open-end management BILLING CODE 7590–01–P The event is open to the public. Pre- investment companies (‘‘Funds’’) to registration is not required. Members of issue shares redeemable in large the public will have an opportunity to aggregations only (‘‘Creation Units’’); (b) PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES secondary market transactions in Fund OVERSIGHT BOARD offer comments and pose questions to the panelists. shares to occur at negotiated market [Notice–PCLOB–2019–01; Docket No. Individuals who plan to attend and prices rather than at net asset value PCLOB–2019–0001; Sequence No. 1] require special assistance should (‘‘NAV’’); (c) certain Funds to pay contact Jen Burita, Public Affairs/ redemption proceeds, under certain Public Forum Legislative Affairs Officer, 202–331– circumstances, more than seven days AGENCY: Privacy and Civil Liberties 1986, at least 72 hours prior to the after the tender of shares for Oversight Board. event. redemption; (d) certain affiliated persons of a Fund to deposit securities ACTION: Notice of public forum; request Public Comments for public comment. into, and receive securities from, the The Privacy and Civil Liberties Fund in connection with the purchase SUMMARY: The Privacy and Civil Oversight Board invites written and redemption of Creation Units; (e) Liberties Oversight Board will conduct comments of interested persons certain registered management

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3837

investment companies and unit Company name box, at http:// 4. Because shares will not be investment trusts outside of the same www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by individually redeemable, applicants group of investment companies as the calling (202) 551–8090. request an exemption from section Funds (‘‘Funds of Funds’’) to acquire 5(a)(1) and section 2(a)(32) of the Act Summary of the Application shares of the Funds; and (f) certain that would permit the Funds to register Funds (‘‘Feeder Funds’’) to create and 1. Applicants request an order that as open-end management investment redeem Creation Units in-kind in a would allow Funds to operate as companies and issue shares that are master-feeder structure. actively-managed exchange traded redeemable in Creation Units only. APPLICANTS: Victory Portfolios II (the funds (‘‘ETFs’’).1 Fund shares will be 5. Applicants also request an ‘‘Trust’’), a Delaware statutory trust that purchased and redeemed at their NAV exemption from section 22(d) of the Act is registered under the Act as an open- in Creation Units only. All orders to and rule 22c–1 under the Act as end management investment company purchase Creation Units and all secondary market trading in shares will with multiple series, Victory Capital redemption requests will be placed by take place at negotiated prices, not at a Management Inc. (the ‘‘Initial Adviser’’), or through an ‘‘Authorized Participant,’’ current offering price described in a a New York corporation that is which will have signed a participant Fund’s prospectus, and not at a price registered as an investment adviser agreement with the Distributor. Shares based on NAV. Applicants state that (a) under the Investment Advisers Act of will be listed and traded individually on secondary market trading in shares does 1940, and Foreside Fund Services LLC a national securities exchange, where not involve a Fund as a party and will not result in dilution of an investment (the ‘‘Initial Distributor’’), a Delaware share prices will be based on the current in shares, and (b) to the extent different limited liability company and broker- bid/offer market. Certain Funds may prices exist during a given trading day, dealer registered under the Securities operate as Feeder Funds in a master- or from day to day, such variances occur Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’). feeder structure. Any order granting the requested relief would be subject to the as a result of third-party market forces, FILING DATES: The application was filed such as supply and demand. Therefore, on December 7, 2018, and amended on terms and conditions stated in the application. applicants assert that secondary market February 1, 2019. transactions in shares will not lead to 2. Each Fund will consist of a HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An discrimination or preferential treatment portfolio of securities and other assets order granting the requested relief will among purchasers. Finally, applicants and investment positions (‘‘Portfolio be issued unless the Commission orders represent that share market prices will Instruments’’). Each Fund will disclose a hearing. Interested persons may be disciplined by arbitrage on its website the identities and request a hearing by writing to the opportunities, which should prevent Commission’s Secretary and serving quantities of the Portfolio Instruments shares from trading at a material applicants with a copy of the request, that will form the basis for the Fund’s discount or premium from NAV. personally or by mail. Hearing requests calculation of NAV at the end of the 6. With respect to Funds that hold should be received by the Commission day. non-U.S. Portfolio Instruments and that by 5:30 p.m. on March 5, 2019, and 3. Shares will be purchased and effect creations and redemptions of should be accompanied by proof of redeemed in Creation Units and Creation Units in kind, applicants service on applicants, in the form of an generally on an in-kind basis. Except request relief from the requirement affidavit, or for lawyers, a certificate of where the purchase or redemption will imposed by section 22(e) in order to service. Pursuant to rule 0–5 under the include cash under the limited allow such Funds to pay redemption Act, hearing requests should state the circumstances specified in the proceeds within fifteen calendar days nature of the writer’s interest, any facts application, purchasers will be required following the tender of Creation Units bearing upon the desirability of a to purchase Creation Units by for redemption. Applicants assert that hearing on the matter, the reason for the depositing specified instruments the requested relief would not be request, and the issues contested. (‘‘Deposit Instruments’’), and inconsistent with the spirit and intent of Persons who wish to be notified of a shareholders redeeming their shares section 22(e) to prevent unreasonable, hearing may request notification by will receive specified instruments undisclosed or unforeseen delays in the writing to the Commission’s Secretary. (‘‘Redemption Instruments’’). The actual payment of redemption proceeds. Deposit Instruments and the 7. Applicants request an exemption to ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and Redemption Instruments will each permit Funds of Funds to acquire Fund Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, correspond pro rata to the positions in shares beyond the limits of section Washington, DC 20549–1090; the Fund’s portfolio (including cash 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act; and the Funds, Applicants: c/o James G. Silk, Willkie positions) except as specified in the and any principal underwriter for the Farr & Gallagher LLP, 1875 K Street, application. Funds, and/or any broker or dealer NW, Washington, DC 20006 and Jay G. registered under the Exchange Act, to Baris, Shearman & Sterling LLP, 599 1 sell shares to Funds of Funds beyond Lexington Ave., New York, NY 10022. Applicants request that the order apply to the initial Funds, as well as to future series of the Trust the limits of section 12(d)(1)(B) of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and any existing or future open-end management Act. The application’s terms and Laura L. Solomon, Senior Counsel, at investment companies or series thereof (each, included in the term ‘‘Fund’’), each of which will conditions are designed to, among other (202) 551–6915, or Kaitlin C. Bottock, operate as an actively-managed ETF, and their things, help prevent any potential (i) Branch Chief, at (202) 551–6821 respective existing or future Master Funds. Any undue influence over a Fund through (Division of Investment Management, Fund will (a) be advised by the Initial Adviser or control or voting power, or in Chief Counsel’s Office). an entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the Initial Adviser (each such connection with certain services, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The entity and any successor thereto, an ‘‘Adviser’’) and transactions, and underwritings, (ii) following is a summary of the (b) comply with the terms and conditions of the excessive layering of fees, and (iii) application. The complete application application. For purposes of the requested order, a overly complex fund structures, which ‘‘successor’’ is limited to an entity or entities that may be obtained via the Commission’s result from a reorganization into another are the concerns underlying the limits website by searching for the file jurisdiction or a change in the type of business in sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B) of the number, or for an applicant using the organization. Act.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3838 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

8. Applicants request an exemption permitting a transaction otherwise II. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the prohibited by section 17(a) if it finds Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Act to permit persons that are Affiliated that (a) the terms of the proposed Proposed Rule Change Persons, or Second-Tier Affiliates, of the transaction are fair and reasonable and In its filing with the Commission, ICE Funds, solely by virtue of certain do not involve overreaching on the part ownership interests, to effectuate Clear Europe included statements of any person concerned; (b) the concerning the purpose of and basis for purchases and redemptions in-kind. The proposed transaction is consistent with deposit procedures for in-kind the proposed rule change and discussed the policies of each registered any comments it received on the purchases of Creation Units and the investment company involved; and (c) redemption procedures for in-kind proposed rule change. The text of these the proposed transaction is consistent redemptions of Creation Units will be statements may be examined at the with the general purposes of the Act. the same for all purchases and places specified in Item IV below. ICE redemptions and Deposit Instruments For the Commission, by the Division of Clear Europe has prepared summaries, and Redemption Instruments will be Investment Management, under delegated set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) valued in the same manner as those authority. below, of the most significant aspects of Portfolio Instruments currently held by Eduardo A. Aleman, such statements. the Funds. Applicants also seek relief Deputy Secretary. (A) Clearing Agency’s Statement of the from the prohibitions on affiliated [FR Doc. 2019–02189 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the transactions in section 17(a) to permit a Proposed Rule Change Fund to sell its shares to and redeem its BILLING CODE 8011–01–P shares from a Fund of Funds, and to (a) Purpose engage in the accompanying in-kind SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE ICE Clear Europe proposes to amend transactions with the Fund of Funds.2 COMMISSION certain provisions of its Rules (and The purchase of Creation Units by a specifically its Continuing CDS Rule Fund of Funds directly from a Fund will Provisions as defined therein) relating to be accomplished in accordance with the [Release No. 34–85072; File No. SR–ICEEU– 2019–001] termination by the Clearing House of the policies of the Fund of Funds and will membership of a CDS Clearing Member. be based on the NAVs of the Funds. 9. Applicants also request relief to Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE The Continuing CDS Rule Provisions permit a Feeder Fund to acquire shares Clear Europe Limited; Notice of Filing are certain provisions of the Rules as of another registered investment and Order Granting Accelerated they were in effect prior to the adoption company managed by the Adviser Approval of Proposed Rule Change of rule amendments relating to recovery, having substantially the same Relating to Clearing Member wind-down and default management for investment objectives as the Feeder Termination the F&O Contract Category,4 and which Fund (‘‘Master Fund’’) beyond the continued in effect with respect to the limitations in section 12(d)(1)(A) and February 7, 2019. CDS Contract Category, as provided in permit the Master Fund, and any Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the ICE Clear Europe Circular C14/012 of 31 principal underwriter for the Master Securities Exchange Act of 1934 January 2014 and in the definition thereof in the Rules. Fund, to sell shares of the Master Fund (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 to the Feeder Fund beyond the notice is hereby given that on January The Continuing CDS Rule Provisions limitations in section 12(d)(1)(B). 30, 2019, ICE Clear Europe Limited include Rule 209 as it relates to the CDS 10. Section 6(c) of the Act permits the (‘‘ICE Clear Europe’’ or the ‘‘Clearing Contract Category and/or CDS Clearing Commission to exempt any persons or Members. Under Rule 209(b) under the House’’) filed with the Securities and transactions from any provision of the Continuing CDS Rule Provisions, the Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) Act if such exemption is necessary or Clearing House may terminate the appropriate in the public interest and the proposed rule change described in clearing membership of a CDS Clearing consistent with the protection of Items I and II below, which Items have Member on not less than three months’ investors and the purposes fairly been prepared by ICE Clear Europe. The notice.5 ICE Clear Europe proposes to intended by the policy and provisions of Commission is publishing this notice change the notice period for such a the Act. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act and order to solicit comments on the termination to 30 Business Days. Such provides that the Commission may proposed rule change from interested change would be made through an exempt any person, security, or persons and to approve the proposed amendment to the definition of transaction, or any class or classes of rule change on an accelerated basis.

persons, securities, or transactions, from 4 I. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the ICE Clear Europe adopted these rules, relating to any provision of section 12(d)(1) if the Clearing House recovery and wind-down for the exemption is consistent with the public Terms of Substance of the Proposed F&O and FX Contract Categories, in 2014. Exchange interest and the protection of investors. Rule Change Act Release No. 34–71450 (SR–ICEEU–2014–013) Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the (Jan. 31, 2014), 79 FR 7250 (Feb. 6, 2014). ICE Clear Europe proposes to amend 5 ICE Clear Europe may use this provision to Commission to grant an order certain provisions of its Clearing Rules 3 terminate the membership of a Clearing Member for a variety of reasons. It may, for example, be used relating to termination by the Clearing 2 The requested relief would apply to direct sales in a scenario where such termination is required in of shares in Creation Units by a Fund to a Fund of House of the membership of a CDS order for the Clearing House and its operations to Funds and redemptions of those shares. Applicants, Clearing Member. remain in compliance with applicable laws in moreover, are not seeking relief from section 17(a) relevant jurisdictions. for, and the requested relief will not apply to, The Clearing House has the right to terminate a transactions where a Fund could be deemed an 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). CDS Clearing Member without notice in a variety Affiliated Person, or a Second-Tier Affiliate, of a 2 of other circumstances, generally relating to the Fund of Funds because an Adviser or an entity 17 CFR 240.19b–4. conduct or circumstances of the Clearing Member, controlling, controlled by or under common control 3 Capitalized terms used but not defined herein as specified in Rule 209(a) of the Continuing CDS with an Adviser provides investment advisory have the meanings specified in the ICE Clear Rule Provisions. Those provisions would be services to that Fund of Funds. Europe Clearing Rules (the ‘‘Rules’’). unaffected by the proposed amendment.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3839

‘‘Continuing CDS Rule Provisions’’ in clearing members in non-EU expected departure from the EU and the the Rules, as set forth in Exhibit 5. jurisdictions. resulting potential limitations on ICE The change would make the notice Clear Europe’s ability to provide (b) Statutory Basis period for termination of a CDS Clearing clearing services to persons located in Member consistent with the notice ICE Clear Europe believes that the the EU. As a result, in ICE Clear period for termination of an F&O changes described herein are consistent Europe’s view, the amendments will Clearing Member, which is also 30 with the requirements of Section 17A of facilitate the continued prompt and Business Days under the Rules. The the Act 6 and the regulations thereunder accurate clearance and settlement of current difference in treatment exists for applicable to it. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of cleared transactions and will avoid historical reasons relating the timing of the Act 7 in particular requires, among unfair discrimination among Clearing the adoption of recovery, wind-down other things, that the rules of the Members, within the meaning of Section and default management related rules clearing agency be designed to promote 17A(b)(3)(F).10 for the F&O product category as the prompt and accurate clearance and The amendments are also consistent compared to the CDS product category. settlement of securities transactions with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(1), which At this time, ICE Clear Europe does not and, to the extent applicable, derivative requires in relevant part that a covered believe that there is a substantive reason agreements, contracts and transactions, clearing agency have policies and to have a different notice period for CDS to assure the safeguarding of securities procedures reasonably designed to Clearing Members. Furthermore, the and funds in the custody or control of ‘‘provide for a well-founded, clear, current provision creates a disparity the clearing agency or for which it is transparent and enforceable legal basis among F&O Clearing Members, as the responsible and, in general, protect for each aspect of its activities in all three-month notice period also applies investors and the public interest. When relevant jurisdictions.’’ 11 As noted to F&O Clearing Members that are also the UK ceases to be an EU member state, above, the amendments will permit the CDS Clearing Members, whereas the 30 there may be limitations on ICE Clear Clearing House to terminate the Business Day notice period applies to Europe’s ability to provide clearing membership of CDS Clearing Members, F&O Clearing Members that are not CDS services to persons located in the EU. As on the same basis as F&O Clearing Clearing Members. a result, it may become necessary for Members, where the Clearing House In particular, in a scenario where ICE ICE Clear Europe to terminate the determines it is necessary or appropriate Clear Europe determined that it was membership of a Clearing Member or a to do so in order to remain in necessary or appropriate to terminate group or category of Clearing Members compliance with applicable laws in all the membership of a Clearing Member in order to remain in compliance with relevant jurisdictions. or a group or category of Clearing applicable laws and to avoid resulting Members, ICE Clear Europe believes that legal uncertainty and related potential (B) Clearing Agency’s Statement on having the shorter, 30 Business Day disruptions to the functioning of the Burden on Competition notice period apply to all Clearing Clearing House, including with respect ICE Clear Europe does not believe the Members, both CDS and F&O (including to default management, use and proposed rule changes would have any joint CDS and F&O Clearing Members), protection of margin and guaranty fund impact, or impose any burden, on will avoid the additional disruption that contributions and other matters. As a competition not necessary or would be caused by having different result, in ICE Clear Europe’s view, the appropriate in furtherance of the notice periods for different categories of amendments will facilitate the purpose of the Act. The amendments Clearing Member. continued prompt and accurate will provide for a uniform notice period ICE Clear Europe is proposing to clearance and settlement of cleared for termination of Clearing Members, adopt the amendment now in transactions, the safeguarding of across the F&O and CDS product connection with the expected departure securities and funds in the custody or categories. As such, ICE Clear Europe of the United Kingdom (‘‘UK’’) from the control of ICE Clear Europe or for which does not believe the amendments will in European Union (‘‘EU’’), which it is responsible, and the protection of themselves materially affect the cost of, pursuant to the European Union investors and the public interest, within or access to, clearing. Although the (Withdrawal) Act 2018 will occur on the meaning of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of market for cleared services may be March 29, 2019. When the UK ceases to the Act.8 adversely affected if ICE Clear Europe be an EU member state, there may be Section 17A(b)(3)(F) further requires terminates the membership of Clearing regulatory limitations on ICE Clear that the rules of the clearing agency not Members or categories of Clearing Europe’s ability to provide clearing be designed to permit unfair Members, the amendments will, in ICE services to persons located in the EU. As discrimination in the admission of Clear Europe’s view, assist with a result, it may become necessary for participants or among participants in Clearing House with mitigating and ICE Clear Europe to terminate the the use of the clearing agency.9 The managing any such adverse membership of a Clearing Member or a proposed amendments eliminate an consequences. As a result, ICE Clear group or category of Clearing Members unnecessary distinction between the Europe does not believe the proposed in advance of March 29, 2019 in order termination notice period for CDS rule changes impose any burden on for the Clearing House to remain in Clearing Members and F&O Clearing competition that is inappropriate in compliance with applicable laws in all Members. In so doing, the amendments furtherance of the purposes of the Act. relevant jurisdictions. Failure to will also better enable the Clearing (C) Clearing Agency’s Statement on terminate EU-based Clearing Members House to manage any scenario in which Comments on the Proposed Rule in that scenario, in an orderly and it may determine to terminate Clearing Change Received From Members, timely way, could, among other Members (or a category of Clearing Participants or Others consequences, result in legal Members), in response to the UK’s uncertainty as to the rights and Written comments relating to the obligations of the Clearing House and its 6 15 U.S.C. 78q–1. proposed rule changes have not been Clearing Members, and thus cause 7 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). potential disruptions to clearing 8 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 10 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). operations generally, including for 9 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 11 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(1).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3840 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

solicited or received. ICE Clear Europe be posted without change. Persons their membership (as opposed to 30 will notify the Commission of any submitting comments are cautioned that business days for F&O Clearing written comments received by ICE Clear we do not redact or edit personal Members). If, as a result of the UK Europe.12 identifying information from comment ceasing to be an EU member state on submissions. You should submit only March 29, 2019, it becomes unlawful III. Solicitation of Comments information that you wish to make under applicable law for ICE Clear Interested persons are invited to available publicly. All submissions Europe to continue providing clearing submit written data, views, and should refer to File Number SR–ICEEU– services to persons located in the EU, arguments concerning the foregoing, 2019–001 and should be submitted on under current Rule 209 ICE Clear including whether the proposed rule or before March 6, 2019. Europe would not be able to terminate change is consistent with the Act. the membership of such Clearing Comments may be submitted by any of IV. Commission’s Findings and Order Members because the deadline for the following methods: Granting Accelerated Approval of the providing three months’ notice in Proposed Rule Change advance of March 29, 2019 has already Electronic Comments Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act directs passed. By changing the notice required • Use the Commission’s internet the Commission to approve a proposed for termination of CDS Clearing comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ rule change of a self-regulatory Members from three months to thirty rules/sro.shtml) or organization if it finds that such business days, consistent with the • Send an email to rule-comments@ proposed rule change is consistent with existing notice period for F&O Clearing sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– the requirements of the Act and the Members, the Commission believes that ICEEU–2019–001 on the subject line. rules and regulations thereunder the proposed rule change would allow applicable to such organization.13 For ICE Clear Europe to terminate the Paper Comments the reasons given below, the membership of CDS Clearing Members • Send paper comments in triplicate Commission finds that the proposed if it determines that doing so is to Secretary, Securities and Exchange rule change is consistent with Section necessary to avoid providing clearing Commission, 100 F Street NE, 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act 14 and Rule services to persons located in the EU Washington, DC 20549–1090. 17Ad–22(e)(1) thereunder.15 without legal authorization. All submissions should refer to File The Commission further understands (A) Consistency with Section that, in the event that it becomes Number SR–ICEEU–2019–001. This file 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act number should be included on the unlawful for ICE Clear Europe to subject line if email is used. To help the Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act provide clearing services for persons Commission process and review your requires, among other things, that the located in the EU as a result of the UK comments more efficiently, please use rules of ICE Clear Europe be designed to withdrawing from the EU, ICE Clear only one method. The Commission will promote the prompt and accurate Europe could incur legal liability, and post all comments on the Commission’s clearance and settlement of securities its personnel could incur personal legal internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ transactions and, to the extent liability. Potential sanctions for such rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the applicable, derivative agreements, legal liability could include, among submission, all subsequent contracts, and transactions, to assure the other penalties, monetary penalties and amendments, all written statements safeguarding of securities and funds fines, potentially putting at risk funds with respect to the proposed rule which are in the custody or control of which are in the custody or control of change that are filed with the ICE Clear Europe or for which it is ICE Clear Europe or for which it is Commission, and all written responsible, and, in general, to protect responsible. Moreover, providing communications relating to the investors and the public interest.16 clearing services to persons located in proposed rule change between the As discussed above, when the UK the EU without legal authorization Commission and any person, other than withdraws from the EU on March 29, could potentially put at risk ICE Clear those that may be withheld from the 2019, ICE Clear Europe believes that, in Europe’s ability to safeguard securities public in accordance with the certain circumstances, there may be and funds held on behalf of such provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be regulatory limitations on its ability to persons by negating the legal basis for holding such securities and funds. available for website viewing and provide clearing services to persons Thus, by allowing ICE Clear Europe to printing in the Commission’s Public located in the EU. As a result, ICE Clear terminate the membership of CDS Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Europe believes it may become Clearing Members located in the EU if Washington, DC 20549, on official necessary to terminate the membership necessary to avoid providing clearing business days between the hours of of Clearing Members located in the EU services to such Clearing Members in 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such in advance of March 29, 2019 to remain contravention of applicable law after filings will also be available for in compliance with applicable EU law. March 29, 2019, the Commission inspection and copying at the principal In that event, the Commission believes believes that the proposed rule change office of ICE Clear Europe and on ICE the proposed rule change would allow would help assure the safeguarding of Clear Europe’s website at https:// ICE Clear Europe to terminate the membership of such Clearing Members. securities and funds which are in the www.theice.com/clear-europe/ custody or control of ICE Clear Europe regulation. All comments received will As discussed above, Rule 209 of the Continuing CDS Rule Provisions or for which it is responsible. Conversely, the Commission believes 12 ICE Clear Europe has previously conducted currently provides CDS Clearing public consultations with respect to proposed rule Members with three months’ notice that, to help mitigate potential changes (not ultimately adopted) that included the before ICE Clear Europe may terminate disruption to the CDS markets that change in termination notice period addressed in could result from the termination of the these amendments. See ICE Clear Europe Circular 13 membership of EU-based CDS Clearing C17107 (Sept. 22, 2017) and C13009 (Feb. 15, 2013), 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C). available at https://www.theice.com/clear-europe/ 14 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). Members, it would be beneficial for ICE circulars. No comments were received in those 15 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(1). Clear Europe to have (i) sufficient time consultations with respect to that proposed change. 16 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). prior to March 29, 2019 to determine

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3841

whether it will be able to provide that clear CDS contracts (including notice rather than three months, which clearing services to persons located in those that also clear F&O products) are would be consistent with the current the EU after the UK’s withdrawal from provided three months’ notice. The notice requirement for F&O Clearing the EU without violating applicable law, Commission understands that, as ICE Members and allow ICE Clear Europe and (ii) Rules that provide it with Clear Europe explains above, this sufficient time to determine whether it sufficient flexibility to avoid disparity is the result of ICE Clear must terminate the membership of EU- prematurely terminating the Europe adopting recovery, wind-down based Clearing Members and, if such a membership of EU-based CDS Clearing and default management rules with determination is made, provide the Members in the event that it makes such respect to the F&O product category but required notice. At the same time, if ICE a determination. Under the current Rule not yet adopting similar rules with Clear Europe determines that it requiring three months’ notice ICE Clear respect to the CDS product category. continues to be able to comply with Europe cannot terminate the Further, the Commission agrees with applicable laws and still provide membership of EU-based CDS Clearing ICE Clear Europe that there is no clearing services to EU-based Clearing Members prior to March 29, 2019. The substantive reason for this difference in Members after March 29, 2019, the Commission believes that, by aligning notice periods and that allowing it to proposed rule change would allow ICE the termination notice period for CDS continue could result in unfair Clear Europe to avoid prematurely Clearing Members with the thirty discrimination between those Clearing terminating the membership of such business days’ notice period for F&O Members that only clear F&O products Clearing Members. Thus, by permitting Clearing Members, the proposed rule and those Clearing Members that also ICE Clear Europe to remain in change would allow ICE Clear Europe clear CDS contracts. The Commission compliance with applicable law and additional time to determine whether it finds that the proposed rule change with its own Rules, and by providing will be able to provide clearing services would resolve this disparity and help ICE Clear Europe sufficient time to to persons located in the EU after the avoid potential unfair discrimination determine whether it must terminate the UK’s withdrawal from the EU without between F&O Clearing Members and membership of EU-based CDS Clearing violating applicable law and, if no such CDS Clearing Members. Members to remain in compliance with determination is made, still provide ICE For these reasons, the Commission applicable law, the Commission Clear Europe sufficient time to provide finds that the proposed rule change is believes that the proposed rule change notice of termination of membership to consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of would allow ICE Clear Europe to 18 EU-based CDS Clearing Members prior the Exchange Act. provide for a well-founded, clear, to March 29, 2019. In allowing ICE Clear (B) Consistency With Rule 17Ad– transparent, and enforceable legal basis Europe to avoid prematurely or 22(e)(1) for its clearing services as required by unnecessarily terminating the Rule 17Ad–22(e)(1). membership of EU-based CDS Clearing Rule 17Ad–22(e)(1) requires that ICE For these reasons, the Commissions Members, the Commission believes that Clear Europe establish, implement, finds that the proposed rule change is the proposed rule change would help maintain and enforce written policies consistent with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(1).20 ICE Clear Europe avoid the potential and procedures reasonably designed to disruptions that could result from provide for a well-founded, clear, (C) Accelerated Approval of the Clearing Members in the EU no longer transparent, and enforceable legal basis Proposed Rule Change being able to clear at ICE Clear Europe. for each aspect of its activities in all For example, if a Clearing Member in relevant jurisdictions.19 In its filing, ICE Clear Europe requests the EU is not able to clear CDS contracts As discussed above, ICE Clear Europe that the Commission grant accelerated at ICE Clear Europe and is unable to believes that, in certain circumstances, approval of the proposed rule change either reduce its positions or transfer it could become unlawful under pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(C)(iii) of applicable law to continue providing the Exchange Act.21 Under Section them to an alternative clearing house, 22 then the Clearing Member may need to clearing services to EU-based Clearing 19(b)(2)(C)(iii) of the Act, the cease entering into CDS contracts with Members after the UK’s withdrawal Commission may grant accelerated its clients. Such a potential disruption from the EU on March 29, 2019. In that approval of a proposed rule change if to the clearing of CDS contracts could event, ICE Clear Europe may determine the Commission finds good cause for negatively affect the prompt and that it must terminate the membership doing so. ICE Clear Europe believes that accurate clearance and settlement of of such Clearing Members prior to that accelerated approval is warranted such contracts, and, in general, the date in order to remain in compliance because, in the event that ICE Clear protection of investors and the public with applicable law. However, because Europe determines that it must interest. Rule 209 of the Continuing CDS Rule terminate the membership of EU-based Section 17A(b)(3)(F) further requires Provisions currently provides CDS Clearing Members to remain in that the rules of ICE Clear Europe not be Clearing Members with three months’ compliance with applicable law designed to permit unfair notice before ICE Clear Europe may following the UK’s withdrawal from the discrimination in the admission of terminate their membership, ICE Clear EU on March 29, 2019, the thirty participants or among participants in Europe would not be able to terminate business day notice period that would the use of the clearing agency.17 As the membership of EU-based CDS be afforded by the proposed rule change discussed above, the proposed rule Clearing Members by March 29, 2019 is necessary to provide ICE Clear Europe change would resolve a disparity in ICE because the deadline for providing with sufficient time prior to that date to Clear Europe’s rules. Under the current notice by that time has already passed. provide such Clearing Members with rules, Clearing Members that only clear The Commission believes that the the required notice of termination. F&O products are provided thirty proposed rule change would remedy The Commission finds good cause, business days’ notice before ICE Clear this issue by permitting ICE Clear pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(C)(iii) of Europe may terminate their Europe to provide thirty business days’ membership, while Clearing Members 20 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(1). 18 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 21 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(iii). 17 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 19 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(1). 22 Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3842 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

the Act,23 for approving the proposed SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE generally provides for the dissemination rule change on an accelerated basis, COMMISSION of information on all transactions in TRACE-Eligible Securities 3 prior to the 30th day after the date of [Release No. 34–85073; File No. SR–FINRA– publication of notice in the Federal 2019–003] immediately upon receipt of the Register, because the proposed rule transaction report,4 except as set forth in change is required to permit ICE Clear Self-Regulatory Organizations; the Rule. Rule 6750(c) (Transaction Europe to terminate the membership of Financial Industry Regulatory Information Not Disseminated) specifies EU-based CDS Clearing Members prior Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a the circumstances under which FINRA to the UK’s withdrawal from the EU on Proposed Rule Change Relating to will not disseminate information on a March 29, 2019 should ICE Clear Europe FINRA Rule 6750 (Dissemination of transaction in a TRACE-Eligible determine that such termination is Transaction Information) Security—i.e., non-member affiliate necessary to remain in compliance with trades; certain transfers of proprietary February 7, 2019. interests; List or Fixed Offering Price or applicable law after that date. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Takedown Transactions; 5 certain Additionally, the Commission notes that Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Securitized Products; 6 and U.S. the proposed rule change would help (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 Treasury Securities.7 ICE Clear Europe to avoid prematurely notice is hereby given that on January FINRA currently offers a number of terminating the membership of EU- 29, 2019, the Financial Industry real-time and historic TRACE data based CDS Clearing Members in the Regulatory Authority, Inc. (‘‘FINRA’’) products on disseminated transactions event that ICE Clear Europe determines filed with the Securities and Exchange for a fee.8 FINRA also publishes and that it can continue to provide clearing Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the distributes aggregated transaction services to such members after March proposed rule change as described in information and statistics on 29, 2019 while remaining in compliance Items I, II, and III below, which Items disseminated transactions at no charge. with applicable law. have been prepared by FINRA. The FINRA proposes to amend the Rule to Commission is publishing this notice to include supplementary material to V. Conclusion solicit comments on the proposed rule clarify that, notwithstanding Rule change from interested persons. On the basis of the foregoing, the 6750(c), FINRA may, in its discretion, Commission finds that the proposed I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s publish or distribute aggregated rule change is consistent with the Statement of the Terms of Substance of transaction information and statistics on requirements of the Act and in the Proposed Rule Change 3 Rule 6710 generally defines a ‘‘TRACE-Eligible particular with the requirements of FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA Security’’ as: A debt security that is United States Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act 24 and Rule 6750 to provide that FINRA may (‘‘U.S.’’) dollar-denominated and is: (1) Issued by a the Rule 17Ad–22(e)(1) 25 thereunder. publish or distribute aggregated U.S. or foreign private issuer, and, if a ‘‘restricted security’’ as defined in Securities Act Rule It is therefore ordered pursuant to transaction information and statistics on non-disseminated TRACE-Eligible 144(a)(3), sold pursuant to Securities Act Rule Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 26 that the 144A; (2) issued or guaranteed by an Agency as Securities at no charge. proposed rule change (SR–ICEEU–2019– defined in Rule 6710(k) or a Government-Sponsored The text of the proposed rule change Enterprise as defined in Rule 6710(n); or (3) a U.S. 001) be, and hereby is, approved on an is available on FINRA’s website at Treasury Security as defined in Rule 6710(p). 27 accelerated basis. http://www.finra.org, at the principal ‘‘TRACE-Eligible Security’’ does not include a debt security that is issued by a foreign sovereign or a For the Commission, by the Division of office of FINRA and at the Money Market Instrument as defined in Rule Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Commission’s Public Reference Room. 6710(o). authority.28 4 FINRA generally requires members to report II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s transactions in any security that meets the Eduardo A. Aleman, Statement of the Purpose of, and definition of ‘‘TRACE-Eligible Security’’ to the Deputy Secretary. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine [FR Doc. 2019–02114 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Change (‘‘TRACE’’), unless an exception applies. See Rule 6730 (Transaction Reporting). BILLING CODE 8011–01–P In its filing with the Commission, 5 List or Fixed Offering Price or Takedown FINRA included statements concerning Transactions are primary market sale transactions the purpose of and basis for the on the first day of trading, as set forth in Rule 6710(q) or 6710(r). Such transactions exclude all proposed rule change and discussed any Securitized Products (as defined in Rule 6710(m) comments it received on the proposed except Asset-Backed Securities (as defined in Rule rule change. The text of these statements 6710(cc)). See Rules 6710(q) and 6710(r). may be examined at the places specified 6 Specifically, FINRA does not disseminate information on transactions in collateralized in Item IV below. FINRA has prepared mortgage-backed securities (‘‘CMBSs’’) and summaries, set forth in sections A, B, collateralized debt obligations (‘‘CDOs’’). FINRA and C below, of the most significant may disseminate information on transactions in aspects of such statements. collateralized mortgage obligations (‘‘CMOs’’) depending on the transaction size and level of A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s trading activity in the CMO. See Rule 6750(b). Statement of the Purpose of, and the 7 ‘‘U.S. Treasury Security’’ means a security, other than a savings bond, issued by the U.S. Department 23 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(iii). Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule of the Treasury to fund the operations of the federal 24 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). Change government or to retire such outstanding securities. 25 The term also includes separate principal and 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(1). 1. Purpose 26 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). interest components of a U.S. Treasury Security that has been separated pursuant to the Separate 27 Rule 6750 (Dissemination of In approving the proposed rule change, the Trading of Registered Interest and Principal of Commission considered the proposal’s impact on Transaction Information) (the ‘‘Rule’’) Securities (STRIPS) program operated by the U.S. efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 Department of Treasury. See Rule 6710(p). U.S.C. 78c(f). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 8 See Rule 7730 (Trade Reporting and Compliance 28 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. Engine (TRACE)).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3843

TRACE-Eligible Securities that are not B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s only one method. The Commission will subject to dissemination, other than U.S. Statement on Burden on Competition post all comments on the Commission’s Treasury Securities, at no charge (unless FINRA does not believe that the internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ FINRA submits a rule filing imposing a proposed rule change will result in any rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the fee for such data). For example, FINRA burden on competition that is not submission, all subsequent may publish aggregated transaction necessary or appropriate in furtherance amendments, all written statements information and statistics on trades in of the purposes of the Act. Since the with respect to the proposed rule CMBSs and CDOs, including data on proposed amendment clarifies FINRA’s change that are filed with the aggregate daily volume, aggregate daily discretion in publishing or distributing Commission, and all written communications relating to the number of trades, and average price aggregated transaction information and proposed rule change between the information, and such information may statistics on TRACE-Eligible Securities, Commission and any person, other than be grouped within customer buy, FINRA believes that there are no direct or indirect impacts on member firms those that may be withheld from the customer sell, dealer-to-dealer, year of public in accordance with the and investors. issuance, investment rating, or other provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be categories. Under the proposal, FINRA C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s available for website viewing and would not identify individual market Statement on Comments on the printing in the Commission’s Public participants or transactions. In addition, Proposed Rule Change Received From Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, FINRA would not publish aggregated Members, Participants, or Others Washington, DC 20549 on official transaction information and statistics by Written comments were neither business days between the hours of individual securities. The proposed rule solicited nor received. 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such change would not apply to U.S. filing also will be available for Treasury Securities. FINRA believes that III. Date of Effectiveness of the inspection and copying at the principal the proposed rule change will benefit Proposed Rule Change and Timing for office of FINRA. All comments received investors and market participants by Commission Action will be posted without change. Persons providing additional information on Within 45 days of the date of submitting comments are cautioned that TRACE Eligible-Securities at no cost, publication of this notice in the Federal we do not redact or edit personal while maintaining the confidentiality of Register or within such longer period (i) identifying information from comment individual market participants and as the Commission may designate up to submissions. You should submit only transactions. 90 days of such date if it finds such information that you wish to make longer period to be appropriate and available publicly. All submissions If the Commission approves the publishes its reasons for so finding or should refer to File Number SR–FINRA– proposed rule change, the effective date (ii) as to which the self-regulatory 2019–003, and should be submitted on of the proposed rule change will be the organization consents, the Commission or before March 6, 2019. date of Commission approval. will: For the Commission, by the Division of 2. Statutory Basis (A) By order approve or disapprove Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated such proposed rule change, or authority.11 FINRA believes that the proposed rule (B) institute proceedings to determine Eduardo A. Aleman, change is consistent with the provisions whether the proposed rule change Deputy Secretary. of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,9 which should be disapproved. [FR Doc. 2019–02116 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] requires, among other things, that IV. Solicitation of Comments BILLING CODE 8011–01–P FINRA rules must be designed to Interested persons are invited to prevent fraudulent and manipulative submit written data, views, and acts and practices, to promote just and SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE arguments concerning the foregoing, COMMISSION equitable principles of trade, and, in including whether the proposed rule general, to protect investors and the change is consistent with the Act. [Release No. 34–85071; File No. SR–NYSE– public interest, and Section 15A(b)(9) of Comments may be submitted by any of 2019–01] 10 the Act, which requires that FINRA the following methods: rules not impose any burden on Self-Regulatory Organizations; New competition that is not necessary or Electronic Comments York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of appropriate. • Use the Commission’s internet Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ FINRA believes that the proposed rule 7.31 Relating to the Minimum Trade change will promote greater rules/sro.shtml); or • Send an email to rule-comments@ Size Modifier transparency for TRACE-Eligible sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Securities. FINRA believes the proposal February 7, 2019. FINRA–2019–003 on the subject line. 1 strikes an appropriate balance between Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the providing insightful information on Paper Comments Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3 TRACE-Eligible Securities at no charge • Send paper comments in triplicate notice is hereby given that on January while preserving the confidentiality of to Secretary, Securities and Exchange 28, 2019, New York Stock Exchange individual market participant identities Commission, 100 F Street NE, LLC (‘‘NYSE’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed and transactions. Accordingly, FINRA Washington, DC 20549–1090. with the Securities and Exchange believes the proposal is in the public All submissions should refer to File Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the interest and will help promote Number SR–FINRA–2019–003. This file transparency. number should be included on the 11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). subject line if email is used. To help the 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 9 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). Commission process and review your 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. 10 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(9). comments more efficiently, please use 3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3844 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

proposed rule change as described in organizations could choose how such changes are also based on the rules of Items I and II below, which Items have orders would trade on arrival to trade the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC been prepared by the self-regulatory either with (i) orders that in the (‘‘Nasdaq’’) and Investors Exchange LLC organization. The Commission is aggregate meet the MTS (current (‘‘IEX’’), which both offer minimum publishing this notice to solicit functionality), or (ii) individual orders trade size functionality for orders that comments on the proposed rule change that each meet the MTS (proposed are not displayed and that do not from interested persons. functionality). route.10 Nasdaq and IEX, as well as Cboe The MTS Modifier is currently I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s BYX Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BYX’’), Cboe BZX available for Limit IOC Orders 6 and Statement of the Terms of Substance of Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BZX’’), Cboe EDGA MPL Orders.7 As such, the MTS the Proposed Rule Change Exchange, Inc. (‘‘EDGA’’), and Cboe Modifier is currently available only for EDGX Exchange, Inc. (‘‘EDGX’’, together The Exchange proposes to amend orders that are not displayed and do not with BYX, BZX, and EDGA, the ‘‘Cboe Rule 7.31 relating to the Minimum route. On arrival, both Limit IOC Orders Equity Exchanges’’), also all offer the Trade Size Modifier. The proposed rule and MPL Orders with an MTS Modifier option for orders with a minimum trade change is available on the Exchange’s will trade against contra-side orders in size to trade on entry only with website at www.nyse.com, at the the Exchange Book that in the aggregate, individual orders that each meet the principal office of the Exchange, and at meet the MTS. Once resting, MPL minimum trade size condition of the the Commission’s Public Reference Orders with an MTS Modifier function incoming order.11 Room. similarly: If a contra-side order does not Rule 7.31(i)(3) currently states that on II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s meet the MTS, the incoming order will arrival, an order to buy (sell) with an Statement of the Purpose of, and not trade with and may trade through MTS Modifier will trade with sell (buy) Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule the resting order with the MTS Change Modifier. In addition, MPL Orders with orders in the Exchange Book that in the an MTS Modifier will be cancelled if aggregate meet such order’s MTS. As In its filing with the Commission, the such orders are traded in part or amended, Rule 7.31(i)(3)(B) would now self-regulatory organization included reduced in size and the remaining require a member organization to statements concerning the purpose of, quantity is less than the MTS. specify one of the following instructions and basis for, the proposed rule change The Exchange proposes to amend its with respect to how an order with an and discussed any comments it received rules to make MTS Modifier MTS Modifier would trade on arrival on the proposed rule change. The text functionality available for two (new text underlined): of those statements may be examined at additional non-displayed orders that do the places specified in Item IV below. not route, i.e., Non-Displayed Limit Types and Expanding the Minimum Trade Size The Exchange has prepared summaries, Orders and Non-Displayed Primary Modifier for Existing Order Types). The Exchange set forth in sections A, B, and C below, Pegged Orders.8 understands that NYSE American as well as its of the most significant parts of such The Exchange also proposes to add an other affiliated exchanges, NYSE Arca, Inc. (‘‘NYSE statements. Arca’’), and NYSE National, Inc. (‘‘NYSE National’’, option that an order with an MTS together with the Exchange and NYSE Arca, the A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Modifier would trade on entry only with ‘‘Affiliate SROs’’) intend to file similar proposed Statement of the Purpose of, and the individual orders that each meet the rule changes with the Commission to extend the availability of their respective MTS Modifiers to Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule MTS. This proposed change is based on the rules of its affiliate, NYSE American Non-Displayed Limit Orders. Change 10 See Nasdaq Rule 4703(e) (Nasdaq’s ‘‘Minimum LLC (‘‘NYSE American’’), which offers 1. Purpose Quantity Order’’ may not be displayed and will be the option for orders with an MTS to rejected if it includes an instruction to route) and The Exchange proposes to amend trade on entry only with individual IEX Rule 11.190(b)(11)(A) (IEX’s ‘‘Minimum Rule 7.31 relating to the Minimum orders that each meet the MTS of the Quantity Order’’ or ‘‘MQTY’’ is a non-displayed, Trade Size (‘‘MTS’’) Modifier. incoming order.9 Both of these proposed non-routable order’’). 11 See Nasdaq Rule 4703(e) (Nasdaq’s ‘‘Minimum Specifically, the Exchange proposes to Quantity’’ order attribute allows for a Nasdaq 6 make the MTS Modifier available for See Rule 7.31(b)(2)(A). In sum, a Limit Order participant to specify one of two alternatives to how Non-Displayed Limit Orders 4 and Non- designated IOC is to be traded in whole or in part a Minimum Quantity Order would be processed at on the Exchange as soon as such order is received, Displayed Primary Pegged Orders.5 The the time of entry, one of which is that ‘‘the and the quantity not so traded is cancelled. Id. minimum quantity condition must be satisfied by Exchange also proposes to provide 7 See Rule 7.31(d)(3). In sum, an MPL Order is a execution against one or more orders, each of which additional optionality for member ‘‘Limit Order that is not displayed and does not must have a size that satisfies the minimum organizations using the MTS Modifier route, with a working price at the midpoint of the quantity condition’’) and IEX Rule with Limit IOC Orders, Non-Displayed PBBO.’’ Id. 11.190(b)(11)(G)(iii)(B) (On arrival, IEX’s 8 Limit Orders, and Mid-Point Liquidity The Exchange also proposes to make related ‘‘Minimum Execution Size with All-or-None changes to paragraph (F) of Rule 7.31(i)(3) and Rule Remaining’’ qualifier for IEX’s MQTY executes (‘‘MPL’’) Orders. As proposed, member 7.37 to refer to orders with an MTS Modifier against each willing resting order in priority, generally to accommodate the additional order provided that each individual execution size meets 4 See Rule 7.31(d)(2). In sum, a Non-Displayed types that may include an MTS Modifier. its effective minimum quantity.) See also BYX Rule Limit Order is a Limit Order that is not displayed 9 See NYSE American Rule 7.31E(i)(3)(B). See 11.9(c)(5); BZX Rule 11.9(c)(5); EDGA Rule 11.6(h); and does not route. Id. also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81672 and EDGX Rule 11.6(h) (The Cboe Equity 5 See Rule 7.31(h)(4). In sum, A Non-Displayed (September 21, 2017), 82 FR 45099 (September 27, Exchanges each allow a User to alternatively specify Primary Pegged Order is a Pegged Order to buy 2017) (SR–NYSEAMER–2017–17) (Notice of Filing the order not execute against multiple aggregated (sell) with a working price that is pegged to the PBB and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule orders simultaneously and that the minimum (PBO), with no offset allowed, that is not displayed Change Amending Rule 7.31E Relating to the quantity condition be satisfied by each individual and does not route. Id. Minimum Trade Size Modifier for Additional Order order resting on the book.)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3845

Proposed paragraph (i)(3)(B)(ii) is new designated to execute on entry only The Exchange also believes that the and reflects the Exchange’s proposal to with individual orders that each meet proposal would remove impediments to, add an alternative to how an order with the MTS (proposed functionality). In and perfect the mechanism of, a free and an MTS Modifier would trade on such scenario, if the arriving order open market and a national market arrival. An order with an MTS Modifier cannot trade, it would be ranked on the system and, in general, to protect that is to trade upon entry only with Exchange Book. investors and the public interest individual orders that each meet the Because of the technology changes because it would provide member MTS would execute against resting associated with this proposed rule organizations with the option for orders change, the Exchange will announce the orders in accordance with Rules with a MTS Modifier to trade on entry 7.31(i)(3)(F)(i) and 7.36, Order Ranking implementation date of this proposed only with individual orders that each and Display, until it reaches an order rule change by Trader Update. The meets the MTS of the incoming order, that does not satisfy the MTS, at which Exchange anticipates that the point it would be posted or cancelled in implementation date will be in the first thereby providing member organizations accordance with the terms of the order. quarter of 2019. with more control in how such orders could execute. The proposed rule This proposed rule text is also based on 2. Statutory Basis NYSE American Rule 7.31E(i)(3)(B).12 change is based on similar options Proposed Exchange Rule 7.31(i)(3)(B)(i) The proposed rule change is available for users of minimum trade would describe the existing consistent with Section 6(b) of the size functionality on the Exchange’s functionality as one of the instructions Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the affiliate, NYSE American, as well as that would be available to member ‘‘Act’’),14 in general, and furthers the Nasdaq, IEX, and the Cboe Equity organizations. objectives of Section 6(b)(5),15 in Exchanges.17 The Exchange further As discussed above, the addition of particular, because it is designed to believes that this proposed option this instruction for how orders with an prevent fraudulent and manipulative would remove impediments to, and MTS Modifier would trade on entry is acts and practices, to promote just and perfect the mechanism of, a free and based on the rules of NYSE American, equitable principles of trade, to foster open market and a national market Nasdaq, IEX, and the Cboe Equity cooperation and coordination with system because it would allow member 13 persons engaged in facilitating Exchanges. organizations to provide an instruction For parity allocation purposes, the transactions in securities, to remove that an order with an MTS Modifier Exchange proposes to treat an order impediments to, and perfect the would not trade with orders that are with an MTS Modifier that is to execute mechanism of, a free and open market on entry only with individual orders and a national market system and, in smaller in size than the MTS for such that each meet the MTS the same as a general, to protect investors and the order, thereby providing member resting order with an MTS Modifier that public interest. organizations with more control over becomes an Aggressing Order. Rule The Exchange believes that the when an order with an MTS Modifier 7.31(i)(3)(F)(ii) sets forth how a resting proposal to expand the availability of may be executed. order to buy (sell) with an MTS that the Exchange’s existing MTS Modifier to The Exchange believes that if a becomes an Aggressing Order trades two additional non-displayed, non- member organization designates an with sell (buy) orders in a priority routable orders, e.g., Non-Displayed order with an MTS Modifier, that category that allocates orders on parity. Limit Orders and Non-Displayed member organization has instructed the Because in a parity allocation model, Primary Pegged Orders, would remove Exchange not to trade that order with more than one contra-side resting order impediments to, and perfect the contra-side orders that are smaller in may participate in an allocation, the mechanism of, a free and open market size than the MTS. Because in a parity Aggressing Order to buy (sell) with an and a national market system and, in allocation, resting orders are allocated MTS Modifier does not trade with any general, to protect investors and the based on their position on an allocation contra-side orders if at least one sell public interest, because the proposed wheel, it would be consistent with the (buy) order that would have been rule change is based on similar incoming order’s instruction and considered for allocation does not meet minimum trade size functionality on current functionality for resting orders the MTS. The Exchange proposes that Nasdaq and IEX, which both similarly with an MTS that become an Aggressing this allocation logic would be applicable make minimum trade size functionality both when an order is resting and available to non-displayed, non-routable Order not to trade at all rather than to becomes an Aggressing Order (current orders.16 trade with even one order in the parity functionality) or when an order is allocation that that does not meet the 14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). MTS. 12 See supra note 9. 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 13 See supra notes 9 and 11. 16 See supra note 10. 17 See supra notes 9 and 11.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES EN13FE19.001 3846 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Commission takes such action, the Number SR–NYSE–2019–01 and should Statement on Burden on Competition Commission shall institute proceedings be submitted on or before March 6, 21 The Exchange does not believe that under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act to 2019. the proposed rule change will impose determine whether the proposed rule For the Commission, by the Division of any burden on competition that is not change should be approved or Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated necessary or appropriate in furtherance disapproved. authority.22 of the purposes of the Act. The IV. Solicitation of Comments Eduardo A. Aleman, Deputy Secretary. Exchange believes that the proposed Interested persons are invited to rule change is designed to increase submit written data, views, and [FR Doc. 2019–02115 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] competition by making available on the arguments concerning the foregoing, BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Exchange functionality that is already including whether the proposed rule available on Nasdaq, IEX, and the Cboe change is consistent with the Act. Equity Exchanges. The Exchange also Comments may be submitted by any of DEPARTMENT OF STATE believes that the proposed rule change the following methods: [Public Notice 10669] would promote competition by Electronic Comments providing market participants with an 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information additional venue to which to route non- • Use the Commission’s internet Collection: Statement of Registration displayed, non-routable orders with an comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ MTS Modifier. rules/sro.shtml); or ACTION: Notice of request for public • Send an email to rule-comments@ C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s comment and submission to OMB of sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Statement on Comments on the proposed collection of information. NYSE–2019–01 on the subject line. Proposed Rule Change Received From SUMMARY: The Department of State has Members, Participants, or Others Paper Comments submitted the information collection No written comments were solicited • Send paper comments in triplicate described below to the Office of or received with respect to the proposed to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Management and Budget (OMB) for rule change. Commission, 100 F Street NE, approval. In accordance with the Washington, DC 20549–1090. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 we III. Date of Effectiveness of the All submissions should refer to File are requesting comments on this Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Number SR–NYSE–2019–01. This file collection from all interested Commission Action number should be included on the individuals and organizations. The The Exchange has filed the proposed subject line if email is used. To help the purpose of this Notice is to allow 30 rule change pursuant to Section Commission process and review your days for public comment. 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 18 and Rule comments more efficiently, please use DATES: Submit comments directly to the 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.19 Because the only one method. The Commission will Office of Management and Budget proposed rule change does not: (i) post all comments on the Commission’s (OMB) up to March 15, 2019. Significantly affect the protection of internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ ADDRESSES: Direct comments to the investors or the public interest; (ii) rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the Department of State Desk Officer in the impose any significant burden on submission, all subsequent Office of Information and Regulatory competition; and (iii) become operative amendments, all written statements Affairs at the Office of Management and prior to 30 days from the date on which with respect to the proposed rule Budget (OMB). You may submit it was filed, or such shorter time as the change that are filed with the comments by the following methods: Commission may designate, if Commission, and all written • Email: oira_submission@ consistent with the protection of communications relating to the omb.eop.gov. You must include the DS investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change between the form number, information collection proposed rule change has become Commission and any person, other than title, and the OMB control number in effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) those that may be withheld from the the subject line of your message. of the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) public in accordance with the • Fax: 202–395–5806. Attention: Desk thereunder.20 provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Officer for Department of State. At any time within 60 days of the available for website viewing and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: filing of such proposed rule change, the printing in the Commission’s Public Direct requests for additional Commission summarily may Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, information regarding the collection temporarily suspend such rule change if Washington, DC 20549 on official listed in this notice, including requests it appears to the Commission that such business days between the hours of for copies of the proposed collection action is necessary or appropriate in the 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the instrument and supporting documents, public interest, for the protection of filing also will be available for to Andrea Battista, who may be reached investors, or otherwise in furtherance of inspection and copying at the principal on 202–663–3136 or at battistaal@ the purposes of the Act. If the office of the Exchange. All comments state.gov. received will be posted without change. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). Persons submitting comments are • Title of Information Collection: 19 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). cautioned that we do not redact or edit 20 Statement of Registration. 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b– • 4(f)(6) requires the Exchange to give the personal identifying information from OMB Control Number: 1405–0002. Commission written notice of its intent to file the comment submissions. You should • Type of Request: Revision of a proposed rule change, along with a brief description submit only information that you wish Currently Approved Collection. and text of the proposed rule change, at least five to make available publicly. All • Originating Office: Directorate of business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as submissions should refer to File Defense Trade Controls (DDTC). designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement. 21 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). 22 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3847

• Form Number: DS–2032. U.S. Government entities. This Public Notice of these determinations be • Respondents: Respondents are any information is currently used in the published in the Federal Register. person/s who engages in the United review and action on registration FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie States in the business of manufacturing requests and to ensure compliance with Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, Office of or exporting or temporarily importing defense trade laws and regulations. the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of defense articles. State (telephone: 202–632–6471; email: • Methodology Estimated Number of Respondents: [email protected]). The mailing 14,800. Statement of Registration submissions • address is U.S. Department of State, L/ Estimated Number of Responses: are made via a completed DS–2032 PD, SA–5, Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 15,540. which may be accessed from DDTC’s 20522–0505. • Average Time per Response: 1 hour website and submitted electronically. to complete the registration; 5 minutes SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The to amend the form as necessary. Response to Public Comment foregoing determinations were made • Total Estimated Burden Time: DDTC received a single response pursuant to the authority vested in me 14,862 hours. removal of home address and Social by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. • Frequency: Annually, with Security Number (SSN) for members of 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order amendments as necessary. the applicant’s board of directors, senior 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign • Obligation to Respond: Required to officers, partners and owners from the Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of Obtain or Retain a Benefit. information collection. DDTC has 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. We are soliciting public comments to reevaluated the need to collect home 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of permit the Department to: address and SSN for these individuals Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, • Evaluate whether the proposed and determined the home address and and Delegation of Authority No. 236–3 information collection is necessary for SSN fields will be removed from the of August 28, 2000. the proper functions of the Department. information collection (Block 6 of the Marie Therese Porter Royce, • Evaluate the accuracy of our DS–2032). The same commenting party Assistant Secretary, Educational and Cultural estimate of the time and cost burden for recommended updating or removing Affairs, Department of State. this proposed collection, including the payment information from the [FR Doc. 2019–02236 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] validity of the methodology and information collection. DDTC notes that assumptions used. BILLING CODE 4710–05–P • the payment information was previously Enhance the quality, utility, and removed from the information clarity of the information to be collection under a previous OMB review collected. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD • and approval. Minimize the reporting burden on [Docket No. FD 36256] those who are to respond, including the Anthony M. Dearth, use of automated collection techniques Chief of Staff, Directorate of Defense Trade Central Railroad Company of or other forms of information Controls, U.S. Department of State. Indianapolis—Change in Operators technology. [FR Doc. 2019–02096 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Exemption—Kokomo Rail, LLC Please note that comments submitted BILLING CODE 4710–25–P in response to this Notice are public Central Railroad Company of record. Before including any detailed Indianapolis (CERA), a Class III rail personal information, you should be DEPARTMENT OF STATE carrier, has filed a verified notice of aware that your comments as submitted, exemption under 49 CFR 1150.41 to [Public Notice: 10674] including your personal information, assume operations over approximately will be available for public review. 12.59 miles of track owned by Kokomo Culturally Significant Object Imported Rail, LLC (Kokomo Rail), extending Abstract of Proposed Collection for Exhibition—Determinations: from milepost 147.07 in Amboy, Ind., to ‘‘Charlotte Posenenske: Work in milepost 134.48 in Marion, Ind. (the Pursuant to Part 122 of the Progress’’ Exhibition International Traffic in Arms Regulation Line). (ITAR), and section 38 of the Arms AGENCY: State Department. According to CERA, the Line previously was leased to, and operated Export Control Act, 22 U.S.C. 2778, any ACTION: Notice. person who engages in the United States by, US RAIL Corporation (US Rail) until in the business of manufacturing or SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the its lease expired on November 25, 2018. exporting or temporarily importing following determinations: I hereby See U.S. Rail Corp.—Lease & Operation defense articles or furnishing defense determine that a certain object to be Exemption—Winamac S. Ry., FD 35205 services is required to register with the included in the exhibition ‘‘Charlotte (STB served Dec. 31, 2008), corrected, Department of State, Directorate of Posenenske: Work in Progress,’’ FD 35205 (STB served Jan. 15, 2009). Defense Trade Controls (DDTC). imported from abroad for temporary CERA states that, since then, Kokomo Pursuant to Part 129 of the ITAR, any exhibition within the United States, is Rail has been providing service on an U.S. person wherever located, and any of cultural significance. The object is interim basis.1 CERA states that it will foreign person located in the United imported pursuant to a loan agreement provide its own common carrier service States or otherwise subject to the with the foreign owner or custodian. I over the Line pursuant to a lease to be jurisdiction of the United States, who also determine that the exhibition or executed shortly, and that it will begin engages in the business of brokering display of the exhibit object at the Dia operations on receipt of all regulatory activities, is required to register with Art Foundation, Beacon, New York, approvals or exemptions. CERA states DDTC. DDTC uses the information from on or about March 8, 2019, until provided by registrants to meet the on or about September 9, 2019, and at 1 CERA states that, because Kokomo Rail currently does not have railroad employees or mandates described in Part 122 and Part possible additional exhibitions or equipment, Kokomo Rail has retained CERA to 129 of the ITAR. As appropriate, such venues yet to be determined, is in the provide the interim common carrier service in the information may be shared with other national interest. I have ordered that name and on behalf of Kokomo Rail.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3848 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

that US Rail does not object to the SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD copy of the notice at the workplace of proposed change in operators and will the employees on the affected lines, and no longer operate over the Line. [Docket No. FD 36255] certify to the Board that it has done so. CERA states that there are no existing Toledo, Peoria & Western Railway On November 28, 2018, TPW certified interchange commitments with any Corp.—Change in Operators that it had posted notice of the connecting carriers and that none will Exemption—Winamac Southern transaction at the workplace of US Rail be required as part of this transaction. Railway Company employees and noted that US Rail CERA certifies that its projected annual employees are not represented by any revenues as a result of the transaction Toledo, Peoria & Western Railway labor union. Corp. (TPW), a Class III rail carrier, has will not exceed those that would qualify Under 49 CFR 1150.42(b), a change in filed a verified notice of exemption it as a Class III carrier and will not operators requires that notice also be exceed $5 million. under 49 CFR 1150.41 to lease and operate approximately 46.3 miles of rail given to shippers. TPW certifies that it Under 49 CFR 1150.42(b), a change in has provided notice of the proposed operator requires that notice be given to line owned by Winamac Southern Railway Company (WSRY), located in change in operators to the eight shippers shippers. CERA certifies that it has on the Lines. provided notice of the proposed change Indiana as follows: (1) The Bringhurst in operators to Kokomo Grain, the only Line, between milepost 50.1 at The earliest this transaction may be known shipper on the Line. Bringhurst and milepost 71.5 at Van consummated is February 27, 2019 (30 Junction in Logansport; (2) the Kokomo days after the verified notice was filed).2 The earliest this transaction may be Line, between milepost 74.5 at If the verified notice contains false or consummated is February 27, 2019 (30 Eighteenth Street Yard in Logansport 2 days after the verified notice was filed). and milepost 97.9 at Kokomo; and (3) misleading information, the exemption If the verified notice contains false or the Kokomo Belt Line, between milepost is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the misleading information, the exemption 0.0 at East Markland Avenue in Kokomo exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the and milepost 1.5 at South Union Street may be filed at any time. The filing of exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) in Kokomo (collectively, the Lines). a petition to revoke will not may be filed at any time. The filing of According to TPW, the Lines were automatically stay the effectiveness of a petition to revoke will not previously leased to, and operated by, the exemption. Petitions for stay must automatically stay the effectiveness of US Rail Corporation (US Rail) until its be filed no later than February 20, 2019 the exemption. Petitions for stay must lease expired on November 25, 2018. (at least seven days before the be filed no later than February 20, 2019 See U.S. Rail Corp.—Lease & Operation exemption becomes effective). (at least seven days before the Exemption—Winamac S. Ry., FD 35205 An original and 10 copies of all exemption becomes effective). (STB served Dec. 31, 2008), corrected, pleadings, referring to Docket No. FD An original and 10 copies of all FD 35205 (STB served Jan. 15, 2009). 36255, must be filed with the Surface pleadings, referring to Docket No. FD TPW states that, since the US Rail lease Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW, 36256, must be filed with the Surface expired, WSRY, as the residual carrier Washington, DC 20423–0001. In and owner of the Lines, has been Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW, addition, one copy of each pleading providing common-carrier freight Washington, DC 20423–0001. In must be served on TPW’s representative, service on an interim basis.1 TPW states addition, one copy of each pleading Eric M. Hocky, Clark Hill PLC, One must be served on Eric M. Hocky, Clark that it will provide its own common- carrier service over the Lines pursuant Commerce Square, 2005 Market Street, Hill PLC, One Commerce Square, 2005 Suite 1000, Philadelphia, PA 19103. Market Street, Suite 1000, Philadelphia, to a lease to be executed shortly. PA 19103. According to TPW, US Rail does not According to TPW, this action is object to the proposed change in According to CERA, this action is excluded from environmental review operators and will no longer operate excluded from environmental review under 49 CFR 1105.6(c) and from over the Lines. under 49 CFR 1105.6(c) and from historic preservation reporting historic preservation reporting TPW certifies that there are no requirements under 49 CFR requirements under 49 CFR existing interchange commitments with 1105.8(b)(1). any of the connecting carriers and that 1105.8(b)(1). Board decisions and notices are none will be required as part of the Board decisions and notices are proposed transaction. TPW states the available at www.stb.gov. available at www.stb.gov. proposed transaction will not result in Decided: February 7, 2019. Decided: February 7, 2019. the creation of a Class II or Class I rail By the Board, Allison C. Davis, Acting By the Board, Allison C. Davis, Acting carrier, but that its projected annual Director, Office of Proceedings. Director, Office of Proceedings. revenues as a result of this transaction Jeffrey Herzig, would exceed $5 million. Accordingly, Brendetta Jones, Clearance Clerk. under 49 CFR 1150.42(e), TPW is Clearance Clerk. [FR Doc. 2019–02194 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2019–02155 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] required, at least 60 days before this exemption is to become effective, to BILLING CODE 4915–01–P BILLING CODE 4915–01–P send notice of the transaction to the national offices of the labor unions with 2 CERA submitted the verified notice during the 2 TPW submitted the verified notice during the partial shutdown of the Federal government from employees on the affected lines, post a partial shutdown of the Federal government from December 22, 2018, through January 25, 2019. December 22, 2018, through January 25, 2019. Filings submitted during the partial shutdown are 1 TPW states that, because WSRY does not Filings submitted during the partial shutdown are considered filed on January 28, 2019. See Filings currently have railroad employees or equipment, considered filed on January 28, 2019. See Filings Submitted or Due to Be Submitted During the WSRY has retained TPW to perform the common Submitted or Due to Be Submitted During the Partial Fed. Gov’t Shutdown, EP 751 (STB served carrier service in the name of and on behalf of Partial Fed. Gov’t Shutdown, EP 751 (STB served Jan. 28, 2019). WSRY. Jan. 28, 2019).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3849

SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN of Up to 4.9990 mgd; Approval Date: projects were subject to deadline of COMMISSION January 29, 2019. February 18, 2019. Written comments Authority: Pub. L. 91–575, 84 Stat. 1509 et pertaining to other items on the agenda Projects Approved for Consumptive seq., 18 CFR parts 806, 807, and 808. at the business meeting may be mailed Uses of Water to the Susquehanna River Basin Dated: February 8, 2019. Commission, 4423 North Front Street, AGENCY: Susquehanna River Basin Jason E. Oyler, Commission. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110–1788, Acting Secretary to the Commission. or submitted electronically through ACTION: Notice. [FR Doc. 2019–02222 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] www.srbc.net/about/meetings-events/ SUMMARY: This notice lists the projects BILLING CODE 7040–01–P business-meeting.html. Such comments approved by rule by the Susquehanna are due to the Commission on or before River Basin Commission during the February 18, 2018. Comments will not SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN period set forth in DATES. be accepted at the business meeting COMMISSION DATES: January 1–31, 2019. noticed herein. ADDRESSES: Susquehanna River Basin Commission Meeting Authority: Pub. L. 91–575, 84 Stat. 1509 et Commission, 4423 North Front Street, seq., 18 CFR parts 806, 807, and 808. Harrisburg, PA 17110–1788. AGENCY: Susquehanna River Basin Dated: February 8, 2019. Commission. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jason E. Oyler, ACTION: Jason E. Oyler, General Counsel, Notice. Acting Secretary to the Commission. telephone: (717) 238–0423, ext. 1312; SUMMARY: The Susquehanna River Basin [FR Doc. 2019–02221 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] fax: (717) 238–2436; email: joyler@ Commission will hold its regular BILLING CODE 7040–01–P srbc.net. Regular mail inquiries may be business meeting on March 15, 2019, in sent to the above address. Annapolis, Maryland. Details SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This concerning the matters to be addressed SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN notice lists the projects, described at the business meeting are contained in COMMISSION below, receiving approval for the the Supplementary Information section Grandfathering (GF) Registration consumptive use of water pursuant to of this notice. Also the Commission Notice the Commission’s approval by rule published a document in the Federal process set forth in 18 CFR 806.22(e) Register on February 6, 2019, AGENCY: Susquehanna River Basin and § 806.22 (f) for the time period concerning its public hearing on Commission. specified above: February 7, 2019, in Harrisburg, ACTION: Notice. Approvals by Rule Issued Under 18 Pennsylvania. CFR 806.22(f) DATES: The meeting will be held on This notice lists Grandfathering 1. Chief Oil & Gas, LLC; Pad ID: Friday, March 15, 2019, at 9 a.m. Registration for projects, described HOFFMAN UNIT PAD, ABR– ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at below, pursuant to 18 CFR 806, subpart 201901002; Overton Township, the Crowne Plaza Annapolis, 173 E by the Susquehanna River Basin Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use Jennifer Road, Annapolis, Maryland Commission during the period set forth of Up to 2.5000 mgd; Approval Date: 21401. in DATES. January 7, 2019. DATES: January 1–31, 2019. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ava 2. Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation; Pad Stoops, Administrative Specialist, 717– ADDRESSES: Susquehanna River Basin ID: SquierR P1, ABR–201401004.R1; 238–0423, ext. 1302. Commission, 4423 North Front Street, Brooklyn Township, Susquehanna Harrisburg, PA 17110–1788. County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 5.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 24, business meeting will include actions or Jason E. Oyler, General Counsel, 2019. presentations on the following items: (1) telephone: (717) 238–0423, ext. 1312; 3. Pin Oak Energy Partners LLC; Pad Informational presentation of interest to fax: (717) 238–2436; email: joyler@ ID: Wolfinger Pad A (Beechwood), the lower Susquehanna River region; (2) srbc.net. Regular mail inquiries may be ABR–201901001; Shippen Township, FY2020 budget reconciliation; (2) sent to the above address. Cameron County and St. Marys City, Elk consideration of an amendment to the County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to irrevocable retiree health trust; (3) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 28, resolution adopting recommendations of notice lists GF Registration for projects, 2019. the 2018 Pennsylvania performance described below, pursuant to 18 CFR 4. Repsol Oil & Gas USA, LLC; Pad ID: audit; (4) ratification/approval of 806, subpart E for the time period COOLEY (05 266) D, ABR–201901003; contracts/grants; (5) a report on specified above: delegated settlements; (6) resolution to Pike Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Grandfathering Registration Under 18 balance renewal cycle workload; and (7) Consumptive Use of Up to 6.0000 mgd; CFR 806, Subpart E Approval Date: January 28, 2019. Regulatory Program projects. 5. SWN Production Company, LLC; Regulatory Program projects listed for 1. Range End Golf Club, GF Certificate Pad ID: NR–15–HUGHES–PAD; ABR– Commission action were those that were No. GF–201901011, Carroll Township, 201401007.R1; Great Bend Township, the subject of public hearings conducted York County, Pa.; Irrigation Pond; Issue Susquehanna County, Pa.; Consumptive by the Commission on February 7, 2019, Date: January 17, 2019. Use of Up to 4.9990 mgd; Approval and identified in the notices for such 2. Village of Newark Valley, GF Date: January 29, 2019. hearings, which was published in 84 FR Certificate No. GF–201901012, Village 6. SWN Production Company, LLC; 2296, February 6, 2019. of Newark Valley, Tioga County, NY; Pad ID: WY 04 DIMMIG, ABR– The public is invited to attend the Well 3; Issue Date: January 17, 2019. 201401009.R1; Forkston Township, Commission’s business meeting. 3. Stewartstown Borough Authority, Wyoming County, Pa.; Consumptive Use Comments on the Regulatory Program GF Certificate No.GF–201901013,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3850 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

Stewartstown Borough, York County, the proposed information collection to The FAA continues to move toward Pa.; Well 4; Issue Date: January 17, 2019. the Office of Information and Regulatory the electronic collection of data for 4. Pennsylvania American Water Affairs, Office of Management and some of its information collections and Company—Berwick District, GF Budget. Comments should be addressed electronic signatures. As such, the FAA Certificate No. GF–201901014, Berwick to the attention of the Desk Officer, is working to develop the ASKME Borough, Columbia County, Pa.; Well 1, Department of Transportation/FAA, and Segment 2 Airworthiness Application Well 2, and Well 3; Issue Date: January sent via electronic mail to oira_ (AWC) that would allow the electronic 18, 2019. [email protected], or faxed to collection of the specific information 5. West Shore Country Club, GF (202) 395–6974, or mailed to the Office requested in these forms. Testing for Certificate No. GF–201901015, East of Information and Regulatory Affairs, this effort is underway with scheduled Pennsboro Township, Cumberland Office of Management and Budget, field implementation targeted for early County, Pa.; Conodoguinet Creek and Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th 2019. the Irrigation Pond; Issue Date: January Street NW, Washington, DC 20503. Respondents: Approximately 16,773 18, 2019. Public Comments Invited: You are aircraft parts designers, manufacturers, 6. New York State Parks, Recreation asked to comment on any aspect of this and aircraft owners. and Historic Preservation—Chenango information collection, including (a) Frequency: On occasion. Valley State Park Golf Course, GF Whether the proposed collection of Estimated Average Burden per Certificate No. GF–201901016, Town of information is necessary for FAA’s Response: .55 hours. Fenton, Broome County, NY; performance; (b) the accuracy of the Estimated Total Annual Burden: consumptive use; Issue Date: January estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to 12,916.6 hours. 18, 2019. enhance the quality, utility and clarity Issued in Washington, DC. of the information collection; and (d) Authority: Pub. L. 91–575, 84 Stat. 1509 Joy Wolf, et seq., 18 CFR parts 806, 807, and 808. ways that the burden could be Aviation Safety, Directives & Forms minimized without reducing the quality Dated: February 8, 2019. Management Officer (DMO/FMO), Aircraft of the collected information. The agency Certification Service. Jason E. Oyler, will summarize and/or include your [FR Doc. 2019–02133 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Acting Secretary to the Commission. comments in the request for OMB’s BILLING CODE 4910–13–P [FR Doc. 2019–02220 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] clearance of this information collection. BILLING CODE 7040–01–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joy Wolf at (202) 267–4524, or by email at: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [email protected]. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Office of the Secretary OMB Control Number: 2120–0018. [Docket No. OST–2018–0210] Federal Aviation Administration Title: Certification Procedures for Products and Parts. Notice of Request for Comments: V2X Agency Information Collection Form Numbers: FAA Forms 8110–12, Communications Activities: Requests for Comments; 8130–1, 8130–6, 8130–9, 8130–12. Clearance of Renewed Approval of Type of Review: Renewal with change. AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Information Collection: Certification Background: The Federal Register Department of Transportation (DOT). Procedures for Products and Parts Notice with a 60-day comment period ACTION: Request for comment; extension soliciting comments on the following of comment period. AGENCY: Federal Aviation collection of information was published Administration (FAA), DOT. on September 26, 2018. (83 FR 48682). SUMMARY: On December 26, 2018, the ACTION: Notice and request for 14 CFR part 21 prescribes certification Department of Transportation published comments. standards for aircraft, aircraft engines, a Request for Comments that discussed propellers appliances and parts. The numerous issues concerning vehicle-to- SUMMARY: In accordance with the information collected is used to vehicle (V2V), vehicle-to-infrastructure Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA determine compliance and applicant (V2I), and vehicle-to-pedestrian (V2P) invites public comments about our eligibility. FAA Airworthiness communications, collectively known as intention to request the Office of inspectors, designated inspectors, ‘‘V2X.’’ The original comment period for Management and Budget (OMB) engineers, and designated engineers this request would have closed on approval for to renew a previously review the required data submittals to January 25, 2019. Prior to that time, the approved information collection. The determine that aviation products and Department announced on its website, Federal Register Notice with a 60-day articles and their manufacturing https://www.transportation.gov/v2x, comment period soliciting comments on facilities comply with the applicable that it would consider all comments the following collection of information requirements, and that the products and submitted within 30 calendar days of was published on September 26, 2018. articles have no unsafe features. January 25, 2019. Today’s notice makes Applicable federal regulations prescribe This request is to make changes to clear that the comment period has been certification standards for aircraft, FAA Form 8130–6, APPLICATION FOR extended and will now close on aircraft engines, propellers appliances U.S. AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE February 25, 2019. and parts. The information collected is to include new entries for the SPECIAL DATES: used to determine compliance and AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE Comments: The comment period has applicant eligibility. The respondents Categories, Section II. CERTIFICATION been extended and comments are now are aircraft parts designers, REQUESTED, BLOCK 4. requested by February 25, 2019. See the manufacturers, and aircraft owners. EXPERIMENTAL, UNMANNED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section on DATES: Written comments should be AIRCRAFT. The new categories to be ‘‘Public Participation,’’ below, for more submitted by March 15, 2019. added to the form will be annotated by information about written comments. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are blocks 9D—SHOW COMPLIANCE Written Comments: Comments should invited to submit written comments on WITH CFR and 9E—EXHIBITION. refer to the docket number above and be

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3851

submitted by one of the following instructions given above under You may also see the comments on the methods: ADDRESSES. Please note, if you are internet, identified by the docket • Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// submitting comments electronically as a number at the heading of this notice, at www.regulations.gov. Follow the online PDF (Adobe) file, we ask that the http://www.regulations.gov. instructions for submitting comments. documents submitted be scanned using • Issued in Washington, DC on February 7, Mail: Docket Management Facility, an Optical Character Recognition (OCR) 2019, under authority delegated at 49 U.S.C. U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 process, thus allowing the agency to 1.25a. New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building search and copy certain portions of your Finch Fulton, Ground Floor, Room W12–140, submissions. Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Washington, DC 20590–0001. Policy. • Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey How do I submit confidential business [FR Doc. 2019–02147 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Avenue SE, West Building Ground information? Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC, Any submissions containing BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday Confidential Information must be through Friday, except Federal delivered to OST in the following Holidays. manner: DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Instructions: For detailed instructions • Submitted in a sealed envelope Internal Revenue Service on submitting comments and additional marked ‘‘confidential treatment information on the rulemaking process, requested’’; • Proposed Collection; Comment see the Public Participation heading of Accompanied by an index listing Request for Form 8876 the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section the document(s) or information that the of this document. Note that all submitter would like the Departments to AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), comments received will be posted withhold. The index should include Treasury. without change to http:// information such as numbers used to ACTION: Notice and request for www.regulations.gov, including any identify the relevant document(s) or comments. personal information provided. information, document title and Privacy Act: Except as provided description, and relevant page numbers SUMMARY: The Internal Revenue Service, below, all comments received into the and/or section numbers within a as part of its continuing effort to reduce docket will be made public in their document; and paperwork and respondent burden, entirety. The comments will be • Submitted with a statement invites the general public and other searchable by the name of the explaining the submitter’s grounds for Federal agencies to take this individual submitting the comment (or objecting to disclosure of the opportunity to comment on information signing the comment, if submitted on information to the public. collections, as required by the behalf of an associations, business, labor OST also requests that submitters of Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The union, etc.). You should not include Confidential Information include a non- IRS is soliciting comments concerning information in your comment that you confidential version (either redacted or Form 8876, Excise Tax on Structured do not want to be made public. You may summarized) of those confidential Settlement Factoring Transactions. review DOT’s complete Privacy Act submissions in the public docket. In the DATES: Written comments should be Statement in the Federal Register event that the submitter cannot provide received on or before April 15, 2019 to published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR a non-confidential version of its be assured of consideration. 19477–78) or at https:// submission, OST requests that the ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments www.transportation.gov/privacy. submitter post a notice in the docket to Laurie Brimmer, Internal Revenue Docket: For access to the docket to stating that it has provided OST with Service, room 6526, 1111 Constitution read background documents or Confidential Information. Should a Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224. comments received, go to http:// submitter fail to docket either a non- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: www.regulations.gov or to the street confidential version of its submission or Requests for additional information or address listed above. Follow the online to post a notice that Confidential copies of the form and instructions instructions for accessing the dockets. Information has been provided, we will note the receipt of the submission on should be directed to Sara Covington, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (202)317–6038, at Internal Revenue Please contact us at [email protected] the docket, with the submitter’s organization or name (to the degree Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution or Sujeesh Kurup (202–366–9953) for Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224, or policy issues or Timothy Mullins (202– permitted by law) and the date of submission. through the internet at 366–9038) for legal issues. [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Will the Agency consider late SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Participation comments? Title: Excise Tax on Structured U.S. DOT will consider all comments Settlement Factoring Transactions. How do I prepare and submit received before the close of business on OMB Number: 1545–1826. comments? the comment closing date indicated Form Number: 8876. Your comments must be written and above under DATES. To the extent Abstract: Form 8876 is used to report in English. To ensure that your possible, the agency will also consider structured settlement transactions and comments are filed correctly in the comments received after that date. pay the applicable excise tax. docket, please include the docket Current Actions: There are no changes number of this document in your How can I read the comments submitted in the paperwork burden previously comments. by other people? approved by OMB. Please submit one copy (two copies if You may read the comments received Type of Review: Extension of a submitting by mail or hand delivery) of at the address given above under currently approved collection. your comments, including the Comments. The hours of the docket are Affected Public: Business or other for- attachments, to the docket following the indicated above in the same location. profit organizations and individuals.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3852 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

Estimated Number of Respondents: Federal agencies to take this comments will become a matter of 100. opportunity to comment on collections, public record. Estimated Time Per Respondent: 5 as required by the Paperwork Reduction Comments are invited on: (a) Whether hrs., 36 min. Act of 1995. The IRS is soliciting the collection of information is Estimated Total Annual Burden comments concerning Form 4970, Tax necessary for the proper performance of Hours: 560. on Accumulation Distributions of the functions of the agency, including The following paragraph applies to all Trusts. whether the information shall have the collections of information covered DATES: Written comments should be practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the by this notice: agency’s estimate of the burden of the An agency may not conduct or received on or April 15, 2019 to be assured of consideration. collection of information; (c) ways to sponsor, and a person is not required to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments respond to, a collection of information of the information to be collected; (d) to Laurie Brimmer, Internal Revenue unless the collection of information ways to minimize the burden of the Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution displays a valid OMB control number. collection of information on Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224. Books or records relating to a collection respondents, including through the use of information must be retained as long FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of automated collection techniques or as their contents may become material Requests for additional information or other forms of information technology; in the administration of any internal copies of the form and instructions and (e) estimates of capital or start-up revenue law. Generally, tax returns and should be directed to Sara Covington, costs and costs of operation, tax return information are confidential, (202) 317–6038, at Internal Revenue maintenance, and purchase of services as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution to provide information. Request for Comments: Comments Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224, or submitted in response to this notice will through the internet at Approved: February 7, 2019. be summarized and/or included in the [email protected]. Laurie Brimmer, request for OMB approval. All SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Senior Tax Analyst. comments will become a matter of Title: Tax on Accumulation [FR Doc. 2019–02118 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] public record. Distribution of Trusts. BILLING CODE 4830–01–P Comments are invited on: (a) Whether OMB Number: 1545–0192. the collection of information is Form Number: 4970. necessary for the proper performance of Abstract: Internal Revenue Code 667 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY the functions of the agency, including requires a tax to be paid by a beneficiary whether the information shall have of domestic or foreign trust on Internal Revenue Service accumulation distributions. Form 4970 practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Proposed Collection; Comment is used to compute the tax adjustment agency’s estimate of the burden of the Request for Form 8288–B collection of information; (c) ways to attributable to an accumulation enhance the quality, utility, and clarity distribution and to verify whether the AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), of the information to be collected; (d) correct tax has been paid on the Treasury. ways to minimize the burden of the accumulation distribution. ACTION: Notice and request for collection of information on Current Actions: There are no changes comments. respondents, including through the use being made to the form at this time. of automated collection techniques or Type of Review: Extension of a SUMMARY: The Internal Revenue Service, other forms of information technology; currently approved collection. as part of its continuing effort to reduce and (e) estimates of capital or start-up Affected Public: Individuals or paperwork and respondent burden, costs and costs of operation, households. invites the general public and other maintenance, and purchase of services Estimated Number of Respondents: Federal agencies to take this to provide information. 30,000. opportunity to comment on information Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour, Approved: February 7, 2019. collections, as required by the 25 minutes. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The Laurie Brimmer, Estimated Total Annual Burden IRS is soliciting comments concerning Senior Tax Analyst. Hours: 42,900. Form 8288–B, Application for [FR Doc. 2019–02120 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] The following paragraph applies to all Withholding Certificate for Dispositions BILLING CODE 4830–01–P of the collections of information covered by Foreign Persons of U.S. Real Property by this notice: Interests. An agency may not conduct or DATES: DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY sponsor, and a person is not required to Written comments should be respond to, a collection of information received on or before April 15, 2019 to Internal Revenue Service unless the collection of information be assured of consideration. displays a valid OMB control number. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments Proposed Collection; Comment Books or records relating to a collection to Laurie Brimmer, Internal Revenue Request for Form 4970 of information must be retained as long Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), as their contents may become material Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224. Treasury. in the administration of any internal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ACTION: Notice and request for revenue law. Generally, tax returns and Requests for additional information or comments. tax return information are confidential, copies of the collection tools should be as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. directed to Sara Covington, (202) 317– SUMMARY: The Internal Revenue Service, Request for Comments: Comments 6038, at Internal Revenue Service, Room as part of its continuing effort to reduce submitted in response to this notice will 6526, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, paperwork and respondent burden, be summarized and/or included in the Washington, DC 20224, or through the invites the general public and other request for OMB approval. All internet at [email protected].

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices 3853

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: costs and costs of operation, Public Comment: Members of the Title: Application for Withholding maintenance, and purchase of services public wishing to comment on the Certificate for Dispositions by Foreign to provide information. business of the Financial Research Persons of U.S. Property Interests. Approved: February 7, 2019. Advisory Committee are invited to OMB Number: 1545–1060. Laurie Brimmer, submit written statements by any of the Form Number: 8288–B. following methods: Abstract: Section 1445 of the Internal Senior Tax Analyst. • Electronic Statements. Email the Revenue Code requires transferees to [FR Doc. 2019–02119 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] Committee’s Designated Federal Officer withhold tax on the amount realized BILLING CODE 4830–01–P at [email protected]. from sales or other dispositions by foreign persons of U.S. real property • Paper Statements. Send paper interests. Code sections 1445(b) and (c) DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY statements in triplicate to the Financial allow the withholding to be reduced or Research Advisory Committee, Attn: Open Meeting of the Financial eliminated under certain circumstances. Patricia Driver, Office of Financial Research Advisory Committee Form 8288–B is used to apply for a Research, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, withholding certificate from IRS to AGENCY: Office of Financial Research, reduce or eliminate the withholding Department of the Treasury. Washington, DC 20220. required by Code section 1445. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. The OFR will post statements on the Current Actions: There is no change committee’s website, http:// in the paperwork burden previously SUMMARY: The Financial Research www.financialresearch.gov, including approved by OMB. Advisory Committee for the Treasury’s any business or personal information Type of Review: Extension of a Office of Financial Research (OFR) is provided, such as names, addresses, currently approved collection. convening for its 13th meeting on email addresses, or telephone numbers. Affected Public: Business or other for- Thursday, February 28, 2019, in the The OFR will also make such statements profit organizations and individuals or Cash Room at Main Treasury, 1500 available for public inspection and households. copying in the Department of the Estimated Number of Respondents: Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20020, beginning at 9:00 a.m. EST. Treasury’s library, Annex Room 1020, 5,079. 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Estimated Time per Respondent: 5 The meeting will be open to the public and limited seating will be available. Washington, DC 20220 on official hrs., 46 min. business days between the hours of 8:30 Estimated Total Annual Burden DATES: The meeting will be held on a.m. and 5:30 p.m. EST. You may make Hours: 29,256. Thursday, February 28, 2019 beginning an appointment to inspect statements by The following paragraph applies to all at 9:00 a.m. EST. telephoning (202) 622–0990. All of the collections of information covered ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in by this notice: statements, including attachments and the Cash Room at Main Treasury, 1500 other supporting materials, will be part An agency may not conduct or Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC sponsor, and a person is not required to of the public record and subject to 20020. The meeting will be open to the public disclosure. You should submit respond to, a collection of information public. A limited number of seats will unless the collection of information only information that you wish to make be available for those interested in available publicly. displays a valid OMB control number. attending the meeting, and those seats Tentative Agenda/Topics for Books or records relating to a collection would be on a first-come, first-served Discussion: The committee provides an of information must be retained as long basis. Because the meeting will be held opportunity for researchers, industry as their contents may become material in a secured facility, members of the leaders, and other qualified individuals in the administration of any internal public who plan to attend the meeting to offer their advice and revenue law. Generally, tax returns and MUST contact the OFR by email at recommendations to the OFR, which, tax return information are confidential, [email protected] by 5 p.m. among other things, is responsible for as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. EST on Thursday, February 14, 2019, to collecting and standardizing data on Request for Comments: Comments inform the OFR of their desire to attend financial institutions and their activities submitted in response to this notice will the meeting and receive further and for supporting the work of Financial be summarized and/or included in the instructions about building clearance. request for OMB approval. All Stability Oversight Council. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: comments will become a matter of This is the 13th meeting of the public record. Tricia Driver, Designated Federal Officer, Office of Financial Research, Financial Research Advisory Comments are invited on: (a) Whether Committee. Topics to be discussed the collection of information is Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, include presentation of reports to the necessary for the proper performance of central counterpart clearing, the functions of the agency, including DC 20220, (202) 622–1766 (this is not a _ presentation of bond market liquidity whether the information shall have toll-free number), or OFR FRAC@ ofr.treasury.gov. Persons who have and the presentation of regulatory practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the reporting charge. In addition, new agency’s estimate of the burden of the difficulty hearing or speaking may access this number via TTY by calling charges will also be presented. For more collection of information; (c) ways to information on the OFR and the enhance the quality, utility, and clarity the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877–8339. committee, please visit the OFR website of the information to be collected; (d) at http://www.financialresearch.gov. ways to minimize the burden of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of collection of information on this meeting is provided in accordance Dated: February 6, 2019. respondents, including through the use with the Federal Advisory Committee Barbara Shycoff, of automated collection techniques or Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, 10(a)(2), through Chief of External Affairs. other forms of information technology; implementing regulations at 41 CFR [FR Doc. 2019–02153 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] and (e) estimates of capital or start-up 102–3.150, et seq. BILLING CODE P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 3854 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS information; (3) ways to enhance the of Foreign Wars Memorial Building, 200 AFFAIRS quality, utility, and clarity of the Maryland Avenue NE, Washington, DC information to be collected; and (4) 20002. The meeting sessions are open to [OMB Control No. 2900–0014] ways to minimize the burden of the the public. Agency Information Collection collection of information on The purpose of the Committee is to Activity: Authorization and respondents, including through the use advise the Secretary of Veterans Affairs Certification of Entrance or Reentrance of automated collection techniques or on the administration of national Into Rehabilitation and Certification of the use of other forms of information cemeteries, soldiers’ lots and plots, the Status technology. selection of new national cemetery sites, Authority: Public Law 104–13; 44 U.S.C. the erection of appropriate memorials, AGENCY: Veterans Benefits 3501–3521. and the adequacy of Federal burial Administration, Department of Veterans benefits. The Committee will make Affairs. Title: Authorization and Certification of Entrance or Reentrance Into recommendations to the Secretary ACTION: Notice. Rehabilitation and Certification of regarding such activities. SUMMARY: Veterans Benefits Status—VA Form 28–1905. On Tuesday, May 7, 2019, the Administration, Department of Veterans OMB Control Number: 2900–0014. Committee will convene with an open Affairs (VA), is announcing an Type of Review: Extension without session from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. opportunity for public comment on the change of a currently approved eastern time. The dial-in number is 1– proposed collection of certain collection. 800–767–1750, access code is 02668#. information by the agency. Under the Abstract: VA case managers use VA The agenda will include remarks by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of Form 28–1905 to identify program VA Leadership, Ethics refresher 1995, Federal agencies are required to participants and provide specific training, briefing from the Advisory publish notice in the Federal Register guidelines on the planned program to Committee Management Office, concerning each proposed collection of facilities providing education, training, introductions of new member information, including each proposed or other rehabilitation services. Facility appointments, and status updates from extension of a currently approved officials certify that the claimant has Ex-Officio members, and a site visit to collection, and allow 60 days for public enrolled in the planned program and Alexandria National Cemetery (in comment in response to the notice. submit the form to VA. VA uses the data Virginia) to observe cemetery operations, and memorialization DATES: Written comments and collected to ensure that claimants do not products of the Veterans Legacy recommendations on the proposed receive benefits for periods for which Program. collection of information should be they did not participate in any received on or before April 15, 2019. rehabilitation, special restorative or On May 8, 2019, the meeting will specialized vocational training reconvene an open session from 8:30 ADDRESSES: Submit written comments a.m.–3:00 p.m., eastern time. The dial- on the collection of information through programs. Affected Public: Individuals and in number is 1–800–767–1750, access Federal Docket Management System households. code is 02668#. The agenda will include (FDMS) at www.Regulations.gov or to Estimated Annual Burden: 7,500 status updates on the National Cemetery Nancy J. Kessinger, Veterans Benefits hours. Scheduling Office, Pre-Need Burial Administrations (20M33), Department Estimated Average Burden per Determination, burial needs for Native of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Respondent: 5 minutes. American Veterans, status update of Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420 or Frequency of Response: Once. 2017 & 2018 recommendations, new email to [email protected]. Please Estimated Number of Respondents: charges, and next steps. refer to ‘‘OMB Control No. 2900–0014 in 90,000. any correspondence. During the Any member of the public wishing to comment period, comments may be By direction of the Secretary. attend the meeting should contact Ms. viewed online through FDMS. Danny S. Green, Christine Hamilton, Designated Federal Officer, at (202) 461–5681. The FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Interim VA Clearance Officer, Office of Committee will also accept written Daniel S. Green at (202) 421–1354. Quality, Performance and Risk, Department of Veterans Affairs. comments. Comments may be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the transmitted electronically to the PRA of 1995, Federal agencies must [FR Doc. 2019–02136 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320–01–P Committee at Christine.hamilton1@ obtain approval from the Office of va.gov or mailed to the National Management and Budget (OMB) for each Cemetery Administration (40A1), 810 collection of information they conduct DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS Vermont Avenue NW, Room 400, or sponsor. This request for comment is AFFAIRS Washington, DC 20420. In the public’s being made pursuant to Section communications with the Committee, 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA. Advisory Committee on Cemeteries the writers must identify themselves With respect to the following and Memorials, Notice of Meeting and state the organizations, associations, collection of information, VBA invites or persons they represent. comments on: (1) Whether the proposed The Department of Veterans Affairs collection of information is necessary (VA) gives notice under the Federal Dated: February 8, 2019. for the proper performance of VBA’s Advisory Committee Act that a meeting Jelessa M. Burney, functions, including whether the of the Advisory Committee on Federal Advisory Committee Management information will have practical utility; Cemeteries and Memorials will be held Officer. (2) the accuracy of VBA’s estimate of the on May 7–May 8, 2019. The meeting [FR Doc. 2019–02135 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] burden of the proposed collection of sessions will take place at the Veterans BILLING CODE P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\13FEN1.SGM 13FEN1 khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Vol. 84 Wednesday, No. 30 February 13, 2019

Part II

Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 107 Operation of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Over People; Proposed Rules

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3856 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION public to better inform its rulemaking 8. Recordkeeping Requirements process. DOT posts these comments, 9. Remote Pilot Operating Instructions Federal Aviation Administration without edit, including any personal 10. Labeling Requirements information the commenter provides, to 11. Manufacturer Accountability 14 CFR Part 107 http://www.regulations.gov, as 12. Operational Requirements and Remote Pilot Restrictions [Docket No.: FAA–2018–1087; Notice No. described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can 13. Provisions Applicable to Existing Small 18–07] UAS be reviewed at http://www.dot.gov/ RIN 2120–AK85 C. Waivers privacy. 1. Prohibition on Operations Over a Docket: Background documents or Operation of Small Unmanned Aircraft Moving Vehicle comments received may be read at Systems Over People 2. Operations Over People http://www.regulations.gov at any time. D. Remote Pilot in Command Requirements AGENCY: Federal Aviation Follow the online instructions for 1. Presentation of Remote Pilot in Administration (FAA) and Office of the accessing the docket or go to the Docket Command Certificate Secretary of Transportation (OST), Operations in Room W12–140 of the 2. Changes to Knowledge Testing Department of Transportation (DOT). West Building Ground Floor at 1200 Framework ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, V. Other Amendments DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday A. UAS Exemption-Holders SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to amend through Friday, except Federal holidays. B. Remote Pilot in Command its rules applicable to the operation of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For C. Operation of Multiple Small UAS small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). small UAS policy questions concerning VI. Privacy This rulemaking would allow this proposed rule, contact Guido VII. Section 44807 Statutory Findings operations of small unmanned aircraft A. Hazard to Users of the NAS or the Hassig, Aviation Safety Inspector, Public over people in certain conditions and General Aviation and Commercial B. Certificate Requirements operations of small UAS at night Division, Flight Standards Service, VIII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses without obtaining a waiver. It would Federal Aviation Administration, 55 M A. Regulatory Evaluation also require remote pilots in command Street SE, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 1. Assumptions and Data to present their remote pilot in 20003; telephone 1–844–FLY–MYUAS; 2. Benefits Summary command certificate as well as email: [email protected]. 3. Costs and Savings Summary identification to certain Federal, State, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 4. Benefit Cost Summary or local officials, upon request, and B. Regulatory Flexibility Act I. Executive Summary 1. Description of Reasons the Agency is proposes to amend the knowledge A. Background testing requirements in the rules that B. Overview of the Proposal Considering the Action apply to small UAS operations to 1. Night Operations 2. Statement of the Legal Basis and require training every 24 calendar 2. Operations Over People Objectives for the Proposed Rule months. This proposal would be the 3. Applicability to Existing Small UAS 3. Description of the Record-Keeping and next phase in integrating small UAS 4. Waivers Other Compliance Requirements of the using a risk-based approach. These 5. Miscellaneous Changes to Part 107 Proposed Rule 4. All Federal Rules That May Duplicate, amendments would allow expanded C. Security Considerations D. Compliance and Enforcement Tools Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed small UAS operations and reduce the E. Costs and Benefits Rule knowledge testing burden on remote II. Authority for This Rulemaking 5. Description and an Estimated Number of pilot in command certificate holders. III. Background Small Entities to Which the Proposed DATES: Send comments on or before A. Related FAA and DOT Actions Rule Will Apply April 15, 2019. 1. Registration and Marking Requirements 6. Description of Significant Regulatory for Small Unmanned Aircraft ADDRESSES: Alternatives Considered for Small Send comments identified 2. Operation and Certification of Small by docket number [FAA–2018–1087] Entities Unmanned Aircraft Systems C. International Trade Impact Assessment using any of the following methods: 3. Secure Operations of Small Unmanned • D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to Aircraft Systems E. Paperwork Reduction Act http://www.regulations.gov and follow B. Advantages of Operations Over People F. International Compatibility and the online instructions for sending your and at Night Cooperation comments electronically. C. Micro UAS Aviation Rulemaking G. Environmental Analysis • Mail: Send comments to Docket Committee IX. Executive Order Determinations IV. Discussion of the Proposed Rule Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism A. Operations at Night Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations 1. Analysis of Risk of Night Operations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Avenue SE, Room W12–140, West 2. Review of Exemptions and Waivers Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 3. Visual Observation at Night Distribution, or Use 20590–0001. 4. Anti-Collision Lighting C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting • Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 5. Waiver International Regulatory Cooperation comments to Docket Operations in 6. Preflight Familiarization D. Executive Order 13771, Reducing Room W12–140 of the West Building 7. Remote Pilot Knowledge Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey B. Operations Over People Costs 1. Definitions X. Tribal Outreach Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 XI. Additional Information a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 2. ARC Recommendation 3. Category 1 Operations A. Comments Invited Friday, except Federal holidays. B. Proprietary or Confidential Business • 4. Category 2 and 3 Operations Fax: Fax comments to Docket 5. Means of Compliance Information Operations at 202–493–2251. 6. Aircraft With Variable Modes and C. Availability of Rulemaking Documents Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. Configurations D. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the 7. Declaring Compliance Fairness Act

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:36 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3857

I. Executive Summary recognized that the possibilities for because the waiver requests lacked innovation in unmanned aircraft necessary information.8 Requests to A. Background technology are virtually boundless and operate at night are, by far, the most On June 28, 2016, the FAA published that the industry can move in directions common type of waiver request the FAA the much-anticipated rules that allowed no one can predict. Today, there are receives. To date, the FAA has not people to begin conducting routine, even more applications and received any reports of small UAS civil small UAS operations.1 That rule opportunities for small UAS that either accidents operating under a night established a new part in the Code of did not exist or were only in their waiver. Federal Regulations, 14 CFR part 107 nascent stages in 2016. The FAA’s In evaluating the waiver requests, the (part 107), containing remote pilot challenge in developing this proposal, FAA considered the most critical factors certification and operating rules for therefore, is to balance the need to to ensuring safety during night small UAS weighing less than 55 mitigate the risk small unmanned operations to be anti-collision lighting pounds. Under those rules, anyone aircraft pose to other aircraft and to and operator knowledge. Accordingly, operating a small UAS must either hold people and property on the ground the FAA proposes to allow routine, a remote pilot certificate or be under the without inhibiting innovation. small UAS operations at night under direct supervision of a remote pilot in One aspect of the FAA’s challenge is two conditions. First, the operator command.2 Throughout this document that technology moves at the speed of would complete knowledge testing or the FAA uses the term ‘‘remote pilot’’ to innovation while the administrative training, including new subject matter mean a person authorized to conduct rulemaking process, by design, does not. areas related to operating at night. The operations under part 107. Part 107 To address this challenge, this proposal second condition would be that the specifically excludes operations by any is technologically neutral, with the small UAS has an anti-collision light UAS weighing 55 pounds or greater; by understanding that technology and illuminated and visible for at least 3 air carriers, regardless of size; and by applications will evolve in the time statute miles.9 Section IV.A. discusses any UAS, regardless of size that operates between the publication of this proposal these proposed requirements. pursuant to an exemption issued under and the final rule, and beyond. As a 2. Operations Over People Section 333 of Public Law 112–95 3 (or result, this proposal incorporates 49 U.S.C. 44807).4 In addition, as a performance-based requirements to In the 2016 rule, the FAA established that an operation over people is one in result of Public Law 115–254, part 107 achieve the agency’s safety objectives which a small unmanned aircraft passes also does not apply to limited while simultaneously encouraging the over any part of any person who is not recreational UAS operations under 49 development of solutions in this 5 directly participating in the operation 10 U.S.C. 44809. dynamic environment. This proposal is the next step in the Taking into account this challenge and who is not located under a covered structure or inside a stationary vehicle. FAA’s incremental approach to and these competing considerations, the (§ 107.39). While the 2016 rule integrating UAS into the national FAA proposes to relax the prohibition prohibited routine operations over airspace system (NAS), based on on operations over people and at night people, it provided a process for a demands for increased operational under certain circumstances. While this remote pilot to obtain a waiver to flexibility and the experience FAA has step may have a significant effect on conduct operations over people. gained since part 107 was first stakeholders, it represents a small 6 (§ 107.200). published. Specifically, this proposal change to the regulatory structure for This rule proposes to allow routine would expand the activities permitted small UAS. The FAA expects all operations over people without a waiver under part 107 to allow operations over operators to continue to comply with or exemption 11 under certain people and at night under certain the existing provisions of part 107. The conditions. The applicable conditions conditions. As such, it builds on the consequences of noncompliance that vary depending on the level of risk the framework established when the FAA currently apply to part 107 remain in small UAS operations present to people first published part 107. For example, effect and would be extended to any this proposal applies to the same new provisions implemented following universe of UAS operations identified in 8 The total reflects a third category of waiver this proposal. Section I.D. discusses the requests: Those that were neither granted nor the 2016 rule. The FAA will continue to consequences of noncompliance. disapproved. These may include pending, build on this framework as it develops withdrawn, or abandoned requests. future proposals to allow increasingly B. Overview of the Proposal 9 A statute mile is 5,280 feet. This is distinguished from a nautical mile, which is approximately 6,076 more complex operations in the NAS. 1. Night Operations This proposal also builds on the feet and is often used as a unit of measure in aviation. performance-based regulatory Current FAA regulations do not permit small UAS operations at night 10 See 81 FR at 42129. To the extent part 107 philosophy established in the 2016 part refers to direct involvement, the FAA considers 107 rule. In that rule, the FAA (§ 107.29). An operation at night is such involvement to mean the remote pilot in defined as an operation conducted command relies on the person’s assistance for the safe conduct of the operation. 1 Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned between the end of evening civil 11 Aircraft Systems, 81 FR 42064 (June 28, 2016). twilight and the beginning of morning Title 14 CFR107.200 states the Administrator may issue a certificate of waiver authorizing a 2 14 CFR 107.12. civil twilight, as published in the Air deviation from any regulation specified in § 107.205 3 Signed into law February 14, 2012. Almanac, converted to local time.7 Part if the Administrator finds that a proposed small 4 Section 347(b) of Public Law 115–254 (Oct. 5, 107 permits operators to request a UAS operation can safely be conducted under the 2018) repealed Section 333. waiver from these provisions, however. terms of that certificate of waiver. Section 5 Section 349 of Public Law 115–254 repealed 107.205(g) currently lists the operations over people section 336 of Public Law 112–95. (§ 107.200). As of December 31, 2017, prohibition as a regulation that is subject to waiver. 6 Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned the agency received 4,837 requests for The Administrator also maintains authority to issue Aircraft Systems, 81 FR 42064 (June 28, 2016). In waivers to operate at night, granted exemptions from regulations promulgated under 49 the 2016 rule, the FAA noted that it would continue 1,233, and disapproved 2,256; the vast U.S.C. 44701(a) or (b) or any of sections 44702– to work on expanding the types of small UAS 44706 of title 49, if the Administrator finds the operations that would be permitted as it gained majority of these were disapproved exemption is in the public interest. Title 14 CFR more experience with the risks UAS pose to the 11.81–11.103 details the process for obtaining such NAS. 7 14 CFR 1.1. an exemption.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3858 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

on the ground. The FAA proposes three resulting injury would be below a Third, no small UAS could be categories of permissible operations certain severity threshold. The operated over people if it has an FAA- over people based on the risk of injury manufacturer would have the flexibility identified safety defect. For Category 2, they present: Category 1, Category 2, to design the unmanned aircraft in any a safety defect would be any material, and Category 3. Section IV.B. discusses way that would allow it to meet this component, or feature that presents manufacturer and operator requirements threshold. more than a low probability of causing for each category. The requirements specific to Category a casualty when operating over people. 2 would have three parts. First, the For this proposal, the FAA defines a (a) Category 1 small unmanned aircraft must be casualty to be a serious injury, which The FAA determined that small designed, upon impact with a person, corresponds to a level 3 injury on the unmanned aircraft weighing less than not to result in an injury as severe as the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). Section 0.55 pounds pose a low risk of injury injury that would result from a transfer IV.B.1. discusses the AIS and includes when operating over people. of 11 ft-lbs of kinetic energy from a rigid examples of level 3 injuries. A safety Accordingly, Category 1 is simple and object. Section IV.B.4. provides more defect could include any hazardous straightforward: Operators would be detailed information about how the condition that meets this threshold, able to fly small unmanned aircraft FAA chose this standard, including how including those not otherwise identified weighing 0.55 pounds or less over to measure the severity of the injury. through the impact kinetic energy or people. While these operations would There are myriad ways a manufacturer exposed rotating parts analyses. be subject to all of the existing could design a small unmanned aircraft Examples could include exposed wires, requirements governing small UAS to meet this threshold, taking into hot surfaces, sharp edges, faulty operations in part 107,12 the FAA does account weight, speed, altitude construction, corrupted software as well not propose any additional restrictions limitations, materials, and technological as many other hazardous conditions. as a condition of flying over people. If fail-safe measures. For example, a Section IV.B.11.a) discusses safety adopted, remote pilots would be able to manufacturer could offset weight with defects. conduct operations over people the day speed limitations, or vice versa. Or the Before a Category 2 small unmanned a final rule goes into effect. Remote manufacturer could use advanced aircraft could be used to fly over people, operators would be responsible for materials or construction methods that the manufacturer would be required to weighing or otherwise determining that are designed to reduce or prevent injury demonstrate, to the FAA’s satisfaction, their small unmanned aircraft does not upon impact. For example, using that the aircraft met these injury exceed the weight threshold. The weight frangible materials, or designing aircraft threshold requirements. The process for restriction would apply from takeoff to to crumple upon impact in a way that demonstrating compliance is discussed landing, meaning that any cargo would likely reduce the amount of later. If adopted as proposed, once a attached to the UAS could not cause the kinetic energy transferred and, as a manufacturer demonstrated compliance aggregate weight (unmanned aircraft result, the severity of the injury. In to the FAA, the small unmanned aircraft plus cargo) to exceed 0.55 pounds. addition, the manufacturer could design could be flown over people. Operators The FAA does not propose any design features or use technology that slow the would be required to adhere to any standards for Category 1. Although the unmanned aircraft’s rate of descent or other existing requirements in part 107 FAA proposes design standards for divert it away from people during a loss that apply to operating small UAS exposed rotating parts (propellers) for of control. These are just a few generally, but the FAA does not propose other categories of small unmanned conceptual examples. The possibilities any operational restrictions specific to aircraft operations (discussed later in for designing an unmanned aircraft to operations over people for Category 2. this document), it does not propose meet this standard are too vast to create More detailed information about comparable standards for Category 1. an exhaustive list. By providing Category 2 operations and how the FAA This is because the FAA believes that flexibility through performance-based developed the requirements is in exposed rotating parts on this category requirements, the FAA enables the Section IV.B.4. of small unmanned aircraft pose a low ingenuity of the industry to come up (c) Category 3 risk of injury to people. Section IV.B.3. with ideas not yet even considered. discusses Category 1 operations. Second, the FAA proposes that the The FAA proposes a final category of unmanned aircraft would not have operations—Category 3—that allows for (b) Category 2 exposed rotating parts that could a higher injury threshold than Category Category 2 would provide flexibility lacerate human skin. There are a 2, but that limits an individual’s for operators who wish to conduct number of ways a manufacturer could exposure to the risk of injury through operations over people using unmanned design small unmanned aircraft to operational limitations. Similar to aircraft that weigh more than 0.55 comply with this requirement. For Category 2, the requirements specific to pounds. Unlike Category 1, Category 2 example, a manufacturer could design a Category 3 would have three parts. The is not solely weight-based. The FAA shroud to protect skin from laceration first part would require a small proposes a set of performance-based upon impact. Or it could design blades unmanned aircraft to be designed, upon requirements that would allow a small that do not lacerate upon impact. impact with a person, not to result in an unmanned aircraft to operate over Another option could be to design the injury as severe as the injury that would people if the manufacturer can unmanned aircraft without external result from a transfer of 25 ft-lbs of demonstrate that, if the unmanned rotating parts. This proposal leaves the kinetic energy from a rigid object. The aircraft crashed into a person, the decision to choose any one of these, or higher injury threshold means that create another solution. This proposal operators could take into account 12 For example, the requirements to hold a remote sets only the desired outcome; it does different weight, speed, altitude, operator’s certificate (§ 107.12), operate a small not tell manufacturers how to achieve material, and technology factors when unmanned aircraft in a condition for safe operation that outcome. The FAA anticipates that choosing a mission-appropriate small (§ 107.15), not operate in a hazardous manner (§ 107.23), operate within visual line of sight manufacturers would present many UAS. For example, the unmanned (§ 107.31), and others would continue to apply to different designs to meet this aircraft could be faster, heavier, these operations. requirement. designed to fly higher, made from

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3859

different materials, or use different Compliance is the term the FAA uses for example, the small UAS could have technology. The second part would be the method a manufacturer would use to software that limits speed or altitude identical to Category 2: The unmanned show that its small UAS would not that makes it eligible for Category 2 aircraft would not have exposed rotating exceed the injury threshold upon operations, but have different settings parts that could lacerate human skin. impact with a person. The FAA does not for Category 3 operations. Or, a small Third, as with Category 2, no small propose to tell manufacturers which unmanned aircraft could be eligible for UAS could be operated over people if it method or test to use to establish Category 2 operations when unladen, has an FAA-identified a safety defect. compliance; rather, the proposal allows but meet Category 3 requirements when Category 3 is distinct, however, because the manufacturer to develop a test and carrying a payload. There are many the safety defect would be one that present evidence to the FAA showing different combinations or options presents more than a low probability of that the test is appropriate and manufacturers could employ to qualify causing a fatality when operating over accurately demonstrates compliance. small UAS for operations over people in people. The FAA anticipates that manufacturers different modes for different operations. In addition, unlike Category 1 and 2, or standards setting organizations More information on small UAS that are Category 3 would have an operational (SSOs) will come up with a variety of qualified for more than one category of requirement. Because of the higher different types of Means of Compliance. operation is in Section IV.B.6. injury threshold, there would be an Some could include simple measures of Section IV.B.5. provides information increased risk of injury to people on the kinetic energy, or they could include about Means of Compliance. Section ground. To manage this increased risk, sophisticated tests or computer IV.B.7. includes details concerning Category 3 operations would include modeling or any other method that Declarations of Compliance. three operational limitations not accurately shows compliance. The FAA also proposes a process to applicable to the other categories of If the FAA agreed that the Means of rescind a previously accepted operations. First, the proposal would Compliance accurately demonstrates Declaration of Compliance if the FAA prohibit operations over any open-air compliance, it would accept the Means determined the small unmanned aircraft assembly of people. Second, the of Compliance and allow the did not meet requirements of this rule. operations would have to be within or manufacturer to use it to demonstrate More information on the circumstances over a closed- or restricted-access site that small UAS meet the proposed under which the FAA proposes to and anyone within that site would have requirements. Once the FAA accepts a consider rescinding a Declaration of to be notified that a small unmanned Means of Compliance, the FAA would Compliance and the proposed process is aircraft may fly over them. Third, for notify the public. The FAA would not in Section IV.B.7.b)(6). operations not within or over a closed- disclose commercially valuable (e) Other Requirements for or restricted-access site, the small information in this document. It would Manufacturers unmanned aircraft may transit but not only provide general information stating hover over people. that FAA had accepted the Means of First, the FAA proposes to require As with Category 2, before a Category Compliance. that each manufacturer, including 3 small unmanned aircraft could be Given that small UAS manufacturers anyone who assumes the role of used to fly over people, the have varying degrees of sophistication, manufacturer after making manufacturer would be required to the FAA proposes to offer one pre- modifications, provides remote pilot demonstrate, to the FAA’s satisfaction, accepted Means of Compliance that operating instructions to anyone to that the aircraft meets the injury measures the transfer of kinetic energy whom it sells, transfers, or otherwise threshold requirements. upon impact. The FAA stresses that provides the small UAS for use. The More detailed information about manufacturers would not have to use operating instructions would address Category 3 operations and how the FAA this method; it would be merely pre- what types of payloads are permissible developed the standards is in Section accepted for manufacturers to use if and other information relevant to the IV.B.4. they so choose. eligibility of the small UAS to operate A manufacturer could use any FAA- in accordance with its Category 2 or (d) Demonstrating Compliance With accepted Means of Compliance to show Category 3 qualification. Section IV.B.9. Injury Thresholds that its small UAS meets the standards discusses operating instructions. Before a small unmanned aircraft proposed in this rule. If the small UAS Second, the rule proposes to require could be used to fly Category 2 or 3 meets the standards, the manufacturer that any manufacturer holding an FAA- operations over people, the would submit a Declaration of accepted Declaration of Compliance manufacturer would have to Compliance to the FAA that identifies allow the FAA to inspect the demonstrate, to the FAA’s satisfaction, the Means of Compliance used and manufacturer’s facilities, technical data, that the aircraft meets the proposed certifies compliance with all the and small UAS covered by that requirements. The proposed process for applicable requirements. If the FAA Declaration of Compliance to determine presenting evidence of compliance to accepted the Declaration of Compliance, compliance. The FAA also proposes that the FAA is based on processes that the the manufacturer would be able to the manufacturer allow the FAA to FAA currently uses for determining consider the small UAS available for witness any tests required for compliance with standards applicable to operations over people. The FAA would compliance. Section IV.B.11.d) manned aircraft. For that reason, make a list publicly available of the discusses inspection requirements. members of the manned aviation small UAS models for which it accepted Third, the FAA proposes to require community may find the processes and a Declaration of Compliance. that a manufacturer holding an FAA- terminology in this proposal familiar; The FAA proposes an additional accepted Declaration of Compliance however, they differ in that they are flexibility that would allow a small UAS establish a process to notify the public streamlined and tailored to the unique to be qualified for both Category 2 or 3 and the FAA of safety defects or other requirements of small UAS. operations, as long as there are issues that would render the small UAS The proposal directs manufacturers to safeguards that prevent the remote pilot ineligible for operations over people. submit evidence of compliance using a from inadvertently switching between Section IV.B.11.b) discusses reporting Means of Compliance. A Means of the two modes of operation. For requirements.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3860 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Fourth, the FAA proposes to require manufacturer’s instructions that 4. Waivers any holder of a Declaration of accompany the small UAS. In some Under existing part 107, remote pilots Compliance or Means of Compliance to cases, small UAS qualified to operate can request a waiver from specific retain certain records for a minimum of over people may have specific operational provisions. (§ 107.200). The two years after ending production of instructions for operating over people. FAA does not propose to make any related small UAS. Section IV.B.8. For example, a manufacturer of a small changes to this process; however, it does discusses recordkeeping requirements. UAS qualified to operate under more propose to expand the list of provisions (f) Rules Applicable to Individuals Who than one category would have to explain from which an operator could seek a Modify Small UAS how to operate in each category. waiver. Currently, part 107 allows Similarly, some small UAS may have a Under this proposal, the FAA would operators to seek waivers from the mode that does not qualify for any consider not only the original person or following provisions: The prohibition company that designed or built a small category of operations over people. on operations from a moving vehicle or UAS to be a manufacturer, but also Remote pilots would have to follow the aircraft; the requirement for daylight anyone who modifies it after the FAA instructions provided so that they only operations; the requirement to operate accepted its Declaration of Compliance. operated over people when their small within visual line of sight; the provision For example, if an individual bought a UAS are in the right operational mode relating to the use of visual observers; small unmanned aircraft that the FAA and are otherwise following all the prohibition on operating multiple accepted as meeting Category 2 instructions or limitations for safe small UAS simultaneously; the requirements and then modified it in a operations. Section IV.B.9. discusses requirement to yield the right of way; way that would change its performance manufacturer instructions. the prohibition on operating over so that it would no longer meet Category Third, under existing rules, remote people; provisions relating to operations 2, that person would be considered a pilots must conduct certain pre-flight within certain airspace; and provisions relating to certain operating limitations. manufacturer and would be required actions to ensure the safety of the (§ 107.205). either to requalify the small unmanned operation, including assessing the This rule proposes to include three aircraft or cease operations over people. operating environment and inspecting additional types of waivers. The first The purpose would be to prevent the small UAS. (§ 107.49). The FAA would apply to operations over moving someone from buying a qualified small proposes to require, in addition to the unmanned aircraft, modifying it in a vehicles. Under existing regulations, an existing pre-flight requirements, that the operator may seek a waiver to operate way that would make it unqualified for remote pilot ensure that the aircraft operations over people, and then over moving vehicles using the waiver meets the requirements in this proposed provision applicable to operations over continuing to operate over people. rule before flying over people. One way Potential disqualifying modifications people. (§ 107.205(g)). This proposal of doing this would be for the remote could include (but are not limited to), would establish a stand-alone waiver pilot to verify that the small UAS is changing computer code to remove provision applicable to operations over qualified for the type of operation over operational restrictions, replacing moving vehicles to make the process people he or she plans to conduct. This compliant propeller blades with clearer for operators. The second would noncompliant blades, or attaching a would include making sure that the permit an operator to seek a waiver to camera or other payload to the small UAS is marked with the conduct operations over people that unmanned aircraft that was not appropriate category and checking would not otherwise meet the specifically identified as approved in publicly available information from the requirements of this proposed rule. The the manufacturer’s instructions. Before FAA and the manufacturer to verify that third would permit an operator to seek flying over people after making the Declaration of Compliance for that a waiver of the anti-collision lighting disqualifying modifications, the person model of small UAS has been accepted requirement for night and civil twilight making the modification would have to by the FAA. Section IV.B.12. discusses operations. In all cases, the waiver test the small unmanned aircraft using pre-flight requirements. applicant would be required to an FAA-accepted Means of Compliance Fourth, although part 107 currently demonstrate that the operations could and submit a Declaration of does not allow operations over people be conducted at the same level of safety Compliance. Section IV.B.7.b)(5) in moving vehicles (§ 107.39), the FAA that the proposed requirements provide. discusses post-acceptance proposes a new section that makes clear Section IV.C. discusses waivers. modifications. that such operations are expressly 5. Miscellaneous Changes to Part 107 prohibited. There is more information (g) Other Requirements for Operators In addition to the provisions enabling on operations over moving vehicles in operations at night and over people, the This proposal includes several other Section IV.B.12.b). requirements for remote pilots who FAA proposes some other changes to operate over people. First, any small 3. Applicability to Existing Small UAS part 107. First, under current unmanned aircraft used for Category 2 regulations, the FAA requires the or 3 operations would have to be The FAA recognizes that a great remote pilot to present his or her remote marked with a label that identified it as number of small UAS are available in pilot certificate upon request from the either Category 2 or 3 (or both). While the marketplace and are in use. Administrator. (§ 107.7). This proposal manufacturers would be free to label Accordingly, the FAA proposes to allow would extend that obligation to require their small unmanned aircraft, any manufacturer or operator to test its the remote pilot to present his or her ultimately the responsibility for making small UAS and submit evidence that it remote pilot certificate and sure that an aircraft is properly labeled is eligible to operate over people using identification in response to a request before each flight falls to the remote the proposed Means of Compliance and from the Administrator; an authorized pilot. Section IV.B.10. discusses labeling Declaration of Compliance processes representative of the National requirements. described above. Section IV.B.13. Transportation Safety Board (NTSB); Second, operators would be discusses provisions applicable to any Federal, State, or local law responsible for following the existing small UAS. enforcement officer; and any authorized

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3861

representative of the Transportation activities that other Federal agencies Aviation Regulations range from a Security Administration (TSA). Section may propose—prior to finalizing the maximum per violation penalty of IV.D.1. discusses this proposed proposed changes in this rule that $1,437, for individual operators, to amendment. would permit operations of small UAS $32,666 for large companies. In Second, the FAA proposes to update over people and operations at night. addition, Congress granted the FAA the existing regulations related to remote Section III.A.3. provides more authority to levy civil penalties of up to pilot certification. Currently, part 107 information about security $20,000 for interfering with law requires remote pilots to take an initial considerations. enforcement, first responders, or knowledge test and then another test wildfire operations. The FAA may take D. Compliance and Enforcement Tools once every two years to maintain a enforcement action against anyone who current remote pilot certificate. While the FAA does not propose any conducts an unauthorized UAS (§§ 107.61, 107.65). This rule proposes new penalties or compliance and operation or operates a UAS in a way to convert the subsequent knowledge enforcement tools in this rule, all that endangers the safety of the National testing requirement to a knowledge existing means of addressing Airspace System. This authority is training requirement. In addition, the noncompliance that currently apply to designed to protect users of the airspace rule proposes to update the testing and small UAS operators under existing part as well as people and property on the training materials to harmonize initial 107 or the FAA’s general enforcement ground. testing and subsequent training, and to authority would continue to apply. The This proposed rule would not alter add new information about night FAA expects compliance with all terms this enforcement regime. The FAA operations. Section IV.D.2. provides of the final rule that follows this emphasizes, however, that certain more information about knowledge proposal. The consequences of requirements this rule proposes would testing and training. noncompliance could include any of the increase remote pilots’ responsibilities. following compliance and enforcement For example, for operations at night, C. Security Considerations tools the FAA has available to it. remote pilots in command would be While the focus of this proposal is to In accordance with its current responsible for ensuring their small ensure the safety of operations that fly compliance philosophy, FAA’s goal is to unmanned aircraft has an anti-collision over people, the FAA is cognizant that find and fix problems before they cause light visible for a minimum of 3 statute security concerns are paramount. As an accident or incident. Under this miles, and for completing an updated with manned aviation, safety and approach, enforcement is one tool the initial knowledge test or updated security walk hand in hand. For that FAA uses, but it may not be the most training. For operations over people, reason, the FAA, which is primarily a effective tool for addressing small UAS remote pilots in command would be safety organization, has partnered with compliance concerns, given the relative responsible for ensuring their Category other Federal agencies to identify and inexperience of small UAS operators. 1 aircraft does not exceed the proposed address security concerns. Through this Therefore, non-enforcement tools, to weight limitation. For Category 3 partnership, the FAA developed an which the FAA refers as compliance operations, remote pilots in command advance notice of proposed rulemaking actions, are additional means to achieve would have the responsibility of (ANPRM), Safe and Secure Operations compliance with FAA regulations adhering to specific operating of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, concerning the safety of small UAS. limitations. For both Category 2 and seeking input on various security Such tools include counseling in the Category 3 operations, remote pilots in considerations related to unmanned form of operator education or an command would need to ensure they aircraft.13 The ANPRM appears informational letter used to comply with remote pilot operating separately in this issue of the Federal communicate effectively the instructions. For all proposed categories Register. requirements of small UAS regulations. of operations, remote pilots in command In particular, the FAA is cognizant of If an operator is unwilling or unable would be required to ensure the small the importance of various stakeholders to comply with, or is deliberately UAS is eligible for the appropriate to be able to identify small UAS to flouting, regulations, the FAA would category of operations. The FAA mitigate security concerns that employ enforcement action. The FAA maintains the discretion and authority operations may present. Because of the has a number of enforcement tools to utilize appropriate surveillance and importance of this particular issue, the available including warning notices, engage in action available to the FAA FAA plans to finalize its policy letters of correction, civil penalties, and when the FAA determines to do so. concerning remote identification of certificate actions to address violations Table 1 provides a brief summary of small UAS—by way of rulemaking, and help deter future violations. Civil the major provisions of this notice of standards development, or other penalties for violations of the Federal proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS

Issue Proposed regulation

Presentation of Certificate and Identification ...... Remote pilots in command must present their remote pilot certificate as well as identification to certain Federal, State, or local officials, upon request. 14 CFR 107.7(a) Operations at Night ...... A remote pilot in command may operate a small UAS at night as long as: (1) The remote pilot has satisfactorily completed updated knowledge testing or training re- quirements; and (2) The small unmanned aircraft maintains an anti-collision light that remains lit throughout the flight.

13 See Safe and Secure Operations of Small 2018), available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/ do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201810&RIN=2120- Unmanned Aircraft Systems, RIN 2120–AL26 (Fall AL26.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3862 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS—Continued

Issue Proposed regulation

14 CFR 107.29 Prohibition on Operation over Moving Vehicles No operations over people located in moving vehicles. 14 CFR 107.105 Category 1 Remote Pilot Requirements ...... Ensure aircraft weighs 0.55 pounds or less. 14 CFR 107.110 Category 2 Remote Pilot Requirements ...... (1) Use aircraft qualified and labeled for Category 2 operations; 14 CFR 107.115(a) (2) Ensure aircraft is labeled for Category 2 operations. 14 CFR 107.150 Category 3 Remote Pilot Requirements ...... (1) Use aircraft qualified and labeled for Category 3 operations; 14 CFR 107.120(a)(1) (2) Ensure aircraft is labeled for Category 3 operations; 14 CFR 107.145 Remote pilots in command cannot conduct Category 3 operations over open air assemblies, and cannot conduct these operations unless the operation occurs: (1) Within or over a closed- or restricted-access site where all people accessing the site have notice; or (2) When the aircraft does not maintain sustained flight over people. 14 CFR 107.120(a)(2) and (3) Eligibility Requirements for Category 1 ...... No performance-based requirements (only a requirement that the small UAS weigh 0.55 pounds or less). 14 CFR 107.110 Eligibility Requirements for Category 2 ...... (1) Meet performance-based requirements by showing the small unmanned aircraft: • will not, upon impact with a person, result in an injury more severe than the injury that would result from a transfer of 11 ft-lbs of kinetic energy from a rigid object; • does not contain any exposed rotating parts that could lacerate human skin upon im- pact with a person; and • does not contain any safety defects identified by the Administrator. (2) Display a label indicating eligibility for Category 2; (3) Have remote pilot operating instructions; (4) Be subject to a product notification process; and (5) Operate only after the FAA has accepted a Declaration of Compliance for that make/ model. 14 CFR 107.115(b) Eligibility Requirements for Category 3 ...... (1) Meet performance-based requirements showing the small unmanned aircraft: • will not, upon impact with a person, result in an injury more severe than the injury that would result from a transfer of 25 ft-lbs of kinetic energy from a rigid object; • Does not contain any exposed rotating parts that could lacerate human skin upon im- pact with a person; and • Does not contain any safety defects identified by the Administrator (2) Display a label indicating eligibility for Category 3; (3) Have remote pilot operating instructions; (4) Be subject to a product notification process; and (5) Operate only after the FAA has accepted a Declaration of Compliance for that make/ model. 14 CFR 107.120(b) Previously Manufactured Small UAS ...... A small UAS manufactured prior to the effective date of a final rule implementing these regula- tions may be operated over people if: It weighs 0.55 pounds or less; or the make/model complies with the impact kinetic energy and exposed rotating parts requirements to render it eligible for operations pursuant to Category 2 or Category 3; and (1) The manufacturer has submitted a Declaration of Compliance for that make/ model; (2) The FAA has accepted the Declaration of Compliance; and (3) The aircraft has a label appropriate for the category of operations for which it is eligible to operate. 14 CFR 107.140 Requirements for a Means of Compliance ...... For small UAS manufactured to be eligible for Category 2 or Category 3 operations, the small UAS must comply with the requirements of § 107.115(b)(1) or § 107.120(b)(1), as shown by test, analysis, or inspection, or any combination of these options that the Administrator has determined is acceptable. Requests for FAA acceptance of means of compliance must con- tain: (1) Detailed description of the means of compliance; and (2) Justification, including any substantiating material, showing the means of compliance fulfills the safety level set forth in § 107.115(b)(1) or § 107.120(b)(1). 14 CFR 107.125 Required Information for Declaration of Compli- (1) Applicant’s name; ance. (2) Applicant’s physical address; (3) Applicant’s email address; (4) Small UAS make/model name; (5) Small UAS serial number or range of serial numbers; (6) Whether the Declaration of Compliance is an initial or amended declaration;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:38 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3863

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS—Continued

Issue Proposed regulation

(7) If amended, the reasons for the re-submittal of the Declaration of Compliance; (8) Certification that the small UAS satisfies the impact kinetic energy and exposed rotating parts standards of that category through an accepted means of compliance; (9) Certification that the manufacturer has a product support and notification process; (10) Certification that the Administrator will be allowed to inspect the manufacturer’s facilities, technical data, and any manufactured small UAS and witness any tests necessary to deter- mine compliance with this subpart; and (11) Other information as required by the Administrator. 14 CFR 107.135 Rescinding a Declaration of Compliance ...... The FAA may rescind a Declaration of Compliance if: (1) The make/model is no longer compliant with the impact kinetic energy requirements of the category for which it is declared; (2) The make/model is no longer compliant with the exposed rotating parts limitation; or (3) The Administrator identifies a safety defect. 14 CFR 107.135 Recurrent Knowledge Training ...... A person may only operate a small UAS if that person has completed the following in a man- ner acceptable to the Administrator within the past 24 months: (1) Passed an initial aeronautical knowledge test covering the areas of knowledge speci- fied in § 107.73; (2) Completed recurrent training covering the areas of knowledge specified in § 107.73; or (3) If a person holds a pilot certificate (other than a student pilot certificate) issued under part 61 and meets the flight review requirements specified in § 61.56, completed training covering the areas of knowledge specified in § 107.74. 14 CFR 107.65

E. Costs and Benefits not necessarily need to avoid flying over proposed rule would result in a cost The FAA has analyzed the benefits people or clear an area of non- savings for relief provided through and the costs associated with this participating people in advance of online training and testing for remote 14 proposed rule and expects the benefits flying. In addition, this proposal pilots. The regulatory analysis for this justify the costs. This proposal would would assist the execution of first proposed rule presents a range of cost enable further operations of small UAS responder and emergency management savings based on the three varying fleet that will benefit the economy and planning and operations. forecasts. Subsequently, over the five- enable innovation and growth across a The costs of this rule include both the year analysis period the net present variety of sectors, such as construction, FAA converting the administration of value cost savings of the proposed rule education, infrastructure inspection, tests to administration of training and ranges from $24 million to $121 million insurance, marketing, and event manufacturers conducting testing, at a seven percent discount rate, for net photography. Operations currently analysis, or inspection to comply with annualized costs savings between $6 allowed under Part 107 would become the requirements relevant to million and $29 million. The following less onerous and, in many instances, manufacturing a small UAS for table presents quantified costs to more efficient with this proposal operations over people. Upon analysis manufacturers and the FAA and savings because, in general, remote pilots would of these costs, the FAA concludes the to remote pilots.

TABLE 2—COSTS AND SAVINGS OF PROPOSED RULE [$MILLIONS] [5-Year period of analysis *]

7% PV 7% Annualized 3% PV 3% Annualized

Low Case: Costs (Manufacturers and FAA) ...... 14 3 15 3 Cost Savings (Remote Pilots) ...... (38) (9) (44) (10) Net Cost Savings ...... (24) (6) (29) (6) Base Case: Costs (Manufacturers and FAA) ...... 14 3 15 3 Cost Savings (Remote Pilots) ...... (49) (12) (57) (12) Net Cost Savings ...... (35) (9) (42) (9) High Case: Costs (Manufacturers and FAA) ...... 14 3 15 3 Cost Savings (Remote Pilots) ...... (135) (33) (158) (34) Net Costs Savings ...... (121) (29) (143) (31) * Columns may not sum to total due to rounding. Savings are shown in parenthesis to distinguish from costs.

14 As explained in section IV.B.12., this proposed open-air assemblies of people. Operations that occur pursuant to Category 1 and Category 2, rule would not permit Category 3 operations over however, would not be subject to this prohibition.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3864 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

The operation of small UAS over III. Background registration requirements for manned people may result in an increased risk aircraft found in 14 CFR part 47. A. Related FAA and DOT Actions to safety. Although the FAA believes the Regardless of whether they chose the probability of injuries that may occur This rulemaking is a deliberative step process in part 47 or part 48, the from operations of small UAS over in further integrating small UAS into the Registration and Marking rule required people is small, when that small NAS in a safe and secure manner. The all small UAS owners to register by probability is multiplied by an FAA is incorporating the operation of February 16, 2016. increased number of operations, some small UAS into the NAS using a phased, The Registration Rule also established additional risk of injury exists. This incremental, and risk-based approach.15 marking requirements for small proposed rule’s performance-based In 2012, Congress passed the FAA unmanned aircraft. In accordance with standards would establish three Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 that rule, all small unmanned aircraft categories of small UAS operations (Pub. L. 112–95). Section 333 of Pub. L. must display a unique identifier. Each defined primarily by level of risk of 112–95 directed the Secretary to small UAS operated under part 107 injury posed. Compliance with the determine which types of UAS do not must display a unique registration manufacturer and operational create a hazard to users of the NAS or number, visible upon inspection of the requirements that apply to these the public or pose a threat to national small unmanned aircraft. categories would mitigate the risks of security. Based on such findings, operating over people. Congress directed the Secretary to 2. Operation and Certification of Small establish requirements for the safe Unmanned Aircraft Systems II. Authority for This Rulemaking operation of such UAS.16 On June 28, On June 28, 2016, the FAA and DOT The primary authority for this 2016, the FAA published the final rule jointly issued the 2016 final rule.19 That rulemaking is based on 49 U.S.C. 44807, for Operation and Certification of small rule, codified at 14 CFR part 107, allows which directs the Secretary of Unmanned Aircraft Systems small UAS operations without requiring Transportation to determine whether (hereinafter, ‘‘2016 final rule’’), which airworthiness certification, exemption, ‘‘certain unmanned aircraft systems may was among the first steps to allow small or a certificate of waiver or 17 operate safely in the national airspace UAS operations. authorization (COA). Part 107 generally system [NAS].’’ Section 44807 directs As technology improves and the sets forth a framework of operational the Secretary to use a risk-based utility of small UAS for activities that rules and robust restrictions to permit approach in making such previously required manned aircraft routine civil operation of small UAS in determinations and provides such increases, the FAA anticipates an the NAS in a safe manner. determinations may occur increased demand for flexibility in To mitigate risk to people on the notwithstanding the completion of the small UAS operations. The proposal to ground and other users of the airspace, permit small UAS operations over comprehensive plan and rulemaking the 2016 final rule limited small UAS to people and small UAS operations at required in other sections of the statute. daylight and civil twilight operations, night is one of a number of regulatory Section 44807(b) directs the Secretary to confined areas of operation, and visual- steps the FAA is taking to allow for this consider a specific list of factors in line-of-sight operations. The 2016 final growth while still maintaining the safety determining which types of UAS may rule also addressed airspace restrictions, of the NAS. Possible small UAS operate safely: The Secretary must remote pilot certification, visual operations that may operate over people consider size, weight, speed, operational observer requirements that apply when capability, proximity to airports and or at night include motion picture a remote pilot in command opts to use populated areas, operation over people, filming, newsgathering, law a visual observer, and operational limits operation within visual line of sight, or enforcement, aerial photography, sports to maintain the safety of the NAS and operation during the day or night. The photography, and construction or ensure small UAS do not pose a threat Secretary must determine, based on surveying. This proposed rule would to national security. Finally, the 2016 these factors, whether operations of the enable further operations of small UAS final rule included a waiver provision, UAS do not create a hazard to users of that would benefit the economy by which allows individual operations to the NAS or the public. If the Secretary increasing opportunities for deviate from many of the operational determines, pursuant to section 44807, commercially beneficial small UAS limitations if the Administrator finds that certain unmanned aircraft systems operations. may operate safely in the NAS, then the the applicant could safely conduct the 1. Registration and Marking Secretary must ‘‘establish requirements proposed operation under the terms of Requirements for Small Unmanned for the safe operation of such aircraft the certificate of waiver. Aircraft systems in the national airspace In its NPRM that preceded the 2016 system.’’ 49 U.S.C. 44807(c). On December 16, 2015, the FAA final rule, the agency proposed This rulemaking is also promulgated published the Registration and Marking including special provisions applicable pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(1) and Requirements for Small Unmanned to UAS weighing less than 4.4 pounds (2), which directs the FAA to issue Aircraft (Registration Rule).18 The (micro UAS), but concluded such regulations: (1) To ensure the safety of Registration Rule established a provisions were best addressed in a 20 aircraft and the efficient use of airspace; streamlined, web-based registration separate proposal. A number of and (2) to govern the flight of aircraft for system for small unmanned aircraft in comments were submitted on micro purposes of navigating, protecting and 14 CFR part 48. The FAA provided this UAS operations in response to the identifying aircraft, and protecting process as an alternative to the Operation and Certification of Small 21 individuals and property on the ground. Unmanned Aircraft Systems NPRM, In addition, 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5) 15 For more information regarding the operation and the FAA considered many of those charges the FAA with promoting safe of small UAS, see http://www.faa.gov/uas. 16 19 flight of civil aircraft by prescribing Section 347 of Public Law 115–254 repealed 81 FR 42064. Section 333, but replaced the relevant substantive 20 81 FR 42064 at 42122–23. regulations the FAA finds necessary for provisions, codified at 49 U.S.C. 44807. 21 Operation and Certification of Small safety in air commerce and national 17 81 FR 42064. Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Notice of Proposed security. 18 80 FR 78594. Rulemaking, 80 FR 9544 (Feb. 23, 2015).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:36 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3865

comments during the development of agencies to provide recommendations visual line of sight within a safe this proposal. This proposal for small regarding technologies available for distance from people, but not over UAS operations over people is distinct remote identification and tracking of people who are not participating in the from that proposal and not all of the UAS. The ARC’s objectives included operation, and not at night. Without this originally submitted comments remain identifying and recommending proposed rule, the only entities allowed relevant. Nevertheless, the agency emerging technology as well as to operate small UAS over people or at encourages members of the public to identifying requirements for fulfilling night are: (1) Public entities holding an submit comments on this proposal security and public safety needs of law active certificate of waiver or regardless of whether they had enforcement, homeland defense, and authorization (COA), (2) entities holding submitted comments to the previous national security communities. The an exemption from the FAA that proposal. ARC’s members included experts with permits UAS operations over people or at night, (3) entities that hold a waiver 3. Secure Operations of Small knowledge and experience in electronic to the prohibitions on operations over Unmanned Aircraft Systems data capture, law enforcement, and public safety, among other areas. The people or operations at night, or (4) civil The FAA has been engaged in FAA is cognizant of the importance of small UAS that have received extensive outreach with Federal, State, conducting research to develop airworthiness certification from the local, and tribal law enforcement potential standards relevant to remote FAA and operate with a COA. The FAA entities on the subject of small UAS identification and tracking of small UAS has issued over 6,000 exemptions for operations. The FAA recognizes law and is committed to ensuring further operations of small UAS, some of which enforcement officials are often in the development of such standards and permitted operations over people or best position to detect and deter unsafe protocol in the interest of enabling operations at night. In addition, since and unauthorized drone operations. adequate security measures to mitigate part 107 took effect, the FAA has issued Therefore, the FAA works closely with security concerns that operations of 9 waivers for operations over people these agencies to provide information small UAS may present. As a result, the and over 1,200 for operations at night. regarding the evidence needed by the FAA plans to finalize its policy Under the terms of this proposed rule, FAA to take enforcement actions and concerning remote identification of individuals would be able to operate provide a communications link wherein small UAS—by way of rulemaking, small UAS over people and at night in state and local law enforcement can standards development, or other the NAS under part 107 without a pass along reports in a timely manner. activities that other Federal agencies waiver or exemption, as long as the For example, all remote pilots operating may propose—prior to finalizing the remote pilot in command conducts the in accordance with part 107 must obtain proposed changes in this rule that activity pursuant to the proposed an FAA-issued remote pilot certificate would permit operations of small UAS provisions. with small UAS rating. The process for over people and operations at night.23 With this proposed rule, the FAA obtaining this certificate includes the In addition, the FAA is collecting expects the small UAS industry to same Transportation Security comments in response to its publication continue finding new and creative ways Administration (TSA) review of the Safe and Secure Operations of for deploying small UAS, and thereby procedures that are currently used Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems grow the industry through innovation. under 49 U.S.C. 46111 to ensure that advance notice of proposed rulemaking The proposed performance-based airman certificate applicants do not framework would enable an entirely (ANPRM). In publishing the ANPRM, pose a security risk. Although this new realm of operations, such as the FAA intends to gather information proposed rule would modify the emergency response efforts, from the public to inform the FAA’s recurrent knowledge testing newsgathering, aerial surveying and efforts in assessing options for reducing requirements, an applicant for a remote photography, and certain infrastructure risks to public safety and national pilot certificate would still be subject to inspections. initial and continuing TSA vetting.22 security associated with further During an emergency situation, After initial vetting, TSA conducts integration of UAS into the NAS. The response time often corresponds to lives recurrent vetting to ensure that FAA may consider one or more saved. Remote pilots in command certificate holders do not subsequently rulemaking efforts based on the operating pursuant to the proposed become a security threat. This comments it receives in response to the provisions would not need to expend framework is similar to the framework ANPRM. time clearing an area of any people not applicable to pilots who operate B. Advantages of Operations Over directly involved in the small UAS manned aircraft. People and at Night operation before operating the small The FAA remains committed to UAS pursuant to Category 1 or Category working with security partners to ensure The high level of interest in small 2. Police or special weapons and tactics that appropriate means exist to mitigate UAS rulemaking reflects the small UAS (SWAT) units could operate small UAS security risks that small UAS operations industry’s strong desire for integration over people in situations that would may present. In this regard, the FAA of unmanned aircraft in the NAS. UAS otherwise present risk to law seeks input on whether certain integration will likely create substantial enforcement officers and support standards and restrictions should apply economic, technological, and societal personnel, such as a hostage situation or to operations of small UAS. In benefits while ensuring that the United similar type of incident. Other examples particular, the FAA is currently engaged States retains its role as a global leader include firefighters using small UAS in two distinct projects in which the in innovation and aviation safety. over a burning building and over people FAA seeks feedback. Today, remote pilots in command while colleagues actively fight the fire On May 4, 2017, the FAA convened who are compliant with part 107 can fly inside, providing real time footage of an Aviation Rulemaking Committee a small UAS within the remote pilot’s isolated pockets of fire, safe entry or (ARC) of industry stakeholders and egress points, or the location of trapped 23 The UAS Identification and Tracking Aviation observers from relevant government Rulemaking Committee charter is available at people or animals. A remote pilot could https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/UAS_ID_ provide small UAS visual or infrared 22 See 49 U.S.C. 44903(j)(2)(D)(i). and_Tracking_ARC_Charter.pdf. imagery for search and rescue missions

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3866 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

while personnel are active on the C. Micro UAS Aviation Rulemaking operations over people, the ARC ground beneath the small unmanned Committee recommended the manufacturer of that aircraft. First responders to major On February 24, 2016, the FAA model would have to certify that the transportation disasters, such as train chartered the Micro UAS Aviation aircraft’s energy upon impact, as derailments or bus accidents, could use Rulemaking Committee (ARC) measured by a test established by an small UAS eligible for operations over (hereinafter ‘‘the ARC’’) on the subject industry consensus standards body, people to locate victims or assess danger of enabling operations of small UAS would not, in the most probable failure from a distance while the small over people. As such, the ARC provided modes, exceed a specified threshold. unmanned aircraft proceeds over people recommendations on enabling such Such a test would establish the typical involved in responding to the disaster. operations. ARC members were familiar or likely impact energy of the most This would allow more targeted and with small UAS designed for aerial data probable failure mode, and not simply efficient rescue efforts on the ground. collection and photography with a focus the worst-case condition. The advantages of such operations are on safety features and miniaturization of Based on the foregoing structure for driven by timely and accurate decisions the aircraft and sensors; in addition, categorizing risk, the ARC that save lives and reduce injuries. ARC members’ experience included recommended four categories of The advantages of enabling small development of performance-based operations of small UAS over people. UAS operations over people and at regulations for operations within the Under ARC Category 1, the ARC night extend beyond the realm of NAS, consensus standards, consumer recommended a small UAS could emergency response. With safety product testing techniques, manufacture operate over people if the small standards for operations over people, of unmanned aircraft, and human injury unmanned aircraft weighed 0.55 pounds media outlets could gather aerial images research. The ARC provided a forum to or less. Based on the data the ARC and video with greater ease and safety, discuss and provide recommendations received, the ARC believed the level of giving them the flexibility to cover a to the FAA on enabling the operation of risk of injury posed by this category of wide array of news stories. Likewise, the micro UAS over people who are not small UAS was so insignificant that no potential for scientific and professional directly participating in the operation of performance standards or specific applications are numerous. A farmer the UAS or under a covered structure. operational restrictions would be could survey an entire field, even as On April 2, 2016, the ARC provided a necessary. To demonstrate a small UAS employees are working in it. Small final report with recommendations.24 qualifies for ARC Category 1 operations UAS, which are ideal for operations at The ARC recommended the FAA over people, the ARC recommended the low altitudes, could enable wildlife establish four categories for operations manufacturer of small UAS either: (1) biologists to track and collect data on over people with small UAS. Label the product retail packaging of the animal populations in towns and cities Specifically, the ARC suggested the small UAS with the actual weight of the aircraft, or a general statement that the where people may traverse below, establishment of risk thresholds based aircraft weighs 0.55 pounds or less; or providing more accurate data on myriad on the probability that direct impact (2) declare the aircraft weighed 0.55 aspects such as the efficacy of pest with a person on the ground from a pounds or less, and submit that control efforts and the progression of small unmanned aircraft would cause declaration to the FAA in a form and habitat loss. In addition, the use of small an injury that qualified as level 3 or higher on the Abbreviated Injury Scale manner acceptable to the FAA. UAS during sporting and cultural events To conduct ARC Category 2, 3, and 4 could afford enhanced viewer (AIS).25 The Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine operations, the ARC recommended a experience, more dynamic visuals, and small UAS should be able to operate greater accuracy. Using a small UAS to (AAAM) classifies AIS level 3 injuries as ‘‘serious.’’ 26 The ARC focused on this over people if it did not exceed the observe the performance of athletes, a impact energy threshold specified for judge would be able to measure ‘‘serious’’ category, and assumed any small UAS flown over people may each category, as determined by the competitors against one another with manufacturer using test methods precise data the small UAS obtains. experience a failure and therefore fall, impacting a person. The ARC did not contained in industry consensus Permitting small UAS operations at standards. Additionally, the ARC night would obviate the need for people attempt to quantify the current risk of experiencing a failure or an acceptable recommended the remote pilot for such to engage in activities that present a risk operations should comply with to their safety, such as nighttime failure rate, and did not specify the acceptable probability of a human operational restrictions specified for inspections of infrastructure, wildlife, each category. Because the level of risk and other activities that may be impact occurrence. For each particular model of small UAS to qualify for increases between ARC Categories 2, 3, preferable during nighttime hours. The and 4, the ARC recommended scaling absence of a person actually performing 24 A copy of the ARC’s final report has been up the performance-based standards and such inspections or higher-risk activities placed in the docket for this rulemaking. operational restrictions in each category would therefore result in a decrease in 25 AAAM developed the AIS as: ‘‘an anatomically to mitigate the increased risks. the associated costs of the activities. As based, consensus derived, global severity scoring Under ARC Category 2, the ARC a result, the benefits of utilizing small system that classifies each injury by body region recommended that a small unmanned according to its relative importance on a 6-point UAS to engage in various activities are ordinal scale (1=minor and 6=maximal).’’ See aircraft be permitted to operate over diverse. https://www.aaam.org/abbreviated-injury-scale- people if it weighed more than 0.55 The FAA continues to prioritize safety ais/. Explanations of the AIS were presented to the pounds, but still presented a 1 percent as it develops subsequent rulemakings ARC by several speakers. See section IV.B.1. for a or less chance of ‘‘serious injury’’ (AIS description that contains more information for the entire aviation community. concerning the FAA’s use of the AIS in this level 3 or greater) upon impact with a Providing a set of flexible, performance- proposed rule. person. The manufacturer would be based regulations enables the next phase 26 In a presentation on the historical basis for required to certify that the small UAS of UAS operations, thereby ushering in FAA occupant safety, an FAA presenter provided did not, in the most probable failure the following examples of level 3 injuries to the additional economic and societal head: Small penetrating skull, sinus thrombosis, modes, exceed the typical or likely advantages while maintaining the safety ischemic brain damage, basilar fracture/loss of impact energy threshold, in accordance of the NAS. consciousness for 1 to 6 hours. with test methods contained in industry

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3867

consensus standards. The ARC also restrictions for ARC Category 2 would standards to mitigate the risk of injury recommended the operator 27 of the also have applied to ARC Category 4 to people should the aircraft fail. This small UAS comply with the operations. rule would also set operational manufacturer’s operator manual for the The ARC recommended the means by standards for all remote pilots in small UAS, developed in accordance which manufacturers would comply command who conduct operations over with industry consensus standards. with the provisions would be to: (1) people and who conduct operations at Lastly, the ARC recommended the Declare the small UAS met industry night. operator maintain minimum set-off consensus standards applicable to the A. Operations at Night distances of 20 feet vertically or 10 feet category; (2) submit the declaration to laterally away from people, and the FAA in a form and manner This rule proposes permitting generally not operate so close to people acceptable to the FAA; (3) label the operations of small UAS at night, as to create an undue hazard for them. product or retail packaging in subject to specific requirements. Under ARC Category 3, the ARC accordance with industry consensus The requirements that accompany recommended a small UAS could standards; and (4) provide an operating each of the operations this proposed operate over people if it presented a 30 manual to the operator that includes rule would permit would adequately percent or less chance of causing an AIS operator instructions for flight over mitigate the risk of collision with other level 3 or greater injury upon impact people. The operator would be aircraft, as well as the risk of injury to with a person. The manufacturer of the responsible for knowing the category of people. Such an analysis is consistent small UAS would be required to certify operations for which his or her small with the FAA’s grant of exemptions to the FAA that the small UAS did not, UAS is qualified, and any operational under section 333 that preceded the in the most probable failure modes, limitations he or she would be required promulgation of part 107, as well as exceed the typical or likely impact to follow. waivers the FAA has issued for energy threshold. The ARC also In addition, the ARC recommended operations that occur at night and recommended the operator comply with the FAA establish a distinct knowledge operations over people under § 107.200. the manufacturer’s operator manual for testing framework for ARC Category 1 This proposed rule would amend the small UAS, developed in accordance operations. Based on the proposed § 107.29 to permit operations at night with industry consensus standards and requirements for part 107, a majority of only: (1) When the small unmanned that flight over crowds or dense the ARC recommended the knowledge aircraft has an anti-collision light that is concentrations of people never be test be available online and the TSA visible for 3 statute miles, and (2) when permitted under this category. In vetting process (background checks) be the remote pilot in command has addition, the ARC recommended small reconsidered or eliminated for ARC completed an updated knowledge test or UAS eligible for operations over people Category 1 operations. The ARC based recurrent training as applicable, to pursuant to ARC Category 3 only be this recommendation on input that the ensure familiarity with the risks and permitted to operate over people if: (1) process is unduly burdensome and appropriate mitigations for nighttime The operation is conducted over a therefore detrimental to safety because operations. Under 14 CFR 1.1, the closed- or restricted-access work site the process discourages operators of definition of ‘‘night’’ is applicable for with the permission of the site’s owner small UAS from complying with the purposes of proposed § 107.29. Section or operator; or (2) overflight of people is procedural requirements.28 1.1 defines ‘‘night’’ as follows: ‘‘the time limited to transient or incidental The FAA considered the ARC’s between the end of evening civil operation, rather than sustained flight recommendations in the context of the twilight and the beginning of morning over people. The performance standards agency’s statutory authorities and civil twilight, as published in the Air and operational restrictions applicable responsibilities, as well as the practical Almanac, converted to local time.’’ to ARC Category 2 operations would realities of administering the regulatory 1. Analysis of Risk of Night Operations also apply to ARC Category 3. scheme, while carefully deliberating The ARC recommended an ARC over the ARC’s recommendations and The FAA recognizes the 2016 final Category 4 to include operations in other public policy factors. rule limited operations of small UAS to which a small UAS may operate over daytime and civil twilight, based on the people, including flights over crowds or IV. Discussion of the Proposed Rule assessment that operations at night pose dense concentrations of people This proposed rule would amend part a higher safety risk. The FAA based this prohibited in ARC Category 3, if: (1) The 107 to enable routine small UAS presumption on the general difficulty manufacturer of the small UAS certifies operations over people and at night. involved in maintaining visual line of the aircraft satisfies the same impact This rule would require manufacturers sight and in ensuring discernment of the energy threshold as small UAS eligible ensure that small UAS they build for location of other aircraft during night to conduct ARC Category 3 operations; flying over people adhere to certain hours. The portion of the 2016 final rule (2) the small UAS complies with that explained the agency’s rationale for industry consensus standards; and (3) 28 Representatives of the Air Line Pilots the prohibition stated the distance and the operation is conducted in Association (ALPA); National Agricultural Aviation movement of small unmanned aircraft compliance with a documented risk Association (NAAA); Helicopter Association relative to the distance and movement International (HAI); and Professional Aerial mitigation plan, which would be Photographers Association, International (PAPA) of other lighted manned aircraft are developed and adopted in accordance did not agree with the majority of the ARC on difficult to judge, due to the relative size with industry consensus standards for changing the testing requirements for remote pilots of the aircraft.29 Moreover, the agency conducting risk mitigation. The ARC’s conducting Category 1 operations. These determined visual autokinesis, which is organizations all maintained that an individual recommended performance standards intending to exercise the privileges permitted under the apparent movement of a lighted for ARC Category 3 and operational the proposed part 107, which include commercial object, may occur when the person small UAS operations, ‘‘should fully comply with maintaining visual line of sight stares at 27 The FAA notes that the ARC used the term the necessary training and certification as currently a single light source for several seconds ‘‘operator,’’ as the FAA proposed in the Operation described in part 107, no matter the size or and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft complexity of the aircraft.’’ ARC Report at 13. In on a dark night; as a result, darkness Systems NPRM. When the FAA finalized that rule, addition, these organizations argued that data was it changed the term ‘‘operator’’ to ‘‘remote pilot.’’ not provided to the ARC. 29 81 FR 42064, 42103.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3868 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

increases the difficulty of perceiving operations that proceed in accordance the proposed requirements within reference points that could be used to with those waivers are safe. subpart D, as well as other requirements help understand the position and The FAA also has granted exemptions that may apply. movement of the lighted manned pursuant to section 333 for UAS 3. Visual Observation at Night aircraft, the small unmanned aircraft, or operations at night under 14 CFR part other lighted object. Based on the 91, which contains a different Visual observation is the means by difficulty of perceiving reference points framework than part 107.35 The FAA which a remote pilot in command and other associated risks the FAA considered in its analysis the fact that ensures the small unmanned aircraft identified, the FAA opined in the it did not exempt the requirements of does not collide with other aircraft. preamble of the 2016 final rule that §§ 91.205(c) and 91.209, which require Several factors influence a person’s operations of small UAS at night could lighting on aircraft. In addition, most of ability to detect aircraft visually. For increase the risk of collision with the airman qualification requirements example, size, orientation, visual people, obstacles on the ground, and under 14 CFR part 61 applied to such clutter, and the location of the image on other aircraft.30 The FAA, however, exemptions. The FAA considered these a person’s retina all affect the acknowledged the many comments in two factors—anti-collision lighting and discernment of an aircraft with unaided favor of permitting operations at night airman knowledge—as critical to human vision. Creating contrast, which and stated it planned to consider ensuring safety in the NAS when is the difference in luminance between commenters’ recommendations as part permitting the UAS operations at night an object in its background, enhances of future rulemaking efforts.31 under section 333. In addition, the the safety of aviation operations that occur at night because contrast While the FAA carefully analyzed the current version of § 107.29(b) requires anti-collision lighting for operations facilitates one’s ability to observe risks that operations of small UAS at aircraft and therefore avoid a collision. night present, the FAA remains mindful during periods of civil twilight. The FAA has determined this requirement is Contrast consists of paint schemes, of the fact that the remaining rules of aircraft lighting systems, atmospheric part 107 address risks in a a suitable risk mitigation measure for operations at night. conditions, and variations in comprehensive manner. In this regard, 36 The FAA has also assessed the background. aside from amending the provisions of Feedback from an FAA Pathfinder §§ 107.29 and 107.39, none of the potential effects of operations of small UAS at night in conjunction with the participant supports the FAA’s amendments the FAA proposes in this conclusion that such contrast affects the NPRM would change the remaining other type of operation this proposed rule would permit, which is operations remote pilot’s ability to avoid a collision operational restrictions and based on visual observation. The requirements of part 107.32 The FAA over people. First, risks of operations at night are distinct from those that Pathfinder participant operated a small determined these existing operational UAS at night and staged a manned operations over people present. As provisions, in addition to the proposed aircraft in the same area as the explained in this proposed rule, the requirements of an anti-collision light unmanned aircraft. In that case, both the FAA classifies the risk mitigations for and additional knowledge testing or remote pilot in command and the operations over people via proposed recurrent training, mitigate the risk manned aircraft pilot spotted one categories that are based on the level of posed by small UAS operations at night. another more easily during night risk of injury posed. Manufacturers of operations than during the day, due to 2. Review of Exemptions and Waivers small UAS who seek to produce small the increased conspicuity that anti- UAS eligible to operate over people collision lighting provided.37 The current prohibition on nighttime would need to consider the mass of an operations of small UAS may be waived, anti-collision light if they include such 4. Anti-Collision Lighting and the FAA has analyzed the effects of a light on the small unmanned aircraft. Small unmanned aircraft, in most risk mitigation measures the FAA The lighting conditions at the time of requires under such waivers. Since the cases, are significantly smaller than the flight do not change the level of risk their manned counterparts. The reduced effective date of the rule on August 29, that small UAS operations that occur 33 size, combined with the reduced 2016, the agency has received 4,837 over people present. If the small UAS requests for waiver of the prohibition on visibility due to darkness, favors used in the operation complies with one requiring an anti-collision light for nighttime operations. The agency has of the categories of aircraft listed in 34 reduction of the risk involved with issued 1,233 waivers for operations at proposed subpart D of part 107, then the night, and has determined the small UAS operations at night. The FAA remote pilot in command may operate anticipates the presence of the light will the small UAS over people pursuant to provide other aircraft with awareness of 30 Id. at 42104. 31 the small unmanned aircraft’s presence. Id. at 42105. 35 Section 333 required the Secretary to determine 32 The FAA’s rationale for the proposed For example, remote pilots must still maintain which types of UAS do not create a hazard, based a valid remote pilot certificate and may not operate on considerations that include unmanned aircraft anti-collision light for night operations the small UAS in an unsafe manner. Remote pilots size, weight, speed, operational capability, in this rule remains consistent with the remain prohibited from: Operating small UAS from proximity to airports and populated areas, and rationale the FAA articulated in the a moving vehicle (other than over sparsely operation within visual line of sight. Id. Public Law 2016 final rule with regard to the populated areas) or aircraft and operating in the 112–95 section 333(b)(1). Based on such absence of the capability to discern visually the determinations, the FAA issued exemptions from speed, altitude, attitude, and position of the small various operating rules applicable to manned 36 See Williams and Gildea, A Review of Research unmanned aircraft. In addition, remote pilots may aviation operations to enable operations of UAS. Related to Unmanned Aircraft System Visual only operate in Class G airspace unless they first Some exemptions permitted operations of UAS at Observers, DOT/FAA/AM–14/9 Civil Aerospace obtain prior authorization and must thoroughly night, pursuant to certain conditions and Medical Institute (October 2014) (stating operations check the area of operation and the small UAS in limitations. See, e.g., Industrial Skyworks, at night offer the potential advantage of higher advance of the operation. Furthermore, remote Exemption No. 16341 (April 18, 2016) (concluding, contrast conditions because the small unmanned pilots must continue to yield to other aircraft. ‘‘the petitioner’s use of anti-collision lights that are aircraft’s light against a dark sky provides a 33 This information is current as of December 31, visible from 5,000 feet are adequate for the PIC and difference in luminance). 2017. [visual observer] to maintain [visual line of sight] 37 A copy of correspondence with staff from 34 This information is current as of December 31, capability and as an additional means for collision Pathfinder participant Burlington Northern Santa 2017. mitigation.’’). Fe (BNSF) is available in this rulemaking docket.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3869

requirement for the light during civil as instructive for both the existing without an anti-collision light visible for twilight operations.38 version of § 107.29 as it relates to civil 3 statute miles if an applicant Although a remote pilot in command twilight operations, as well as the demonstrated sufficient measures to might be able to discern the position of version of § 107.29 that the FAA mitigate the risk associated with the the small unmanned aircraft with his or proposes in this NPRM. proposed operation. In this regard, as her unaided human vision when the In promulgating this requirement for with the FAA’s current manner of aircraft is further away at night due to ultralights, the FAA stated ‘‘[t]he responding to requests for waiver, the the lighted anti-collision light this visibility from above of ultralights FAA would expect waiver applicants to proposed rule would require, the remote operating at very low levels can be establish that operating at night without pilot may not be able to rely solely on significantly enhanced by the addition an anti-collision light (or with a light that light as a manner of complying with of an anti-collision light on these that is visible at a distance of less than the existing requirements applicable to vehicles.’’ 40 The FAA stated, for 3 statute miles) would not reduce the visual line of sight operations. Existing purposes of § 103.11, an anti-collision level of safety of the operation. § 107.31(a) requires the remote pilot to light is ‘‘any flashing or stroboscopic be able to see the small unmanned device that is of sufficient intensity so 6. Preflight Familiarization aircraft throughout the flight to: Know as to be visible for at least 3 statute The FAA also considers the existing the unmanned aircraft’s location; miles.’’ 41 Overall, the 3 statute mile preflight familiarization, inspection, and determine the unmanned aircraft’s visibility standard for anti-collision actions for aircraft operation under attitude, altitude, and direction of flight; lighting for night operations of ultralight § 107.49 to mitigate the risk of observe the airspace for other air traffic vehicles has been a longstanding operations of small UAS at night. or hazards; and determine that the requirement. Section 107.49 will continue to require unmanned aircraft does not endanger The FAA considered incorporating the remote pilot in command to assess the life or property of another. the standards of 14 CFR 27.1401, Anti- in advance of the operation the location In almost all cases, the remote pilot in collision light system, for night of persons and property on the surface command will need to restrict the operations under part 107. Part 107 does as well as other ground hazards. The operational area of the aircraft at night not contain aircraft certification rules or remote pilot in command must also or use a small UAS that contains an standards, and the FAA concludes the determine the functionality of the small additional system, such as position reduced risk small UAS operations pose UAS and its required components. lighting, to meet § 107.31(a) does not warrant application of such Similar to the requirements of requirements while operating at night. standards. Prescribing lighting § 91.205(a), the FAA expects the remote Such a necessity arises from the fact that requirements would be overly pilot to check the anti-collision light in reduced lighting and contrast at night burdensome for both the FAA and advance of the operation to ensure the makes it difficult for remote pilots in manufacturers of small UAS because light is in an operable condition for the command to maintain the capability of they would be forced to make tradeoffs duration of all flights during civil visually discerning the location, that affect both the weight of the aircraft twilight and at night. attitude, altitude, and direction of the and the aircraft’s power source and In addition to verifying the flight of the aircraft. In the interest of supply. The FAA proposes small UAS functionality of the anti-collision light enabling remote pilots in command operating at night must simply have an prior to commencing the operation and with the flexibility to determine the anti-collision lighting component that is after noting the locations of hazards appropriate solution for each unique visible for 3 statute miles, rather than a during the assessment of the operating operation, the FAA decided not to light that fulfills prescriptive design environment, the remote pilot in propose amending existing § 107.31 to criteria. The FAA, however, invites command must determine how to avoid require additional requirements on comments on the following: the identified hazards to ensure visual line of sight operations at night. • Should the FAA impose a specific continued safe operation of the small The FAA invites comments from the color or type requirement concerning UAS in accordance with §§ 107.15 and public, however, on whether it should the anti-collision light; the most helpful 107.19(c). Prior to the flight, the remote require position lighting, in addition to comments on this issue will explain pilot in command must also ensure he the anti-collision lighting the FAA how a prescriptive standard would or she will be able to keep the small proposes in this rule, for night achieve the objective of ensuring safety unmanned aircraft within the intended operations. of small UAS operations at night, in area of operation and within visual line Currently, § 107.29 requires an anti- light of the risks the FAA has identified of sight for the duration of the collision light visible for 3 statute miles in this proposed rule. operation. This preflight assessment during periods of ‘‘civil twilight.’’ The • Are there characteristics or effects provides flexibility to the remote pilot 2016 final rule cited 14 CFR 103.11 as of anti-collision lights at low altitude in command and allows him or her to the source of the requirement for an that could have an effect on normal exercise judgment in using the anti-collision light.39 Section 103.11 human activities? If so, are there principles of Aeronautical Decision prohibits operation of ultralight vehicles potential mitigations or alternatives to Making. Advisory Circular 107–242 at night, and sets forth an anti-collision consider? light requirement for ultralight vehicles contains recommended best practices during twilight periods. The FAA is 5. Waiver for operational site assessments and aware that the anti-collision light The FAA also proposes making the avoiding flight over non-participating requirement for ultralights does not anti-collision lighting requirement for people, unless the operation satisfies the constitute a precise analogy to small small UAS night operations subject to proposed requirements of § 107.39. UAS operations. Nevertheless, the FAA waiver. The FAA would consider The FAA considered amending has considered the anti-collision light granting a certificate of waiver allowing § 107.49 to include an explicit requirement as it applies to ultralights a nighttime small UAS operation 42 Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS), Advisory Circular 107–2 (June 21, 2016), available 38 81 FR at 42103. 40 47 FR 38770, 38773 (Sept. 2, 1982). at https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/ 39 81 FR 42064, 42103 (June 28, 2016). 41 Id. at 38773–74. Advisory_Circular/AC_107-2.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3870 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

requirement to check the functionality Aeronautical Knowledge,45 and small UAS eligible to conduct of the anti-collision light prior to night Airplane Flying Handbook.46 The FAA operations over people: ‘‘casualty’’ and operations. The FAA decided such an intends to update Advisory Circular ‘‘declaration of compliance.’’ For amendment is unnecessary because the 107–2 with specific sections pertaining purposes of this rule, the FAA considers language in the proposed version of to night operations and currently a ‘‘casualty’’ as an Abbreviated Injury § 107.29(a)(2) would specifically require maintains brochures and training videos Scale (AIS) level 3 or greater injury. The a lighted anti-collision light. This for night operations. Remote pilots have AIS provides a means of classifying the language is identical to the original free online access to these materials. type and severity of injuries throughout § 107.29(b) for civil twilight operations A remote pilot who obtained his or the body. Although originally designed that also did not require checking the her remote pilot certificate under part to map a series of anatomically-defined functionality of the light in § 107.49. 107 prior to the effective date of this injury descriptions using several rule and has not completed updated parameters (energy dissipation, threat to 7. Remote Pilot Knowledge training would not be eligible to act as life, permanent impairment, treatment remote pilot in command and operate period, and incidence) specifically for The remote pilot’s first-hand their small UAS at night under this rule. vehicular crashes, the U.S. Department knowledge of the risks nighttime small Any person who wishes to be a remote of Transportation as well as many UAS operations present, as well as the pilot in command and operate at night university and industry research teams appropriate risk mitigations and must complete the updated training, in the United States, Europe, and aeronautical judgment, are critical to which includes night operations, Australia have adopted the AIS severity enhancing the safety of operations of regardless of the amount of time that has level scale as the standard for various small UAS at night. As a result, the FAA passed since the person completed the crash investigation teams. Within the would require remote pilots complete previous test or course, before operating AIS system, injuries are classified on a either an updated knowledge test or at night. scale of 1 to 6, as follows: recurrent training that addresses small B. Operations Over People UAS operations at night prior to TABLE 3—ABBREVIATED INJURY SCALE operating as a remote pilot in command This rule proposes amendments to at night. part 107 that would enable operations of AIS Level Definition The additional test questions the FAA small UAS over people. The FAA bases its proposed framework on the 1 ...... Minor injury. anticipates including on the initial 2 ...... Moderate injury. knowledge test under § 107.73 and the presumption that small UAS operating under part 107 are not airworthy, given 3 ...... Serious injury. recurrent training under § 107.74 would 4 ...... Severe injury. focus on night physiology and night that they are not subject to the 5 ...... Critical injury. requirement of an airworthiness 6 ...... Non-survivable injury. illusions. The remote pilot in 47 command’s ability to maintain both the certificate. Accordingly, the FAA proposes three categories of operation small unmanned aircraft and any Throughout this NPRM, the FAA uses that could be conducted over people,48 intruding aircraft within his or her field the phrase ‘‘low probability of causing based on likelihood and severity of of view will directly affect his or her a casualty’’ for Category 2 operations to injuries that could result. ability to discern the potential for a mean a low chance exists that a person 43 This section describes the FAA’s whom a small unmanned aircraft collision. As such, maintaining the proposed requirements applicable to the ability to view the airspace pertinent to impacts would experience a serious three categories that would ensure the injury. The FAA notes that the AAAM the operation is a principal mitigation of safety of operations over people. These the risk small UAS operations present classifies all AIS level 3 injuries as requirements address the manufacturing ‘‘serious.’’ Similarly, although the FAA under part 107. Therefore, the of small UAS that fulfill the safety additional knowledge questions and does not propose codifying a definition thresholds of this proposed rule as well of ‘‘fatality’’ in this rule, this NPRM uses training relevant to night operations as restrictions that may apply to the would emphasize the ability to maintain that term in descriptions concerning operation. In addition, this section Category 3 operations, which appear in uninhibited visual observation of the describes the measures of oversight the airspace and would address how to section IV.B.4. For purposes of this FAA will employ in ensuring discussion, the FAA regards a ‘‘fatality’’ detect aircraft in a dynamic, visually compliance with the proposed complex operational environment. as an AIS level 6 injury, which means requirements. the injury ultimately results in death. In addition, the FAA will continue to 1. Definitions Because a casualty is an AIS level 3 or provide resources to remote pilots in greater injury, AIS level 6 is included command concerning practical tips and This proposed rule includes two new within the definition of a casualty.49 best practices for ensuring the safety of definitions applicable to manufacturing Overall, consistent with the ARC’s small UAS operations at night. The FAA recommendations, the FAA uses the AIS publishes several resources that contain 45 Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, Ch. 17: Aeromedical Factors at p. 17–19 ‘‘Vision in in assessing the levels of risks of injury information and best practices for night Flight,’’ available at https://www.faa.gov/ small unmanned aircraft operating over operations. The FAA encourages remote regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/ _ _ pilots to become familiar with certain phak/media/19 phak ch17.pdf (2016). 49 AIS 3 head injuries can result in a loss of sections of the Aeronautical Information 46 Airplane Flying Handbook, Ch. 10: Night consciousness of 1 to 6 hours, or specific types of Manual (AIM),44 Pilot’s Handbook of Operations (March 23, 2017). skull fractures. AIS 3 neck injuries include 47 81 FR 42068–70 (stating Pub. L. 112–95 section dislocations, fractures, and injuries that put the 333(b)(2) allows for the determination that spinal cord at risk. While an AIS 3 injury may not 43 See M.A. Crognale, UAS/UAV Ground airworthiness certification is not necessary for be life-threatening as a stand-alone injury, Observer Performance: Field Measurements, DOT/ certain small UAS, such as those part 107 covers). compounding factors may lead to death. Therefore, FAA/AR–10/1 (Dec. 24, 2009). 48 As discussed in the preamble of the 2016 final the FAA notes that a person could experience an 44 AIM, Ch. 8: Medical Facts for Pilots, Sec. 8–1– rule, the term ‘‘over’’ refers to the flight of a small AIS 3 injury as a result of a small unmanned aircraft 6 ‘‘Vision in Flight,’’ available at https:// unmanned aircraft directly over any part of a impact that could develop into a more serious www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/media/ person, regardless of the dwell time. 81 FR 42064, injury if, for example, the person does not seek the aim.pdf (April 27, 2017). 42129. appropriate medical attention.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3871

people may present, in the interest of in a value of 12 J/cm2, and that a ARC’s analysis of the risks posed by determining the appropriate manner for quadcopter UAS weighing 4 to 5 pounds Category 1 operations in its report, a reducing such risks. would qualify for an ARC Category 2 copy of which has been placed in the This proposed rule would also define operation, depending on its design docket. The FAA adopts this conclusion a ‘‘Declaration of Compliance’’ as a characteristics and operating that a small unmanned aircraft that document a manufacturer submits to instructions.51 weighs 0.55 pounds or less poses a low certify that a small UAS conforms to the 3. Category 1 Operations risk of injury when operated over Category 2 or 3 requirements for people. operations over people. As discussed in This rule would establish a category section IV.B.7., this rule would require of operations over people using small The FAA anticipates Category 1 manufacturers producing small UAS for UAS that weigh 0.55 pounds or less, operations would consist almost Category 2 and 3 operations to submit including everything that is on board or exclusively of aerial photography, due a Declaration of Compliance to the FAA. otherwise attached to the aircraft at the to the small size of aircraft eligible for Although these aircraft systems would time of takeoff. The FAA refers to this such operations. For example, a small not be certificated as airworthy under category as Category 1, and proposes to UAS qualified for Category 1 operations this rule, the FAA would rely on a enable Category 1 operations without might be used to film a wedding, collect manufacturer’s Declaration of any additional manufacturer or pictures of a school sporting event, or Compliance to ensure the make and operational restrictions beyond what take a self-portrait. The FAA invites model of aircraft complies with the part 107 already requires and any other comments containing data on the risk of applicable standards at the time of applicable laws and regulations. injury to persons posed by operations The FAA’s proposal is consistent with manufacture. using small UAS that weigh 0.55 the ARC’s recommendation for Category pounds or less. 2. ARC Recommendation 1 operations. Based on information from As noted previously, the ARC experts in government, industry, and The FAA anticipates manufacturers recommended a small UAS operating academia,52 the ARC concluded, ‘‘the would design small UAS to meet the over people should present only a low level of risk of injury posed by this Category 1 qualifications for marketing probability of causing a serious injury to category of UAS is so low that no purposes, but responsibility for uninvolved people. The ARC used two performance standards and no determining whether a small unmanned concepts to address the risk to persons operational restrictions beyond those aircraft weighs 0.55 pounds or less rests from small UAS operations over people: imposed by the proposed part 107 are with the remote pilot in command. The injury threshold and impact kinetic necessary.’’ 53 The ARC came to this remote pilot in command would be in energy threshold. The injury threshold conclusion based on the following: (1) the best position to determine, before is the maximum injury level a person An example provided by Dr. Paul Wilde flight, whether the small unmanned would be expected to suffer as a result of the FAA in which a small UAS aircraft satisfies the weight limitation of being impacted by a small unmanned weighing 0.55 pounds and operating and can therefore conduct Category 1 aircraft under normal operating over people presented a ‘‘probability of operations. For example, the remote conditions. The impact kinetic energy serious injury or fatality consistent with pilot in command may choose to add or threshold is the maximum kinetic existing levels of safety for non- energy that the small unmanned aircraft participating people when exposed to change the small unmanned aircraft’s could transfer to a person upon impact aviation risks;’’ 54 (2) data provided by batteries or camera, which may cause a without exceeding the injury threshold. Mr. Arterburn, of the University of small unmanned aircraft that previously The ARC identified threshold injury Alabama in Huntsville’s Alliance for satisfied the 0.55-pound limit to exceed levels using the AIS for each category: System Safety of UAS through Research that weight and no longer qualify for a one percent chance of causing an AIS Excellence (ASSURE), who ‘‘correlated Category 1 operations. Overall, the level 3 injury for ARC Category 2 various human injury thresholds with remote pilot in command must ensure operations and no more than a 30 risks associated with sporting events’’ 55 the small UAS is eligible for operations percent chance of causing an AIS level and suggested that a UAS, under certain under Category 1 prior to operating the 3 injury for ARC Category 3 conditions, could transfer as low as 38 small UAS over people. operations.50 percent of its total kinetic energy on The ARC recommended the proposed impact; 56 and (3) the Registration Task 4. Category 2 and 3 Operations rule should limit the kinetic energy a Force’s selection of a weight threshold While the proposal for Category 1 small UAS could transfer upon impact of 0.55 pounds for registration purposes. operations is based on weight alone, the in order to limit the injury the small There is more information about the proposed amendments for enabling UAS could cause. The ARC encouraged Category 2 and 3 operations require a the FAA to use the injury thresholds to 51 ARC Report at 7. calculate corresponding impact kinetic 52 In addition to presentations from FAA experts, more sophisticated analysis. This rule energy thresholds. The ARC presentations made at the ARC included analyses proposes categorizing eligibility for from researchers at ASTM International (ASTM), Category 2 and 3 operations based on recommended using an impact kinetic Transport Canada, National Aeronautics and Space energy threshold measured in Joules per Administration (NASA), National Institute of the risk of human injury, which is centimeter squared (J/cm2) to calculate Standards and Technology (NIST), Alliance for consistent with the ARC’s System Safety of UAS through Research Excellence recommendations. The following the impact kinetic energy thresholds (ASSURE), Virginia Tech, RTCA, Praxis Aerospace that correspond to these injury Concepts, MIT Lincoln Labs, Simpson College, discussion describes the level of safety thresholds, by way of a performance- Naval Sea Systems Command (NSWC Dahlgren), this rule proposes as the standard for based requirement that limits the risk of EASA, U.S. Navy, UAS Insurance Association, and limiting human injuries from the energy the Consumer Product Safety Commission. See ARC a small unmanned aircraft transfers injury. Based on a presentation it Report at Appendix A received from Transport Canada, the 53 ARC Report at 4. upon impact. This discussion also ARC stated this calculation would result 54 ARC Report at 6. summarizes the sources of relevant 55 ARC Report at 6. information the FAA considered and 50 ARC Report at 9–10. 56 ARC Report at 6. will continue to monitor.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3872 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

(a) International Activities and Ongoing and has considered JARUS activities caused by transfers of kinetic energy, Research and proposed policies in furtherance of exposed rotating parts, or safety defects. Since the ARC, the FAA has carefully the FAA’s goal of integrating UAS safely With regard to the impact kinetic energy examined additional information with into the NAS. In this regard, the FAA limitations in this rule, the small regard to injury risks and energy continues to contribute to JARUS and its unmanned aircraft must not be capable thresholds. The European Aviation stated mission to develop a regulatory of causing an injury to a human being Safety Agency (EASA) published a framework for unmanned aircraft that is more severe than injury that prototype regulation in August 2016, operations and proposals for the would result from an impact kinetic followed by a Notice of Proposed regulation of operations the member energy transfer of 11 ft-lbs (Category 2) Amendment (NPA) on May 4, 2017.57 states would consider ‘‘low-risk.’’ or 25 ft-lbs (Category 3) from a rigid The NPA introduces categories of Since 2015, the FAA has collaborated object. In addition, this proposed rule permissible small UAS operations based with the academic community and its would prohibit small UAS eligible for on maximum takeoff masses; the ‘‘open’’ affiliates by fostering cooperative operations in either Category 2 or category is most permissive, and research and developing intellectual Category 3 from having exposed rotating proposes a subcategory to permit small capabilities of primary interest to the parts that could lacerate human skin UAS operations over uninvolved FAA and the UAS community, through and from having any safety defects. people, but not over assemblies of the work of the UAS Center of Finally, to establish an appropriate people, as long as the aircraft does not Excellence under the Alliance for safety level, this rule would also require exceed 250 grams maximum takeoff System Safety of UAS through Research certain operational limitations for mass and does not have sharp edges. Excellence (ASSURE). Recent research Category 3 operations. Consistent with These aircraft would be limited to 50 from one ASSURE study has informed the ARC recommendation, this rule meters (approximately 164 feet) above the FAA’s decision-making concerning proposes a performance-based standard that the FAA believes is equivalent to ground level (AGL) and eligible for operations of small unmanned aircraft 59 reducing the likelihood of causing a operations that remote pilots of any age over people. The results of the study certain level of expected injury. could conduct, provided they have corroborate the FAA’s impact severity educational materials to ensure estimates that form the basis for this (1) Safety Level competence. Other commercially built rule, in that the ASSURE researchers used kinetic energy upon impact as a This proposed rule’s establishment of small unmanned aircraft would be a safety level that, in part, limits the permitted to operate over uninvolved basis for estimating the severity of injury a small UAS impacting a person effects of kinetic energy upon impact people if they fulfill several product arises from the FAA’s consideration of safety requirements, including either an causes. This research substantiates the need the AIS as a means of establishing the energy transmitted to the human body acceptable injury thresholds. In the less than 80 joules upon impact or a for the development of manufacturer standards that will address how to Supplemental NPRM (SNPRM) titled maximum takeoff mass, including ‘‘Licensing and Safety Requirements for payload, of less than 900 grams and a measure the potential for human injury that results from small UAS impacts Launch,’’ the FAA discussed the maximum cruising speed of 18 meters concept of levels of injury risk from per second. These other aircraft would with a person. In particular, given the significant variability in the impact impacts with inert debris resulting from also be subject to the limit of 50 meters 60 dynamics and amounts of energy commercial space launches. In AGL unless the pilots conducting the determining the acceptable level of risk operations take online training with a transfer that the report identified, the ASSURE research indicates addressing of injury from inert debris, the FAA test, in which case they could conduct stated: ‘‘[o]ne must note that not every operations up to 120 meters AGL. The impact dynamics, aerodynamic drag, the shape and material properties of the impact of debris at 11 ft-lbs or greater NPA proposes allowing other operations would necessarily result in a casualty. that do not fulfill these criteria, as long small UAS, and other potential factors, will be persuasive aspects to consider The probability of casualty due to such as they do not operate directly over an impact is further dependent on a for creating standards that ensure safety. uninvolved people and comply with number of other factors specific to the The A4 Report also highlights the certain operational restrictions.58 debris and the impact scenario.’’ 61 The necessity for safer blade designs or In the NPA, EASA also states it relied FAA considered the concept of the risk restrictions that could limit the effects on the Joint Authorities for Rulemaking of injury from inert debris in proposing of exposed rotating parts. on Unmanned Systems (JARUS) concept standards for small unmanned aircraft, that identifies three categories based on (b) FAA Proposal as explained below. several factors concerning the intended This proposed rule would use the operations. JARUS is a collaborative (a) Transfer of Energy From Rigid Object term ‘‘safety level’’ in the requirement group of international participants that This rule proposes a performance- applicable to means of compliance: In develop guidance material to assist based standard that includes the term particular, applicants that submit means governing authorities in promulgating ‘‘rigid object’’ with regard to the transfer of compliance for FAA acceptance must standards. The FAA participates in of energy. For purposes of this proposed show the means of compliance would JARUS in developing such materials, rule, the FAA considers a rigid object to achieve the safety level the proposed be a body on which the distance standards reach. This safety level refers 57 Introduction of a Regulatory Framework for the between two points never changes, Operation of Drones—Unmanned Aircraft System to the limitation of injury severity notwithstanding the amount of force Operations in the Open and Specific Category, applied on it. Such a definition, Notice of Proposed Amendment 2017–05, available 59 Arterburn, et al., FAA UAS Center of at https://www.easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/ Excellence Task A4: UAS Ground Collision Severity therefore, includes a body that does not NPA%202017-05%20%28A%29_0.pdf. Evaluation: Revision 2 (Apr. 28, 2017) (hereinafter 58 Similar to the FAA, EASA may consider ‘‘A4 Report’’). The final report underwent peer 60 See Licensing and Safety Requirements for ongoing research as it determines the suitability of review of researchers from FAA, the National Launch, Supplemental Notice of Proposed energy thresholds and the likelihood of human Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Rulemaking, 67 FR 49456 (July 30, 2002), which the injury in attempting to categorize the risk small industry participants. The report is available in the FAA finalized on August 25, 2006. 71 FR 50508. UAS operations over people may present. docket for this rulemaking. 61 67 FR at 49465.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3873

deform under the influence of forces. factors. The research conducted impact Based upon this information and human The FAA is fully aware that many testing of each of these objects and injury criteria, the RCC established factors affect the transfer of kinetic established that the transfer of energy threshold values that correlate to low energy. For example, elasticity, impact from these objects varies greatly due to probabilities of specific human injury dynamics, impact orientation, and a design characteristics and the variation levels. Section 6.2 of RCC 321–07, for variety of other factors would ostensibly of materials that compose the objects. example, states ‘‘the threshold criterion reduce the amount of energy the object The study showed the transfer of energy for protection against blunt trauma and actually transfers. Research suggests a from a rigid object was more likely to crushing injuries is 11 ft-lbs impact rigid object impacts someone with more cause injury than the energy transferred kinetic energy.’’ 66 Section 6.2.1 of RCC kinetic energy and therefore could cause from an object that is less rigid, such as 321–10 states, this criterion is designed injuries more severe than those a small a small unmanned aircraft of the same to afford protection against injury levels unmanned aircraft would cause upon weight. The FAA intends the practice of of an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) of impact. comparing the energy transferred from a level 3 or worse. This statement The A4 Report from ASSURE suggests rigid object to the transfer of energy explains that 11 ft-lbs is the appropriate a vertical drop test that measures kinetic from a small unmanned aircraft will standard for a ‘‘low probability’’ of an energy upon impact alone is not the permit manufacturers, likely by way of AIS level 3 injury. In addition, the most accurate means of estimating an industry consensus standard, to standard is consistent with the use of 11 injury that occurs as a result of the design small unmanned aircraft that ft-lbs as the threshold for casualties in energy transfer. The ASSURE research fulfill the safety levels the FAA commercial space launch safety also proposed alternatives to measuring proposes in this rule. Ultimately, the analyses and with the ARC injury that would result from a small FAA intends its inclusion of the term recommendation. The document further unmanned aircraft that impacts a ‘‘rigid object’’ to provide flexibility establishes 25 ft-lbs as a higher impact person. The study suggested other test applicable to each small unmanned kinetic energy threshold for limiting methods that account for the design aircraft design, based on limiting human fatalities due to blunt trauma. When configuration and material properties of injury caused by the transfer of energy. modeling debris fragments and their the small UAS may measure the severity Along with the inclusion of the term impacts on unsheltered people, the RCC of blunt trauma that results from an ‘‘rigid object’’ in the standards that standard explains the impacts that impact more accurately than kinetic would govern the qualification of small transfer kinetic energy in the amount of energy measurements alone. ASSURE is UAS eligible to conduct operations in 25 ft-lbs or less have a low probability conducting further research on Category 2 and Category 3, the FAA of causing a fatality. alternative methodologies as indicators proposes measurements of energy that This research arose from criteria the of the severity of injuries from impacts would ensure a low likelihood that the RCC issued in 1999, which provided with small unmanned aircraft. small unmanned aircraft would cause a government and military Range The study strongly suggests the casualty or fatality upon impact. The Commanders a common approach to transfer of energy from a small FAA’s use of 11 ft-lbs as the basis for the safety risk assessments.67 These unmanned aircraft, while difficult to injury standard applicable to Category 2 documents refer to the impact kinetic measure, is unlikely to reach 100 operations is consistent with existing energy data in RCC Document 321–00 as percent of the total kinetic energy. In commercial space safety regulations at the basis for calculating the casualty this regard, the study states: 14 CFR part 417, Launch Safety, and expectation criteria for unmanned The energy that is directly absorbed is the longstanding Range Commander’s aircraft operations at national test difference between the transferred energy Council (RCC) standards. Specifically, ranges. Using the probability of fatality and the change in kinetic energy of the 14 CFR 417.107(c) establishes 11 ft-lbs data developed in RCC 321–00, the RCC impacted object. Absorbed energy is a as the impact kinetic energy threshold determined casualty expectation criteria function of the deformation of the impacted for inert debris from a commercial space with the same data the FAA uses in this mass and the associated damping caused by launch operation that could cause a proposed rule to establish the impact the materials from which the impacted object kinetic energy thresholds. 62 casualty from blunt trauma to a person is manufactured. not under a covered structure. The FAA Because the RCC impact kinetic The study indicates deformation and bases this threshold on extensive energy thresholds are based on impacts absorption of energy are influential government research of human injury from metallic fragments, the criteria factors to consider when measuring thresholds discussed in the RCC does not take into account any potential energy from a small unmanned aircraft Common Risk Criteria Standards for loss of kinetic energy from non-rigid falling on a person because ‘‘[i]n the National Test Ranges, RCC Standard 321 objects that can be shown to transfer case of a person being hit by a UAS, and associated supplements. The stated only a portion of their total kinetic deformation and absorbed energy intent of RCC Standard 321 is to energy to person upon impact. The RCC contribute to the injuries associated ‘‘establish safety criteria and guidelines thresholds presume all kinetic energy with blunt force trauma.’’ 63 to provide definitive and quantifiable from a rigid object would transfer to a The study attempted to theorize the measures to protect mission-essential person upon impact. The ASSURE likelihood of injury that would result personnel’’ 65 and the general public research, however, demonstrates that from an impact with a small unmanned from launch and reentry hazards small UAS do not always impact a aircraft as compared to an impact with generated by guided and unguided person or surface in the same manner blunt, dense objects such as a ball of missiles, missile intercepts, space that metallic fragments impact them. steel and a block of wood.64 The risk of launches and reentry vehicles. The RCC a serious injury from such objects conducted extensive testing and 66 RCC Range Safety Group, Common Risk varies, given the frangibility and dense analysis to address blunt force injuries Criteria Standards for National Test Ranges: nature of the object, among other Supplement 321–07 at sec. 6.2.a (2007). that may result from falling inert debris. 67 RCC Range Safety Group, Range Safety Criteria for Unmanned Vehicles: Standard 323–99 (1999); 62 A4 Report at 32–33. 65 RCC Range Safety Group, Common Risk see also Range Safety Criteria for Unmanned 63 Id. Criteria Standards for National Test Ranges: Vehicles—Rationale and Methodology Supplement 64 A–4 Report at 84. Supplement 321–10 at sec. 1.3 (2010). (1999).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3874 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

The FAA proposal for using injury a person on impact would have a low appropriate standard by submitting a avoidance as a threshold, rather than an probability of causing a fatality to that declaration of compliance. impact kinetic energy threshold alone, person. As discussed further below, the At present, no means of measuring takes into account the disparity between FAA also proposes standards for exists to establish that a specific amount impacts from metallic fragments and exposed rotating parts applicable to of energy equates with a likelihood of small unmanned aircraft. The Categories 2 and 3 as well as operational injury. Nevertheless, the FAA’s performance-based standards the FAA restrictions for Category 3 operations. adoption of a performance-based proposes in this rule intend to standard as a performance-based (b) Measurements of Transfer of Energy encourage development of testing measurement should encourage methodologies and other means of With regard to energy transfer, the development of various means of compliance that account for the transfer FAA proposes setting the safety level in compliance to ensure small UAS do not of kinetic energy that may occur upon this rule as the limitation of injuries present an unacceptable level of risk of impact from small unmanned aircraft. caused by the total kinetic energy injuring a person when operating over With regard to analyzing the transfer transferred from a rigid object to a people. The FAA emphasizes further of energy, the FAA considers impact person upon impact, rather than the research is necessary on the subject of kinetic energy thresholds established in impact kinetic energy per unit area. The proper modeling of small unmanned the RCC standards as instructive. The FAA acknowledges the ARC aircraft impact physics as it correlates to RCC based its thresholds primarily on recommended the FAA adopt a human injury. From the variation of the assumption that inert debris exists measurement of J/cm2 for the energy kinetic energy thresholds in the in rigid form. Because kinetic energy limitation aspect of this proposed rule, historical blunt trauma research, the depends on weight and speed, the but declines to propose this FAA understands the rigidity of the human injury models of the RCC report measurement. This decision is the result small unmanned aircraft can have an recorded data of impacting fragments for of the fact that the contact area varies effect on the impact dynamics, as seen various weights, such as one, 10, or 80 considerably, based on many factors when comparing small UAS data with pounds. The resulting kinetic energy of (varying shapes of aircraft, size and rigid object data points. Additional these weights can be measured due to positioning of the person, and so on). research may suggest other ways of the changing velocity of the impacting Further, the orientation of the aircraft at measuring injury that results from the fragments. For example, a lightweight the time of impact will also greatly transmission of energy upon impact. unmanned aircraft flying at a certain affect the contact area as well as the The FAA seeks comment on whether speed could have the exact same impact position of the person who is impacted. establishing an impact kinetic energy kinetic energy as a heavier unmanned Impact kinetic energy thresholds alone threshold and using kinetic energy aircraft flying at a slower speed. Due to consider neither the dimensions of the transferred upon impact is the the variability in the kinematics of these small unmanned aircraft nor the area of appropriate method to measure the systems, the FAA considers the transfer the small unmanned aircraft that makes potential injury a small unmanned of this impact energy to be the contact with a person upon impact. aircraft could cause upon impact with a determining factor for safe operations Moreover, impact kinetic energy person. transferred to a person may result in over people. For determining whether a (c) Reduction in Likelihood of Injury means of compliance fulfills the safety blunt trauma injuries. Thresholds levels the FAA proposes at specified in units of energy per area, As noted above, the FAA uses the §§ 107.115(b)(1) and 107.120(b)(1), the such as J/cm2, are used to measure the term ‘‘safety level’’ to refer to the FAA will consider long-held science on risk of non-lacerating, or ‘‘chunky limitation of injury severity caused by which the RCC standards are based, as penetration’’ injuries, not blunt trauma transfers of kinetic energy from a rigid well as other analytical models that may injuries.68 object, exposed rotating parts, or safety be relevant at the time of the FAA’s Manufacturers or others who do not defects. The FAA proposes to establish analysis. seek to use an industry consensus the safety levels set forth in Category 2 Based on the foregoing, the FAA standard may also present a manner of and 3 based on a risk assessment that identified two existing impact kinetic measuring energy transfer the FAA does not attempt to predict the precise energy thresholds that analyze public deems acceptable, via a custom means types or probability of injuries. A chain safety risk from commercial space of compliance. Once the FAA accepts a of events must occur for a small UAS to launches, government space launches, means of compliance for measuring the cause an injury. A Category 2 operation and aircraft operations at national test transfer of energy that accounts for resulting in a low probability of casualty ranges. The FAA concludes, based on mitigating factors, such as dissipation or and a Category 3 operation resulting in the research cited above, that a small absorption of post-impact kinetic energy a low probability of fatality assumes a unmanned aircraft that transfers no by the small unmanned aircraft, the small UAS would experience a failure more than 11 ft-lbs of kinetic energy to FAA would consider the means as during an operation over people and a person on impact would have a low fulfilling the performance-based that it would impact a person. A one probability of causing a casualty to that requirements of Category 2 and 3, hundred percent chance that each of person. Therefore, the FAA considers respectively. As described below, these events would occur is impossible. this rule’s proposed standard for manufacturers would then take Therefore, the probability of injury such Category 2 to consist of the limitation of advantage of the accepted means of thresholds would present is uncertain. the results, or injury, that arise from a compliance by declaring a particular This proposal also does not consider transfer of 11 ft-lbs of kinetic energy make and model of small UAS they which part or section of a small from a rigid object upon impact. have manufactured fulfills the unmanned aircraft impacts a person, but Similarly, the FAA proposes setting the rather assumes the occurrence of the standard for Category 3 as limiting the 68 Impact kinetic energy per unit area, such as J/ worst case in a typical failure mode. For injury to that of an impact of 25 ft-lbs cm2 is the most appropriate means of measuring example, the orientation of a small non-lacerating or ‘‘chunky penetration’’ injuries, from a rigid object because a small not blunt trauma injuries. A4 Report at 83 (Table unmanned aircraft as it impacts a unmanned aircraft that transfers no 30, comparison of energy densities and related person might affect the amount of more than 25 ft-lbs of kinetic energy to metrics for chunky penetration). kinetic energy it transfers. Similarly, if

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3875

the arm of a small unmanned aircraft is 2 and 3 of this proposed rule must be lacerations, combined with the bendable or breakable and comes into designed such that they would not limitation on transfer of kinetic energy contact with a person, the full energy of lacerate human skin upon impact with on impact and prohibition of safety the impact might not transfer to the a person. defects, will mitigate the risk of injuries person; therefore, that person may The ARC recommended that may not involve skin. Moreover, the experience an injury of reduced manufacturers limit the risk of injuries FAA is keenly aware that permanently severity. The FAA assumes that, to caused by exposed rotating parts disfiguring injuries could result from determine the maximum kinetic energy because energy transfer requirements lacerations of skin.70 As a result, and the small unmanned aircraft transfers alone would not mitigate this risk based on the ASSURE research that upon impact with a person, the test sufficiently. The ARC stated the analysis highlighted the concern that exposed would utilize the aircraft orientation of exposed rotating parts should ‘‘focus rotating parts present, the FAA proposes likely to cause the most harm to the on serious injury (level 3 or greater)’’ a general prohibition on such parts that person. For example, the standard without any distinction based on the could lacerate skin. assumes the small unmanned aircraft category of operation. Although the ARC This proposal is the result of the would not impact the person at an angle used the term ‘‘exposed rotating parts’’ agency’s determination that any or in a manner that curtails the fall of to identify any rotating part that could allowance for serious injury from the small unmanned aircraft. The cause an injury, the most common exposed rotating parts would have a standard does not take into account example of this on a small unmanned compounding effect and would add to these less hazardous orientations aircraft is a propeller. In a multi-rotor the overall level of risk for Category 2 because a small unmanned aircraft’s unmanned aircraft configuration, and 3 operations. The FAA concluded position at the time of impact with a propellers are generally arranged that this proposed standard of person is unpredictable. symmetrically around the periphery of prohibiting lacerations of human skin In addition, the FAA is aware that the unmanned aircraft. In a fixed-wing would maintain the risk posed by different parts of the human body have unmanned aircraft configuration, Category 2 operations as a low different vulnerabilities depending on propellers are generally arranged in probability of causing a casualty, and the weight of the impacting object. The either a puller (propeller in front) or Category 3 operations as a low 11 ft-lbs and 25 ft-lbs thresholds for pusher (propeller in back) configuration. probability of causing a fatality. As Category 2 and 3 consider these These propellers generally spin at high described below, manufacturers would variations using data, analyses, and speeds, and could cause injuries, even fulfill this standard by either providing studies performed by the RCC. This if on small unmanned aircraft. descriptions of their test methodology The ASSURE study predicted that the threshold also considers these variations and test data; analyses with severity of cutting or tearing injuries for all parts of the body for both adults substantiating data; or inspection could be greater than impact injuries and children, including when people information. are in various positions, such as from existing rotorcraft designs on A manufacturer may establish it has standing, sitting, and prone. UAS.69 The study indicated blade tip The FAA seeks comment on methods, speed, blade sharpness, and leading fulfilled the limitation on exposed processes, or procedures used in the edge sharpness may all significantly rotating parts by ensuring the small studies on which the FAA bases these affect the potential for laceration of unmanned aircraft simply does not have proposed standards. In particular, the human skin from UAS blades. The parts that are exposed. For example, if FAA invites comment on the costs ASSURE study clarified that all the propellers that provide lift and associated with meeting these proposed propellers can lacerate skin. Based on thrust for the small unmanned aircraft standards, in light of such research. this research, the FAA concludes any are internal to the unmanned aircraft, Collecting operational safety data for small UAS that conducts operations such as in a ducted fan configuration, small UAS operations over people will over people should not have exposed and are incapable of making contact assist in the FAA’s evaluation of the rotating parts capable of lacerating with a person as a result of an impact, effectiveness and continued human skin upon impact with a person. then the parts would not be exposed, applicability of the safety standards the Manufacturers would need to ensure the and the aircraft would satisfy this agency proposes. The FAA also seeks small UAS fulfills this standard using a proposed requirement. The FAA may comment on the need for a process, and means of compliance the FAA accepts. require testing and analysis to conclude the details of that process, to enable the This requirement would not apply to the rotating parts could not become FAA to reassess and possibly adjust the operations of small UAS that occur exposed as a result of an impact with a safety thresholds in this proposed rule pursuant to Category 1. The FAA invites person. For example, if the forces on the based on such safety data. The FAA public comment, however, on the issue small unmanned aircraft during an acknowledges the lack of certainty of whether operations of small UAS impact with a person could cause concerning failure rates and estimates of eligible to operate pursuant to Category structural failures that result in the injury severity based on failures. The 1 should be subjected to a performance- rotating parts becoming exposed, then FAA seeks specific information based requirement for exposed rotating that design would not achieve the regarding methods used to deal with parts. requisite safety level of this proposed such uncertainty. The FAA is aware that exposed rule. The FAA seeks comment on other rotating parts could be capable of (2) Exposed Rotating Parts injuries beyond just lacerations. For 70 In this regard, the FAA’s decision to ensure Exposed rotating parts, which could example, injuries to hair, teeth or eyes, protection of skin from lacerating injuries is similar to the logic the National Highway Traffic Safety cause lacerations or other serious rather than skin, may occur. The FAA, Administration employs. See Federal Motor Vehicle injuries if these parts were to come into however, considered carefully the Safety Standards: Glazing Materials, 65 FR 44710, contact with a person, are a feature proposed limitation on exposed rotating 44711 (July 19, 2000) (explaining NHTSA’s decision common to small UAS on the market parts that could lacerate human skin to assess whether ‘‘advanced glazings’’ are more likely to cause lacerations than ‘‘current glass,’’ and today. Due to the hazards this feature and determined the prohibition on skin stating, ‘‘[a]lthough facial lacerations injuries are can pose, the FAA has determined small relatively minor (AIS 1 or 2), they . . . can be UAS eligible for operations in Category 69 A4 Report at 89. disfiguring’’).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3876 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

means of compliance it could include in (2) an FAA-accepted means of (3) Custom Means of Compliance a final rule. compliance developed by a voluntary The FAA proposes that a consensus standards body; and (3) an 5. Means of Compliance manufacturer or other person may FAA-accepted custom means of propose a custom means of compliance This rule proposes several compliance developed independent of to fulfill the safety level set forth in this performance-based requirements that either the FAA or a voluntary consensus proposed rule’s impact kinetic energy or would accommodate varying means of standards body. A custom means of compliance. In this manner, the FAA exposed rotating parts standards. As compliance would require more discussed further in this section, a would build flexibility into the extensive review by the FAA than a regulations, which would allow the custom means of compliance would be means of compliance developed by a subject to a more comprehensive review regulatory scheme to progress alongside voluntary consensus standards body. the fast pace of small UAS innovation than a means of compliance submitted and development. Additionally, this (1) FAA-Provided Means of Compliance by a voluntary consensus standards rule would establish a process by which Under this proposed rule, any person body. If a person proposes an alternate the FAA could expedite the acceptance may establish compliance with the means of compliance to the impact of voluntary consensus standards as applicable safety levels the FAA kinetic energy or exposed rotating parts means of compliance with requirements proposes in this rule in a variety of requirements in the rule, or an alternate related to impact kinetic energy and ways. The FAA must affirmatively method to any FAA-accepted means of exposed rotating parts. This proposal accept the means of compliance before compliance, the FAA would evaluate would align with the direction of the a manufacturer can rely upon it to the means of compliance on a case-by- Office of Management and Budget demonstrate compliance. Because no case basis. A custom means of (OMB) Circular A–119, which favors the means of compliance currently exist to compliance would need to set forth a use of performance-based regulations address the requirements this rule manner by which an applicant could and voluntary consensus standards. The proposes, the FAA proposes one means comply with the impact kinetic energy FAA proposes to accept both voluntary of compliance it would accept and exposed rotating parts standards of consensus standards and non-consensus immediately, to allow manufacturers to § 107.115(b)(1) or § 107.120(b)(1), as standards as means of compliance with demonstrate their small UAS would applicable. the proposed performance-based fulfill the level of safety the FAA Applicants should consider carefully requirements. proposes in this rule for operations over the additional time and effort that could Given the current absence of people. Section IV.B.5.c) provides a be necessary to coordinate a new or voluntary consensus standards that description of this means of compliance. alternate means of compliance when could apply to operating small The FAA may provide additional FAA- scheduling their projects. FAA unmanned aircraft over people, the FAA accepted means of compliance based on coordination may require the efforts of is proposing one means of compliance future research. FAA technical specialists, Chief for each proposed performance-based Scientific Technical Advisors, and other standard for operations over people, to (2) Voluntary Consensus Standards government agencies. The use of allow interested stakeholders to begin Body Means of Compliance existing FAA-accepted means of demonstrating compliance as soon as A voluntary consensus standards compliance would be more expeditious this rule goes into effect. Additionally, body develops standards that because the FAA has already reviewed the FAA is proposing a process by incorporate openness, balance, due them. Not all developers of custom which it would approve additional process, appeals process and consensus. means of compliance would be means of compliance. A voluntary These characteristics also necessarily manufacturers who submit a Declaration consensus standards body, an industry, result in voluntary consensus standards of Compliance. The FAA, therefore, a manufacturer, or an individual may being peer reviewed. Because voluntary would provide a process by which an develop these means of compliance. consensus standards bodies are applicant could submit a custom means Each means of compliance, including composed of a wide selection of of compliance for FAA review separate the FAA’s proposed means, would industry participants, and often include from submitting a Declaration of constitute one way, but not the only FAA participation, the FAA expects its Compliance. This process is described way, to satisfy the proposed review of a means of compliance in further detail in Advisory Circular performance-based standards. The FAA developed by a voluntary consensus 107–2. would consider other means of standards body to be more expeditious When reviewing a custom means of compliance as entities or individuals than a custom means of compliance compliance, the FAA would utilize a develop and submit them to the FAA for developed in the absence of a voluntary comprehensive set of criteria. To review. consensus standards body. demonstrate compliance with the The FAA has an extensive history of impact kinetic energy or exposed (a) Establishing Compliance working with voluntary consensus rotating parts requirements, the FAA The FAA proposes to require a standards bodies such as RTCA, ASTM would determine whether the applicant manufacturer producing a small UAS International, Society of Automotive has shown compliance by testing, eligible for Category 2 or 3 operations to Engineers (SAE), and Institute of analysis, or inspection that establish compliance with the proposed Electrical and Electronics Engineers demonstrates the manufacturer has met safety level by using a means of (IEEE). In accordance with the ARC the appropriate level of safety provided compliance the FAA has accepted. A recommendation to use industry in the proposed standards. The FAA manufacturer would then declare on its consensus standards for small UAS, and would also determine whether the Declaration of Compliance what means with the precedent already set for custom tests or analyses are performed of compliance, or combination of them, general aviation aircraft, the FAA in accordance with accepted methods it used. This proposal sets forth three anticipates voluntary consensus used by the medical industry, consumer ways of establishing compliance: (1) standards bodies to take the lead in safety groups, or other peer-reviewed The FAA-proposed means of offering means of compliance for FAA test methods. In addition, the FAA compliance, discussed in this preamble; review. would determine whether the proposed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3877

means of compliance required test, methods, results, and conclusions. unmanned aircraft. The applications for unreasonable skill on behalf of the On the other hand, if a manufacturer approval of proposed means of remote pilot in command or seeks to achieve compliance by analysis, compliance that include data and incorporation of mitigations to meet the then the manufacturer should submit relevant information regarding a standards. Lastly, the FAA would the standard to which the manufacturer reasonably foreseeable worst-case determine whether the means of compared his or her specific model of scenario will facilitate the most compliance addressed design features small unmanned aircraft and explain straightforward, efficient type of review such as deployable devices, parachutes, how the data and interpretation of it from the FAA. In general, the FAA or other features. Those additional establishes that the manufacturer fulfills expects the amount of information features would require the FAA’s review the applicable standard. For example, if needed to justify the proposed means of to determine whether they assist in the manufacturer has a simulation with compliance will be proportionate to the achieving an acceptable means of modeling of the impact dynamics that complexity of factors relevant to both compliance when those features the FAA has validated, then the FAA common and worst-case scenarios. function as intended. would evaluate the analysis that utilizes (1) Tests The FAA’s proposed regulatory text in the impact dynamics data to confirm § 107.125 of this rule sets forth the that the analysis establishes fulfillment Anyone may submit test data to show information the FAA must receive in of the standard. In sum, anyone may their small UAS fulfills the safety level determining whether to accept the submit a variety of types of means of the FAA proposes in this rule. The means of compliance. This information compliance using testing, analyses, description below describes tests used would ensure FAA oversight at a level inspections, or any combination of for both a pre-accepted means of that is appropriate for the risk them, in seeking the FAA’s acceptance compliance based solely on the impact operations of small UAS over people of their means of compliance. As kinetic energy measurement, as well as present. In addition, the model for described previously, the FAA would tests used for an alternate means of ensuring compliance that the FAA more closely scrutinize custom means of compliance. proposes in this rule would also permit compliance not submitted by a (a) Impact Kinetic Energy Transfer the FAA’s adoption of an industry voluntary consensus standards body. consensus standard that fulfills the The FAA would indicate acceptance As explained below, this proposed applicable standard. of a means of compliance by publishing rule includes one potential means of a Notice of Availability in the Federal compliance that manufacturers may use (b) Submittal and FAA Acceptance of Register identifying the means of to declare compliance. For all potential Means of Compliance compliance as accepted and by sending means of compliance, the FAA expects As described previously, a letter to the applicant accepting the manufacturers, during their testing, to manufacturers or industry stakeholders proposed means of compliance. If a install or enable any mechanisms that may establish compliance in a variety of manufacturer referred to a custom could affect the transfer of kinetic different ways; however, the FAA must means of compliance on its Declaration energy upon impact. For example, affirmatively accept the means of of Compliance, FAA acceptance of that manufacturers must employ any compliance before the manufacturer can Declaration of Compliance would also systems that could limit the velocity of rely on it for self-certification. indicate acceptance of the custom the small unmanned aircraft upon Any person may submit a means of means of compliance. which the means of compliance relies. compliance to the FAA for review. To Once the FAA has accepted a custom In such cases, the manufacturer should submit a means of compliance, a person means of compliance, the FAA would provide information on the proper use would be required to identify whether consider it as equally valid as a of those systems or equipment, as well the manufacturer achieves compliance voluntary consensus standard that the as any restrictions, in the remote pilot by way of test, analysis or inspection, FAA had accepted. If the FAA did not operating instructions, as discussed in and provide a detailed description of accept a custom means of compliance, section IV.B.9. the means of compliance that the FAA would notify the applicant of The FAA anticipates a person who establishes exactly how the testing, the rationale for its decision and would seeks to comply via a custom means of analysis, or inspection fulfills the safety reject any associated Declarations of compliance would implement these level set forth in the standards of Compliance that rely on that particular types of systems or equipment through § 107.115(b)(1) or § 107.120(b)(1). The custom means of compliance. For both hardware, software, or a combination of rule proposes requiring any person who custom means of compliance and both. If an operator can operate the submits such a custom means of voluntary consensus standards, the FAA small UAS regardless of whether these compliance to provide any could rescind a previously accepted systems or equipment are enabled or substantiating data, studies, means of compliance if the FAA installed, such as in a variable-mode information, or the like to explain determined from service history that the small UAS, then the manufacturer precisely how their proposed means of means of compliance did not meet the should provide information in the compliance achieves the safety level applicable standards for operations over remote pilot operating instructions to that the standards of § 107.115(b)(1) or people. ensure remote pilots in command § 107.120(b)(1) represent. For example, understand any restrictions or (c) Types of Means of Compliance if a manufacturer would achieve limitations associated with the different compliance by conducting testing, then This proposal provides latitude for modes. the manufacturer’s request for the FAA’s people who request acceptance of a acceptance of the means of compliance means of compliance to show Pre-Accepted Means of Compliance should include test procedures that compliance by testing, analyses, One means, but not the only means, outline the test methodology, an inspections, or any combination of the of complying with the proposed analysis to support the equivalency of three. In all proposed means of limitation with regard to the transfer of the testing to the safety level identified compliance cases, the FAA would kinetic energy upon impact would in § 107.115(b)(1) or § 107.120(b)(1), and review data based on the worst-case entail a manufacturer’s calculation of all substantiating data that supports the scenario of a typical failure of the small kinetic energy transferred when a small

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3878 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

unmanned aircraft impacts a person. conditions for both the level flight and For example, a small UAS that weighs This type of means of compliance free-fall scenarios. 1.0 pound and has a maximum impact would not account for impact dynamics The above tests account for speeds a speed of 26 ft/s has a maximum impact or other factors, but consists of using small unmanned aircraft could reach kinetic energy of: 2 only the formula the FAA describes to prior to or during a typical failure mode, KEimpact = 0.0155 * 1.0 * (26) = 10.5 ft- measure kinetic energy upon impact. such as losing power and falling with lbs Use of this formula alone would both a vertical and horizontal speed Similarly, a small UAS that weighs establish the small unmanned aircraft component. The tests do not take into 1.0 pound and has a maximum impact fulfills one of the standards described account small UAS failure modes or speed of 40 ft/s has an impact kinetic above because 11 ft-lbs (for Category 2 pilot actions that would cause the small energy of: operations) and 25 ft-lbs (for Category 3 unmanned aircraft to exceed the speeds KE = 0.0155 * 1.0 * (40) 2 = 24.8 ft- operations) are thresholds that establish impact determined in the previous steps. One lbs low probability of occurrence of a example is a powered descent in which casualty or fatality would exist, Utilizing the formula KEimpact = 0.0155 the ground impact speed of the small 2 respectively. unmanned aircraft exceeds its * w * v , the two tables below provide This pre-accepted means of unpowered free-fall ground impact examples of maximum impact speeds, compliance would be based on the speed. The FAA assumes these types of rounded to whole numbers, associated maximum performance capabilities of a failure modes or pilot actions are not with the impact kinetic energy small unmanned aircraft during a typical, and while possible, have a low thresholds of the different categories typical failure mode. To test a small likelihood of occurring. If a and the weight of the small unmanned unmanned aircraft using this means of manufacturer determines these types of aircraft. One table provides speeds in compliance, a manufacturer would first failure modes or pilot actions could feet per second and the other table determine the maximum forward typically occur and result in speeds provides speeds in miles per hour. airspeed that the small unmanned greater than those determined in the Manufacturers could use these tables aircraft may attain at full power in level previous steps, then the manufacturer when following this proposed means of flight during typical environmental should use higher speeds to determine compliance based on the maximum conditions. The manufacturer would the maximum impact kinetic energy. performance of a small UAS. These use a reliable and accurate airspeed Once the manufacturer determines the tables do not consider any energy- measurement method. For example, a maximum speeds associated with a absorbing characteristics of a small manufacturer could measure the horizontal and vertical impact, the unmanned aircraft that may reduce the maximum speed using a GPS manufacturer would ascertain the amount of energy transferred to a person groundspeed indicator, a radar gun, or highest combination of these speeds that during an impact. tape measure and stop watch. Next, the he or she could achieve as a result of a manufacturer would determine the reasonably foreseeable failure. These TABLE 4—MAXIMUM IMPACT SPEEDS ground impact speed resulting from an conclusions would lead to the (FT/SEC) FOR A GIVEN WEIGHT AND unpowered free-fall from the highest manufacturer’s determination of the IMPACT KINETIC ENERGY 73 altitude the small UAS is capable of maximum impact kinetic energy. In attaining at full power. The ground such a case, the manufacturer should Maximum speed (ft/sec) Weight impact speed could be determined by use the highest combination of (lbs) Category 2 Category 3 performing a drop test from the altitude horizontal and vertical impact speeds (11 ft-lbs) (25 ft-lbs) determined in the previous step using a unless he or she can show the highest reliable and accurate vertical speed combination is not possible in a 1.0 ...... 26 40 measurement method under typical reasonably foreseeable failure and 1.5 ...... 22 33 2.0 ...... 19 28 environmental conditions.71 another combination is therefore more If a manufacturer determines it is 2.5 ...... 17 25 appropriate. The manufacturer should 3.0 ...... 15 23 unreasonable to perform a drop test assess reasonably foreseeable failures from the highest attainable altitude, caused by system or equipment loss of then the manufacturer may perform a function or malfunction as well as those TABLE 5—MAXIMUM IMPACT SPEEDS drop test from a lower altitude sufficient that pilot error could cause. (MPH) FOR A GIVEN WEIGHT AND IM- to determine the small unmanned To calculate the impact kinetic PACT KINETIC ENERGY aircraft free-fall aerodynamic energy, manufacturers would use the characteristics, such as the coefficient of following equation: Maximum speed (mph) 2 Weight drag, to calculate accurately the ground KEimpact = 0.0155 * w * v impact speed from a free-fall from the (lbs) Category 2 Category 3 Where KEimpact is the maximum impact (11 ft-lbs) (25 ft-lbs) highest attainable altitude. The kinetic energy in ft-lbs, w is the weight substantiating data the manufacturer of the small unmanned aircraft 1.0 ...... 18 27 would submit would include sufficient measured in pounds, and v is the 1.5 ...... 15 22 information concerning the maximum impact speed measured in 2.0 ...... 13 19 2.5 ...... 11 17 environmental conditions and the feet per second (ft/s).72 maximum speeds the manufacturer 3.0 ...... 10 16

utilized, as well as any unique test 72 The FAA used the constant 0.0155 in order to This proposed means of compliance allow a person to plug in the weight, rather than 71 Small unmanned aircraft operated under part the mass, of a small unmanned aircraft. Using the does not account for the use or testing 107 may not exceed the speed limitations in part following equations, KE = 1⁄2 *mass*velocity2 and of design features such as parachutes, 107 unless authorized under a Certificate of Waiver mass= weight/gravity, the FAA determined that, in ballistic recovery systems, or other 1 2 or an exemption. See 14 CFR 107.51(a) (stating the English units, KE = ⁄2 * weight/32.17 * velocity deployable devices that, once deployed, ground speed of the small unmanned aircraft may and KE = 1⁄2 * (1/32.17) *weight* velocity2 therefore not exceed 87 knots (100 miles per hour)) and KE = 0.0155 * weight * velocity2. Note that 32.17 § 107.205 (listing § 107.51(a) as a provision that is is the gravitational constant measured in English 73 The values provided in Tables 4 and 5 are subject to waiver). units. based on the factors summarized in footnote 75.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:36 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3879

create drag to reduce the maximum characteristics of the small unmanned cause lacerations under any impact impact speed. The discussion below, aircraft. In this regard, some small UAS scenarios. concerning custom means of manufacturers may seek to use design The more sophisticated or complex compliance, addresses the potential use features such as parachutes or other the materials or design of the small of such design features. deployable devices to establish that a unmanned aircraft, the more As discussed in section IV.B.7.b), if a reduced amount of transferred energy sophisticated the analysis or testing remote pilot in command or other exists for their small unmanned aircraft. should be. If a small unmanned aircraft person modified a small unmanned Such design features would require the aircraft in a manner that increases its FAA’s review to determine whether had propellers made out of soft, flexible maximum speed or weight beyond what they assist in achieving an acceptable material, a manufacturer would likely is identified in the remote pilot means of compliance if the small UAS not need to employ a means of operating instructions, then the small is reliant on the proper functioning of compliance that had used a unmanned aircraft would no longer these features. sophisticated analysis or testing to fulfill the safety level set forth at The means of compliance discussed demonstrate that the exposed rotating § 107.115(b)(1)(i) or § 107.120(b)(1)(i). in the preceding paragraphs should not parts are not capable of causing a To conduct operations over people, a be confused with the Declaration of laceration. However, if a manufacturer manufacturer would have to verify that Compliance discussed in Section chooses to design a small unmanned the modifications satisfied the impact IV.B.7.b), below. The testing or analysis aircraft with exposed propellers that kinetic energy requirements by re- conducted to determine the maximum have sharp leading edges, are made of testing and submitting a new kinetic energy that a small unmanned a rigid material such as a carbon fiber Declaration of Compliance for the aircraft could transfer to a person upon composite and are driven by high torque modified small UAS. impact during a typical failure scenario motors, that manufacturer would likely Custom Means of Compliance would be the actual means of have to perform a more sophisticated Under this proposal, any person may compliance under this rule. The analysis or testing to demonstrate that propose a custom means of compliance Declaration of Compliance would be the the propellers are not capable of showing the small unmanned aircraft ‘‘evidence’’ or ‘‘artifact’’ that is the final lacerating human skin upon impact achieves the safety level the FAA step in demonstrating to the FAA that with a person. proposes in § 107.115(b)(1) or the small UAS is in compliance with Tests and associated data could also this proposed rule. § 107.120(b)(1). At the time of this consist of utilizing exposed rotating proposal, the FAA has not identified a (b) Exposed Rotating Parts propellers at maximum revolutions per means available to determine the actual minute (RPM) and contacting a medium Anyone who seeks approval of a amount of kinetic energy that is that accurately represents human skin to transferred upon impact with a person. means of compliance may establish, using test descriptions, results, and establish the propeller would not Nevertheless, research into this area is lacerate human skin. Similarly, for ongoing. Taking advantage of the data, that a small unmanned aircraft shrouded propellers, such a test would opportunity to employ a customized does not contain any rotating parts that establish that the propellers, while solution that ensures compliance with could cause lacerations of human skin. the safety levels set forth in An industry consensus organization turning, would not lacerate human skin. §§ 107.115(b)(1) and 107.120(b)(1), the could develop a standard for small This test would establish the manufacturer would request the FAA’s unmanned aircraft that have rotating effectiveness of the shroud or covering acceptance of a means of compliance parts that are protected by safety in a dynamic impact scenario. Such a that establishes how the manufacturer features, such as propeller guards. The test may consist of a drop test or test has made this determination. standard could require testing to using a pendulum to show the shrouds The structural configuration, support the determination that the remain effective when the propeller did materials of construction, or other protective safety features accomplish not lacerate the medium that represents design features may function to reduce their intended function of preventing human skin. the amount of the total kinetic energy rotating parts from contacting a person Further, in the exemplar test that is transferred to a person from a during an impact. If the manufacturer described above, the test data small unmanned aircraft during an has tested those safety features and manufacturers or others submit would impact. The FAA’s proposed means of established they would remain intact likely require a description of the skin compliance described above does not during an impact, this could be one media used to determine that the take into account the effect of these means of demonstrating that exposed aspects during an impact with a person, rotating parts would not be capable of shrouded propellers did not lacerate because it assumes that the total kinetic lacerating human skin. If a small human skin. Research that has led to the energy of the small unmanned aircraft unmanned aircraft has rotating parts development of standards and analyses would be transferred to the person upon that are exposed without any protective on the subject of laceration injuries impact. In reality, however, the small safety features, this rule proposes to includes the use of media such as a unmanned aircraft may transfer much permit manufacturers or others to show medium that is 10 percent gelatin,74 a less energy. For example, the presence through testing, analysis or inspection of energy-absorbing materials, or an that the rotating parts are not capable of energy-absorbing protective cage, may lacerating human skin upon impact reduce the transfer of kinetic energy with a person. Manufacturers or others during an impact with a person. Under who seek to obtain approval of a means these circumstances, a manufacturer of compliance could submit testing 74 Nicholas and Welsch, Ballistic Gelatin 2, may wish to provide data showing the results and data that consider the size, Pennsylvania State University Applied Research amount of kinetic energy that is shape, rotational speed, material, and Laboratory, (2004), available at http:// transferred to a person during an orientation of the rotating parts, and www.firearmsid.com/Gelatin/ impact, based on the impact-absorbing concludes that these parts could not Ballistic%20Gelatin%20Report.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3880 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

pig cadaver,75 plasticine,76 and a geometry of the object in a flow field of the use of the previously accepted data medium that may include chamois, the medium. Further, the model may and FEA methodology is appropriate for among other components.77 In this also simulate the dynamic interaction of the small UAS design at issue. rulemaking, the FAA does not endorse the aircraft structure with a validated (3) Inspection any of the aforementioned media as model of a person to calculate the substitutions for human skin. Rather, a amount of kinetic energy that is Manufacturers may also opt to manufacturer or industry consensus transferred. confirm that the small UAS they have group that seeks acceptance from the The person who seeks FAA manufactured would fulfill the safety FAA of a means of compliance for acceptance of the means of compliance level set forth in this proposed rule by establishing exposed rotating parts would need to document the submitting information based on would not lacerate human skin may justification by including any analysis inspection. The FAA would expect a provide test data, analyses, or or validation testing. Such records full description of the inspection and information that employs one of the should establish validity of the the results or conclusions from that above media, or another medium. The aerodynamic modeling as well as any inspection in order to accept the means FAA would review the entire other modeling techniques used in the of compliance. Often, manufacturers submission of information in order to computation of impact kinetic energy may use the inspection option when a determine whether the agency will values. Therefore, in evaluating the small UAS has undergone accept the potential means of proposed means of compliance based on modifications. compliance. analysis, the FAA would expect (a) Impact Kinetic Energy Transfer submission of a full description of the (2) Analysis For purposes of establishing that the process and an explanation of the kinetic energy a small unmanned A person may submit means of precise effect of the aerodynamic or aircraft transfers upon impact does not compliance that consist of analyses to other characteristics that influence the exceed the applicable standard, a establish they have achieved the level of flight envelope in which the small manufacturer may submit records to safety set forth in § 107.115(b)(1) or unmanned aircraft operates. As with all establish the manufacturer has § 107.120(b)(1). In general, the FAA proposed custom means of compliance, performed an inspection verifying that envisions many proposed means of the FAA would expect to evaluate the small UAS adheres to the standard. compliance could employ computer information and data concerning the For example, a small UAS model the modeling analysis to comply with the worst-case scenario of a typical failure, FAA has previously determined fulfills energy transfer standard or the exposed combined with mean data that depicts the standard may continue to do so after rotating parts standard. common scenarios within the aircraft’s a modification when the manufacturer flight envelope. (a) Impact Kinetic Energy Transfer has simply replaced a part on the small A proposed means of compliance may (b) Exposed Rotating Parts unmanned aircraft that weighs less than involve the use of analyses to predict A person may also choose to confirm the original part. The manufacturer the amount of kinetic energy transferred that exposed rotating parts on the small would provide justification to verify the upon impact with a person. For unmanned aircraft they have new part does not alter the small example, a person who submits a means manufactured would not lacerate unmanned aircraft such that it would of compliance for acceptance may seek human skin by submitting analysis. increase the kinetic energy the small to incorporate the aerodynamic effects Such analysis could include verified unmanned aircraft transfers upon (including drag) of the small unmanned data from relatable studies that models impact. In this example, the aircraft in a dynamic model of impact the small unmanned aircraft’s propellers manufacturer would present with a person. The person could utilize at a maximum RPM, and the material information to establish that the overall computational fluid dynamics (CFD) choice of the propeller and strength weight and structure of the small and finite element modeling (FEM) into characteristics of an average human’s unmanned aircraft did not change to the simulation. Such a simulation skin in an FEM simulation,79 and render it out of compliance with the would analyze the aerodynamic applicable standard regarding energy 78 performs a finite element analysis properties of the aircraft. The model (FEA) 80 to determine the laceration transfer. would calculate the interaction of the characteristics of the propeller. In such (b) Exposed Rotating Parts a case, the FAA would expect the 75 In addition, a manufacturer’s design Sullivan et al, The Pig as a Model for Human justification related to this method to Wound Healing, The International Journal of Tissue with propeller blade guards to fulfill the Repair and Regeneration (2001); Simon and explain the rationale for concluding that prohibition on exposed rotating parts Maibach, The Pig as an Experimental Animal Model may lend itself to a verification of the of Percutaneous Permeation in Man: Qualitative 79 FEM, as used in the example above, refers to and Quantitative Observations An Overview, Skin the utilization of multi-dimensional model of an means of compliance by way of Pharmacology and Physiology 13.5 at 229–34 object that subdivides the model into smaller inspection. For example, a manufacturer (2000). components with attached algebraic equations to with a previously accepted means of 76 Ro¨hrich et al, Skin Injury Model Classification help represent complex geometry and the dynamics compliance who wishes to replace or Based on Shape Vector Analysis, BMC Medical associated to such geometry during simulated Imaging (2012), available at https:// stresses or impacts. upgrade propellers could do so with a www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3599354/. 80 FEA, as used in this example, is a numerical propeller design of the same size, fit and 77 Bir, et al., Skin Penetration Surrogate for the analysis of a system to simulate the impact dynamic weight that has fulfilled the previously Evaluation of Less Lethal Kinetic Energy Munitions, reaction when developed with the material and accepted means of compliance, and thus 220 Forensic Science International 126, 127 (2012), design characteristics of the small unmanned available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ aircraft and surrounding objects that are relevant to demonstrate compliance through article/pii/S0379073812000801?via%3Dihub. the analysis. Manufacturers may use FEA in inspection means and not need to retest 78 CFD, as used in the example above, refers to computer modeling by using boundary value or perform another analysis. When the a simulation that incorporates Navier-Stokes problems for partial differential equations and manufacturer has completed previous equations in a mathematical and computational variation methods from calculus disparities to program that utilizes a multi-dimensional model of approximate a solution using algebraic equations tests the FAA had verified demonstrated an object. Constantin and Fioas. Navier-Stokes attached to small, subdivided pieces of the model the effectiveness of blade guards, the Equations. Univ. of Chicago (1988). and by minimizing an associated error function. Administrator may presume

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3881

replacement of propellers would not configuration in which the small UAS is component parts, to demonstrate the have an effect on the function of the operated, then the manufacturer must small UAS satisfies the standard for guard to prevent laceration. submit to the FAA a Declaration of Category 2 or 3 operations. Compliance that includes each category 6. Aircraft with Variable Modes and A person who builds a small UAS for which the manufacturer has tested or Configurations from parts not provided as a kit would analyzed the small UAS. also be a manufacturer under this Although this rule proposes three The FAA seeks comment on the need proposal. For example, anyone may distinct categories of operations over for means of compliance that address purchase the component parts of a small people, the FAA proposes to allow incorporation of software, including UAS separately and build small UAS small UAS to be configured to conduct software updates or changes, to enable themselves. The FAA would consider operations within more than one performance limitations, variable such a person to be a manufacturer, and category. For example, an aircraft may modes, or variable configurations to would require submission of a be designed in such a way that it would meet the safety level proposed in this Declaration of Compliance regarding the be qualified to conduct Category 2 rule. The FAA also seeks comment on eligibility of the small UAS to conduct operations in one mode or how the FAA should review an Category 2 or 3 operations. configuration, and Category 3 operations acceptable means of compliance for the A manufacturer would also be a in another mode or configuration. impact kinetic energy or exposed person who modifies a small UAS Alternatively, a small UAS could meet rotating parts safety thresholds to covered under an existing Declaration of the requirements to operate over people address the appropriateness of using Compliance to a condition that is non- in one mode or configuration, but not in software to limit or establish the small compliant with the original declaration. another. For example, an aircraft could UAS performance to meet the safety ‘‘Non-compliant’’ means the small UAS operate within the restrictions of an level proposed in this rule. has been altered such that it no longer operation over people, but could also matches the configuration that was operate using higher performance 7. Declaring Compliance originally declared. Any person who characteristics when not operating over The FAA agrees with the ARC makes this kind of a change would be people. recommendation that self-certification is To transition between various modes the appropriate method for required to submit a new Declaration of or configurations, a manufacturer may manufacturers to declare compliance Compliance for the modified choose to use a variety of methods, such with a performance standard. Self- configuration(s) prior to conducting as software-enabled performance certification, combined with the FAA’s operations over people within that limitations including altitude or determination that the means of category. Not all modifications would groundspeed limitations, hardware compliance the manufacturer has used cause a previously determined small configurations, or any combination is acceptable, will ensure the small UAS UAS to become non-compliant, thereof. Using different modes or meets the appropriate safety level the however. A manufacturer may include a configurations, a manufacturer could FAA proposes in this rule. In addition, list of acceptable modifications in the design a small UAS to meet the the FAA’s other proposed measures for remote pilot operating instructions to performance capabilities of multiple overseeing manufacturers, as described ensure that a remote pilot in command categories of operations over people. in section IV.B.12, below, would result who may replace parts or otherwise Additionally, a manufacturer could in a level of oversight and modify the small UAS is aware of which design a small UAS that has removable accountability the FAA has determined modifications would allow it to remain propeller guards or cages that would is appropriate for manufacturers of compliant in the category to which need to be installed for operations over small UAS that certify eligibility to compliance has been declared. people but could be removed when not operate over people in accordance with Additionally, a manufacturer may be operating over people. this proposed rule. a person who modifies a small UAS to The design of a small UAS should not be compliant with one or more permit a remote pilot to change the (a) Applicability to Manufacturers categories of operations over people. For mode or configuration inadvertently. In this proposed rule, the FAA would example, this would include a person Regardless of whether the method of consider a manufacturer to be any who modifies a small UAS not transitioning between various modes or person or entity that designs, produces, previously eligible to conduct configurations involves software or or modifies a small UAS that is eligible operations over people to a small UAS control station selections, a change of to operate over people within the that is eligible to conduct Category 2 or mode or configuration must result only United States under part 107. The FAA 3 operations over people. Similarly, a from a deliberate action on the part of expects the most common form of person who modifies a small UAS that the remote pilot in command. For manufacturer under this proposed rule was previously qualified to conduct example, a remote pilot in command would be an entity that produces and only Category 2 operations so that it could be required to enter a passcode sells a complete and operable small may now conduct only Category 3 that would intentionally alter the mode UAS. operations, by, for example, increasing of operation, thereby switching the Additionally, an entity that sells a kit the weight of the small unmanned category of operation for the aircraft. that contains all the components and aircraft, would be a manufacturer. The To test a small UAS with multiple parts from which to build an operable manufacturer identified on the most modes or configurations, a manufacturer small UAS would be considered a recent FAA-accepted Declaration of should test the small UAS in the mode manufacturer. The kit would contain all Compliance would not carry the or configuration that allows the small the components necessary to build the responsibility for the new configuration UAS to meet the requirements for the small UAS and would not require the of the small UAS that is the subject of category to which a manufacturer owner to purchase any additional the Declaration. Instead, the person who wishes to declare compliance. If a small materials to meet the requirements of made the modification assumes the role UAS could meet the requirements for this proposed rule. A kit manufacturer of the manufacturer. A person making operations in both Category 2 and would be required to test the assembled, such modifications and still seeking to Category 3 based on the mode or completed small UAS, rather than its operate over people would have to first

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3882 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

submit a new Declaration of non-compliant with proposed subpart (2) Declaring Compliance for Multiple Compliance. D, (2) would correct any safety defects Small UAS With the Same Make and The FAA would not consider a person the FAA identified, and (3) would allow Model performing maintenance on a small the Administrator to inspect its UAS, including replacement of facilities, technical data, and any The FAA understands that components and parts in accordance manufactured small UAS and witness manufacturers who are producing the with the manufacturer’s maintenance or any tests necessary to determine same make and model of small UAS on operating instructions, to be a compliance with this subpart. As a large scale may not wish to perform manufacturer as long as the explained below in section IV.B.7.b)(4), individual unit testing to demonstrate maintenance or replacement does not a manufacturer would be permitted to that each small UAS meets the alter the configuration or characteristics label its small UAS for Category 2 or 3 requirements of this proposal. The FAA of the small UAS such that it no longer operations after it receives notification would encourage these manufacturers to meets its Declaration of Compliance. As of acceptance of its Declaration of establish and maintain a production a result, such a person would not need Compliance from the FAA. quality system and design configuration to submit a new Declaration of control system to provide for consistent Compliance. For example, if a (1) Contents of Declaration of repeatability. Such a system would manufacturer provides replacement Compliance provide increased confirmation that propellers with instructions on how to each individual small UAS meets the The proposed Declaration of install them, someone could install the requirements of the category of Compliance would be an electronic parts in accordance with the operations for which the manufacturer form available on the FAA’s website. A manufacturer’s instructions. If the declared compliance, so that a manufacturer, however, does not manufacturer interested in labeling a manufacturer could avoid testing every provide or identify propellers in the small UAS as eligible for Category 2 or unit it constructed. If a manufacturer remote pilot operating instructions with 3 operations over people would submit utilizes a quality assurance system, the specific maintenance instructions, the a Declaration of Compliance to the FAA. FAA would remain confident that each owner could inadvertently become a A completed Declaration of Compliance unit subsequently manufactured would manufacturer by virtue of replacing would include information the comply with the proposed impact those propellers with different Administrator would require for both kinetic energy, exposed rotating parts, replacement parts. determining that a small UAS complied and safety defects standards. The FAA applies the term with the regulation and tracking those manufacturer as described in this models of small UAS that were declared (3) Multiple Categories of Operation compliant with the regulation. A section for the purposes of proposed This proposal would also allow a subpart D of part 107 only. For example, manufacturer would declare compliance with the safety level established by the manufacturer to design a small UAS that a UAS manufacturer that holds a type could meet the performance certificate (TC) or production certificate impact kinetic energy and the exposed rotating parts standards and include the requirements of multiple categories of (PC) would not be a manufacturer under operations over people. If a this proposal because the regulatory following information: manufacturer conducts testing or oversight for a TC/PC holder is codified • Means of compliance used, engages in analysis or inspection to at 14 CFR part 21. Rather, this • Name of the manufacturer, determine a small UAS could meet the discussion applies only to • Physical address of the manufacturer, requirements for operations in both manufacturers of non-type-certificated • Email address of the manufacturer, Category 2 and Category 3 in the or non-production-certificated small • Small UAS make and model appropriate modes or configurations, UAS who declare compliance with the • Serial number or range of serial numbers the small UAS manufacturer would standards of either Category 2 or for the small unmanned aircraft (open-ended need to submit only one Declaration of Category 3 for operations over people. are permitted), and • Whether the Declaration of Compliance Compliance to the FAA. On that (b) Declarations of Compliance was an initial or an amended Declaration of Declaration of Compliance, the For a small UAS to be eligible to Compliance. manufacturer would identify the conduct Category 2 or 3 operations over categories of operation for which it people, this proposed rule would In the event a manufacturer is re- determined the small UAS was require a manufacturer to declare submitting the Declaration of compliant, and the means of compliance compliance with the impact kinetic Compliance, the manufacturer would be used for each category. energy and exposed rotating parts required to include the reason for such re-submittal. For example, the re- (4) FAA Acceptance of Declaration of standards applicable to aircraft eligible Compliance to conduct Category 2 or 3 operations submittal could be to correct a safety demonstrated through an FAA-accepted defect, or it could be to correct the This proposed rule would require a means of compliance. The manufacturer misspelling of the manufacturer’s name manufacturer to provide information on would do this by submitting a or an incorrect address. its Declaration of Compliance regarding Declaration of Compliance via an The FAA would make information whether it has used an FAA-accepted electronic form available on the FAA’s contained in Declarations of means of compliance or a custom means website. For Category 1 operations, Compliance publicly available. By of compliance the FAA has not yet manufacturers would not be required to posting the Declarations or otherwise accepted. A manufacturer would label submit a Declaration of Compliance. making the information in the its small UAS for Category 2 or 3 By submitting a Declaration of Declarations publicly available, the FAA operations once it receives notification Compliance, a manufacturer would also and the public would be able to of acceptance of its Declaration of certify that it (1) established and determine which make and model of Compliance from the FAA. Once the maintained a process to notify owners of small UAS are eligible to conduct FAA accepts a Declaration of small UAS and the FAA of any unsafe Category 2 and 3 operations over Compliance, the FAA would make the conditions that render those small UAS people. Declaration of Compliance, or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3883

information from the Declaration, proposing new procedural rules, rescinded the Declaration of publicly available. described below, to govern any action to Compliance. If a manufacturer uses a custom rescind a Declaration of Compliance. If the FAA rescinds a Declaration of means of compliance that the FAA has Therefore, the FAA’s rules under 14 Compliance as a result of a safety issue, not yet accepted, the FAA must review CFR part 13 would not apply. a manufacturer would be able to modify and accept the means of compliance the small UAS such that the safety issue before it accepts the Declaration of (a) Notification of Safety Issues is resolved, at which point the Compliance. This could result in The FAA proposes in § 107.135(c) that manufacturer could submit a new additional review time prior to it would notify the manufacturer when Declaration of Compliance. The FAA acceptance of the Declaration of the FAA becomes aware of a safety issue would review the new Declaration of Compliance. The FAA would notify the that could affect a manufacturer’s Compliance and notify the manufacturer manufacturer upon its decision Declaration of Compliance, either of whether the FAA has deemed it regarding acceptance of the custom because the small unmanned aircraft is acceptable. means of compliance and Declaration of not compliant with the exposed rotating (d) Petition for Reconsideration of a Compliance. parts or kinetic energy standards, or Rescission of a Declaration of (5) Modifying a Small UAS and because the small UAS has a safety Compliance defect as described in section IV.B.11. Resubmitting a Declaration of Once a Declaration of Compliance is (a). If a safety issue arises in which the Compliance rescinded, a manufacturer would have small UAS no longer fulfills the safety Any person who modifies a small the opportunity to petition the FAA for level set forth in this proposed rule, UAS in a way that could affect the reconsideration. A manufacturer seeking either by way of a safety defect, eligibility of the small UAS to operate reconsideration under this rule must material, component, or feature on the over people under Category 2 or petition the FAA within 60 days of the small UAS, then the manufacturer must Category 3 of this proposed rule would date of issuance of the notice of notify the FAA. At that point, the be required to submit a new Declaration rescission. The petition would have to of Compliance before the small UAS manufacturer would have the show: (1) The lack of a material fact in could be operated over people. This opportunity to discuss the potential the original response to the notification requirement would not apply to those safety issue with the FAA. As a result of the safety issue, and address why that situations in which an individual of such a discussion, the FAA may fact was not present in the original performs a modification that the determine that a safety issue does not response; (2) an important factual error manufacturer identifies in the remote actually exist, that the manufacturer has existed in the decision to rescind the pilot operating instructions as an incorporated an adequate mitigation to Declaration of Compliance; or (3) the allowable change or modification for address and correct the safety issue, or FAA did not correctly interpret a law, that small UAS, as discussed in section that a safety issue still exists. regulation, or precedent. The FAA IV.B.9. When a manufacturer seeks to (b) Proposed Rescission of a Declaration would consider this petition and issue submit a Declaration of Compliance for of Compliance a final agency decision either affirming a small UAS that was not previously or withdrawing the rescission of the eligible for operations over people, If the FAA determines, as a result of Declaration of Compliance. A however, the FAA would undertake the the discussion described above, that a manufacturer could appeal the final same review process to verify the small safety issue remains unaddressed, the agency decision as provided in 49 UAS fulfills the performance-based FAA would send the manufacturer a U.S.C. 46110. notice of proposed rescission of a standards described previously. (e) Emergency Rescission of a The requirement to submit a new Declaration of Compliance. The notice Declaration of Compliance Declaration of Compliance would would set forth the agency’s basis for ensure any small UAS operated under the proposed rescission and provide the Prior to rescission of a Declaration of this framework meets the applicable manufacturer 10 business days to Compliance, the FAA would typically requirements for operations over people. submit evidentiary information to refute initiate the safety issue notification In this way, the FAA would have the the proposed notice of rescission. process with the manufacturer as ability to track the responsible (c) Notice of Rescission of a Declaration discussed previously. However, if the manufacturer as well as any of Compliance Administrator determines an emergency modifications that the small UAS may exists and safety of persons on the undergo during its lifetime. For these After receiving a proposed notice of ground requires an immediate rescission reasons, the FAA would require any rescission, a manufacturer may provide of a Declaration of Compliance, the FAA person who modifies a previously information demonstrating the small may exercise its authority under 49 declared small UAS to take on the UAS meets the requirements of this part U.S.C. 46105(c) 81 to issue an emergency responsibilities of a manufacturer and within 10 business days. If a order rescinding a Declaration of submit a new Declaration of Compliance manufacturer fails to establish that a Compliance. Under these if the modification took the small UAS safety issue does not exist, or if the circumstances, rescission would go into outside the configuration originally manufacturer fails to respond within 10 effect immediately, prior to the FAA declared. business days, the FAA would issue a initiating the notification process or the notice rescinding the Declaration of rescission procedures described above. (6) Rescission Process Compliance. At this point, the FAA The order would remain in effect until Under this proposed rule, the FAA would publish this rescission. The FAA the basis for issuing the order no longer would rescind a manufacturer’s would also specify on its website for Declaration of Compliance if the agency which category the Declaration of 81 When the Administrator determines that an becomes aware that a small UAS for Compliance has been rescinded. Remote emergency exists related to safety in air commerce pilots in command would not be and requires immediate action, the Administrator which a manufacturer has declared may issue an immediately effective order to meet compliance is no longer qualified for permitted to operate the particular small the emergency, with or without notice. 49 U.S.C. operations over people. The FAA is UAS over people if the FAA has 46105(c).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3884 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

exists. The emergency order would be For a Declaration of Compliance that manufacturer. This requirement would considered a final agency decision; as uses a custom means of compliance that apply to anyone who is a manufacturer such, a manufacturer may appeal the requires direct FAA review, a for the purposes of this proposed rule, decision as provided in 49 U.S.C. 46110 manufacturer would keep both the as described above in section (IV.B.7.(a). following the issuance of the order. records for its Declaration of In addition, the manufacturer would be Compliance and its custom means of required to keep the instructions up-to- 8. Recordkeeping Requirements compliance, as discussed above. The date to account for any changes it makes This proposed rule would require FAA may require access to that to an aircraft over time. manufacturers maintain small UAS information in several types of Specifically, the FAA proposes in records related to their Declarations of situations. For example, if the FAA §§ 107.115(b)(3) and 107.120(b)(3) that Compliance for a minimum of two years rescinded a Declaration of Compliance, the remote pilot operating instructions after ceasing production. The FAA also it may request the original set of include, at a minimum, the following proposes to require manufacturers to substantiating data from a manufacturer information: retain the substantiating data for a if a manufacturer elects to correct the • General information, including system custom means of compliance for as long safety issue and submit a new description and system limitations, and the as the means of compliance remains Declaration of Compliance for the same category or categories of operations over accepted. In the event of a safety defect, small UAS. Upon resubmittal, the FAA people for which the manufacturer of the or if the FAA initiated an action against would likely require all substantiating small UAS has declared compliance; • If modifications of the small UAS can a manufacturer, this information would data from prior to the identification of the safety issue, as well as supporting occur, those modifications the manufacturer be critical to determine the cause, scope, has determined do not bring the small UAS and severity of the defect or infraction. data after anyone had made out of compliance with the category declared; The FAA requests comment on the modifications. Additionally, if a and appropriateness of this proposed manufacturer submitted a Declaration of • If the small UAS has variable modes or amount of time for record retention. Compliance and identified a custom configurations, information regarding those modes or configurations. For a Declaration of Compliance that means of compliance the FAA had not uses an accepted means of compliance, previously accepted, the FAA would Existing regulations require remote the manufacturer would keep require the manufacturer to submit pilots to conduct a preflight inspection substantiating data that includes a substantiating data to facilitate the and ensure that the small UAS is in a description of the method used to FAA’s review of the means of condition for safe operation.83 These compliance. demonstrate compliance as well as the existing regulations would continue to results. Specifically, if the manufacturer 9. Remote Pilot Operating Instructions apply to operations over people established compliance by testing, the conducted under the terms of this In order to operate a small UAS safely proposed rule. The additional manufacturer would retain detailed over people, the remote pilot in information on the test method and the information contained in the remote command would be responsible for pilot operating instructions would serve results used to demonstrate the small knowing what category of operations his to inform a remote pilot in command of UAS meets the applicable impact or her small UAS is eligible to conduct, the characteristics of the small UAS, kinetic energy and exposed rotating and what technical and operational which in turn would assist the remote parts standards. limitations apply to the operations. pilot in conducting his or her preflight For a custom means of compliance Accordingly, the FAA proposes to check and ensuring the small UAS is in submitted independently of a require manufacturers to provide remote a condition for safe operation prior to Declaration of Compliance, the pilot operating instructions with submitter would keep: conducting a Category 2 or 3 operation. product-specific information related to Manufacturer-required components • operations over people that would occur Test procedures that outline the test that make up the small UAS must be in Category 2 or Category 3. methodology (if the manufacturer established listed in the remote pilot operating This proposed requirement is compliance by testing); instructions to help the remote pilot • An analysis or record of inspection to consistent with the ARC’s establish the equivalency of the means of recommendation. Specifically, the ARC ensure that all components of the small compliance to the safety level identified in recommended small UAS manufacturers UAS are present. This is necessary this proposal; and provide operating manuals to the • Substantiating data that supports the test 83 The remote pilot in command must check the operators of the small UAS that would small UAS to ensure it is in a condition for safe (if applicable), methods, results and include operating instructions for conclusions. operation prior to each flight. 14 CFR 107.15(a). Category 2 and 3 operations.82 The ARC Further, no person may continue flight of the small This information would likely include did not provide any information unmanned aircraft when he or she knows or has reason to know that the small UAS is no longer in details on the method and the results regarding the contents of the operating a condition for safe operation. § 107.15(b). Section the submitter used to demonstrate the manual, leaving that determination to 107.49(a) requires that, prior to flight, the remote small unmanned aircraft meets the future voluntary consensus standards. pilot in command must assess the operating applicable impact kinetic energy and The ARC recommended the FAA environment, considering risks to persons and require the operator to comply with the property in the immediate vicinity both on the exposed rotating parts standards. surface and in the air. This assessment must Substantiating data could include operating manual. include becoming aware of: (1) Local weather detailed information on whether the This rule proposes to require conditions; (2) local airspace and any flight testing or analysis was done consistent manufacturers to provide operating restrictions; (3) the location of persons and property instructions upon sale, transfer, or use on the surface; and (4) other ground hazards. The with accepted methods used by the preflight assessment must also include verification medical industry, consumer safety of the aircraft by someone other than the that all control links between the ground control groups, or other peer-reviewed test station and the small unmanned aircraft are methods. Such information should also 82 ARC Report at 7–8. The FAA uses the term working properly. 14 CFR 107.49(c). Finally, ‘‘remote pilot operating instructions’’ in this § 107.49 requires that, if the small UAS is powered, indicate whether the proposed means of proposal in lieu of the ARC’s suggested term of the remote pilot in command must ensure that there compliance required unreasonable skill ‘‘operating manual,’’ to avoid confusion with is enough available power for the small UAS to or mitigation to meet the requirements. manned aircraft flight manuals. operate for the intended operational time.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3885

because, if a small UAS is missing any The same principle would apply a small UAS, make them available components, the small UAS would not concerning the presence of exposed electronically, or provide them in some comply with the category of operations rotating parts. Therefore, should a other way. Manufacturers with products over people for which the manufacturer person make a modification that is not currently on the market would be free declared compliance. A manufacturer listed in the remote pilot operating to choose whether to incorporate the must also clarify the category or instructions, the FAA would consider instructions into existing materials, or categories of operations over people for that person as the new manufacturer of they could create a new set of which the small UAS is eligible. the small UAS, and would require instructions that are specific to The FAA proposes requiring in compliance with manufacturer operations over people. For products in §§ 107.115(b)(3)(ii) and 107.120(b)(3)(ii) requirements to operate the aircraft over production before this rule is finalized that a manufacturer include in the people. but subsequently declared to be in remote pilot operating instructions all The remote pilot operating compliance and eligible for operations modifications the manufacturer has instructions must also state whether the over people, the manufacturer would be determined would not change the small UAS has modifications that will responsible for developing remote pilot ability of the small UAS to meet the change the determination of the small operating instructions and making them requirements for the category of UAS fulfilling the standard for the available to remote pilots and owners. operation for which the manufacturer category of operation the small UAS is The FAA would not prescribe the declared compliance. The FAA eligible to conduct. For example, a method for making the instructions acknowledges that modification of a manufacturer may add an available, but acknowledges publishing small UAS is a routine event for some interchangeable camera to the small them online would be an efficient and remote pilots. Some modifications may unmanned aircraft that would affect the effective way. not change the flight characteristics of small unmanned aircraft’s eligibility for Although the FAA does not propose the small unmanned aircraft; for operating over people in Category 2 or requiring the remote pilot operating example, replacing one camera with 3 operations.84 By this proposed rule, instructions to contain information in another that has the same weight and the FAA would require the addition to the items enumerated above, size but better optics. However, manufacturer to inform remote pilots of the FAA encourages small UAS changing small unmanned aircraft the effect of such options to the extent manufacturers to provide additional components such as propellers or other the exercise of those options may affect operational information to remote articles necessary for flight may change compliance with the applicable pilots. Examples of such information the flight characteristics of the small standards. Without this information, a appear in Advisory Circular 107–2, unmanned aircraft, and could person could change the flight which accompanies this NPRM. potentially change the small UAS characteristics of the small unmanned 10. Labeling Requirements eligibility to conduct operations over aircraft and make it non-compliant with people. Category 2 or 3 requirements. The FAA proposes to require that The modifications described in For a small UAS that has variable manufacturers label any small proposed §§ 107.115(b)(3)(ii) and modes or configurations, the FAA unmanned aircraft that are qualified for 107.120(b)(3)(ii) could consist of adding would require a manufacturer to Category 2 or 3 operations over people. or exchanging products and evaluating provide instructions on how to verify Such labeling would assist the FAA in them based on characteristics such as what mode or configuration the small its oversight role by providing a simple weight, size and shape. For example, a UAS is in, and how to switch between and efficient way to determine whether manufacturer could list certain makes modes or configurations. This an operation is consistent with this and models of payload cameras, or information would facilitate a remote proposal. In addition, it would provide provide weight and size limits along pilot’s verification that his or her small notice to the remote pilot of which with a generic shape description. A UAS is in the correct mode or category of operations he or she is remote pilot would then be able to configuration to conduct a certain eligible to conduct using that aircraft. In its report, the ARC recommended switch out any payload cameras that category of operations over people. a manufacturer of a small UAS ‘‘label meet the described parameters and Similarly, if a remote pilot chooses to the product or product retail packaging continue to operate over people. The operate in a different category of in accordance with industry consensus manufacturer would have to ensure, operations over people, or in a mode or standards,’’ 85 and that the operator be through an accepted means of configuration that is not permitted for responsible for knowing the category in compliance, that the small UAS with operations over people but is permitted which his or her small UAS qualifies to the included modifications would under part 107, he or she could consult operate. Therefore, the operator would remain in compliance with the the remote pilot operating instructions presumably know which operating performance-based requirements for the to determine how to change the mode or limitations he or she must follow. The applicable categories of operations. If a configuration to the desired settings. person modified a small UAS in a The FAA would not require the proposed labeling requirement would manner not included in the remote pilot manufacturer to provide remote pilot assist the FAA in its oversight role operating instructions, the small UAS operating instructions in a particular because it provides an efficient means may no longer comply with its format. For example, a manufacturer for an inspector to evaluate whether an associated Declaration of Compliance. could choose to provide the operating operation is consistent with the category This is because if a person changed instructions as part of the packaging of or categories of operation the small UAS anything related to design, performance, may conduct. Because Category 3 coefficient of drag, or energy-absorbing 84 As discussed in section IV.B.5. (b), operations would entail unique materials, the original test results or manufacturers must submit a declaration of operating limitations, the label on small analyses concerning the transfer of compliance that identifies a means of compliance unmanned aircraft eligible to conduct impact kinetic energy could change, and the FAA has accepted. When verification of Category 3 operations would indicate to compliance assumes the presence of a component such alteration could change the affixed to the aircraft, the FAA must receive the remote pilot that he or she must category of operations or cause the small information concerning this because it would likely UAS to exceed the applicable standard. affect the mass of the small unmanned aircraft. 85 ARC Report at 10.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3886 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

adhere to the applicable operating In addition to the proposed small UAS that increases the likelihood limitations.86 requirement that a manufacturer label that the small UAS could cause a The FAA is not proposing a specific the aircraft, the FAA also proposes casualty or fatality to a person during an location for label placement due to the requiring a remote pilot ensure his or operation over people. Under this numerous design variations of small her small unmanned aircraft is properly proposal, a safety defect would cause a unmanned aircraft. In the case of very labeled before conducting any small UAS to exceed a low probability small unmanned aircraft, manufacturers operations over people. A clear and of causing a casualty (Category 2) or a may need to exercise creativity in legible label will enable a remote pilot, fatality (Category 3) to a person during determining the location best suited to an inspector, or a member of the public an operation over people. For example, satisfying the proposed labeling to identify the types of operations a exposed wires or hot surfaces on a small requirement. Labeling a non-critical small UAS may conduct. If a label unmanned aircraft could cause surface would likely prevent wear and degrades such that it is no longer legible electrocution or burns to a person upon removal during normal operations. or attached to the aircraft, the remote impact. Many small unmanned aircraft The FAA declines to propose a pilot is responsible for providing a new utilize lithium polymer or lithium-ion prescriptive labeling requirement that label before operating over people. The batteries as the primary energy source; specifies exactly how a manufacturer proposed labeling requirement would damaged or defective batteries could must label an aircraft, what size font to apply regardless of whether a person cause casualties from battery fires or use, and so on. Due to the large variety obtains a small UAS directly from a explosions. Sharp edges or projections of small UAS models that exist, such a manufacturer or as a subsequent on a small unmanned aircraft could prescriptive requirement would be transfer. No pilot would be able to cause lacerations or puncture wounds as unnecessarily limiting for operate the small UAS over people a result of an impact with a person. As manufacturers. Instead, a manufacturer unless he or she verifies the label meets small UAS designs evolve over time, could label the aircraft by any means as the requirements of this rule. potentially hazardous features or long as the label is in English, legible, 11. Manufacturer Accountability characteristics, unknown at the present prominent, and permanently affixed to time, could emerge. the aircraft. For example, a After a manufacturer has declared that The FAA would identify safety manufacturer could use the following a specific small UAS fulfills the defects through a variety of means. The labels: ‘‘Category 2’’, ‘‘Category 3’’, ‘‘Cat. standard of a particular category, this FAA may receive consumer complaints, 2’’, or ‘‘Cat. 3’’. proposal would require the Given that a small UAS could be manufacturer to monitor the small UAS industry safety bulletins, or an qualified to conduct more than one to ensure it complies with the individual manufacturer’s notification category of operations, the FAA requirements of this subpart. that a safety defect has arisen. Once the proposes requiring a manufacturer label Specifically, a manufacturer should FAA has formally identified a safety the small UAS with each category of monitor the validity of the means of defect, it would notify the manufacturer operations the small UAS is qualified to compliance used to ensure the of the defect. The manufacturer would conduct. For example, a small UAS continued fulfillment of the safety level have an opportunity to respond by qualified to conduct Category 2 the standards at §§ 107.115(b)(1) and either correcting the defect or operations may also be qualified to 107.120(b)(1) establish. The demonstrating the small UAS does not conduct Category 3 operations. The manufacturer should also track the contain any materials, components, or manufacturer would label such a small construction, related safety analysis, features that increase the probability of UAS with each category, as follows: and service history to ensure they do casualty or fatality for the category of ‘‘Cat. 2, 3’’ or ‘‘Category 2, 3’’. The label not reveal any hazardous conditions or operations for which the manufacturer could be painted onto, etched into, or safety defects that could increase the declared the small UAS as compliant. If affixed to the aircraft by some other risk of a small UAS operation over the manufacturer is unable to permanent means. people. Moreover, the manufacturer has demonstrate the small UAS does not Some small UAS manufactured prior a continuing obligation to ensure that contain any safety defects, the FAA may to final publication of this rule may the remote pilot operating instructions initiate proceedings to rescind the qualify for a category of operations over satisfy the regulatory requirements. To manufacturer’s Declaration of people. In a situation in which a satisfy these obligations, a manufacturer Compliance. manufacturer declared a previously may have to monitor its manufacturing As an ongoing requirement, existing make/model of small UAS processes, small UAS operational usage, manufacturers would be responsible for eligible for Category 2 or 3 operations and collection of accident and incident correcting any safety defects they and has provided remote pilot operating data. Manufacturer monitoring could identify after manufacturing the small instructions as described in section also include information that owners UAS, to ensure continued qualification IV.B.9., the remote pilot could then and operators of the small UAS provide. for Category 2 or 3 operations. In the label that small unmanned aircraft in Should the FAA identify a safety issue event the FAA rescinds a Declaration of accordance with the Declaration of that warrants review of a manufacturer’s Compliance, no small UAS covered by Compliance. data, records, or facilities, a that declaration could operate over manufacturer would be required to grant people. The small UAS could resume 86 The labeling requirement this rule proposes is such access. operations only after the FAA reinstates not the sole means by which a remote pilot in acceptance of the Declaration of command will be aware of the operating limitations (a) Safety Defects Compliance, accepts an amended applicable to Category 3 operations. Remote pilots Declaration of Compliance, or accepts a in command must maintain awareness of updated The FAA proposes to require that a regulations, as required by proposed §§ 107.73(a) manufacturer build a small UAS new Declaration of Compliance that and 107.74(a) in this rule. As a result, initial qualified to conduct Category 2 or 3 applies to that small UAS. Either the knowledge testing and recurrent training operations such that it does not contain original or a subsequent manufacturer implemented after the effective date of a final rule could submit a new Declaration of implementing this proposed rule would include any safety defects. For the purposes of operations over people as a subject area on both the this proposal, a safety defect refers to a Compliance in accordance with this test and training. material, component, or feature on a proposed rule.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3887

The FAA would publish any final public and the FAA if the manufacturer potentially non-compliant conditions. rescission of a Declaration of identifies an issue with its small UAS In this regard, the FAA encourages Compliance on the FAA website, and that would render the small UAS manufacturers to design and utilize a may publish notification of the safety ineligible for operations over people. system that would facilitate defect in the Federal Register as a Reporting a safety defect to the FAA communication between the Notice of Availability. These actions would not automatically result in the manufacturer and the owners of the would serve two purposes: First, to rescission of a Declaration of small UAS and would successfully notify remote pilots that the identified Compliance. The FAA would evaluate inform members of the public at large. aircraft are no longer safe to conduct the report and correspond with a In general, the FAA contends potential operations over people and second, to manufacturer to determine whether consumers and the public have an put manufacturers on notice not to taking corrective action or rescission important interest in being aware that incorporate the material, component, or would be appropriate. proximity to a particular small feature into any future small UAS a A manufacturer must notify the FAA unmanned aircraft may pose an undue manufacturer wishes to qualify for of any safety issues it identifies. hazard. Category 2 or 3 operations over people Reporting such issues would both assist (c) Falsification without appropriate mitigations. The the FAA in discovering product hazards FAA notes the rescission of a and identifying risks of injury the FAA As defined in this proposal, a Declaration of Compliance would not could address through direct Declaration of Compliance would be a render a small UAS inoperable, but communication with manufacturers, record submitted by a manufacturer for rather only unsafe for operations over publication of Notices of Availability in a small UAS that certifies the small UAS people. The FAA seeks comment on the Federal Register, or education. is eligible for operations pursuant to whether this process provides sufficient Manufacturers’ reporting would provide Category 2 or Category 3 under subpart opportunity for notice and comment for a timely and effective source of D of this part. Records are subject to manufacturers aside from those whose information about small UAS because compliance with the falsification products the safety directive directly manufacturers often learn of potential provisions of the existing terms of implicates, and whether the process product safety problems at an early § 107.5. These provisions prohibit any provides the public sufficient stage. For this reason, this proposed rule fraudulent or intentionally false record opportunity for notice and comment. would require manufacturers to develop from being made, kept, or used to show If the FAA rescinds a Declaration of a system for maintaining and reviewing compliance with any requirement of Compliance, the FAA would publish the information about their products that part 107. Accordingly, falsifying any applicable makes and models of small might identify when their product may part of any record intended to constitute UAS that are no longer eligible to have a defect that increases the proof of compliance with manufacturer operate over people. Remote pilots probability of causing injury during requirements under this proposal could would be required to refrain from using operations over people. Such subject the person who submitted the those aircraft to operate over people information would include, but is not record to a civil penalty, and would be until the manufacturer institutes an limited to, consumer complaints, a basis for rescinding a Declaration of acceptable correction. To correct a warranty returns, insurance claims or Compliance. safety defect, a manufacturer could payments, product liability lawsuits, (d) Access to Facilities develop a correction and test the aircraft reports of production problems, product to ensure the aircraft does not increase testing, or other critical information Under this proposed rule, a the probability of causing a casualty or concerning their products. manufacturer must grant the FAA access fatality when operated over people with Subsequent to manufacturers’ to its facilities upon the FAA’s request the correction. The manufacturer would discovery of noncompliance, this rule as described in § 107.7, to validate then submit a new Declaration of would require manufacturers notify the compliance with this subpart. As part of Compliance to the FAA identifying the FAA and the public of the existence of a manufacturer’s Declaration of means of compliance the manufacturer the safety defect. Manufacturers’ Compliance, the manufacturer would used to correct the safety defect. notification to the FAA should describe agree to allow the FAA to inspect its Alternatively, the owner or remote the nature of the noncompliance and facilities, technical data, and any pilot of a small UAS may elect to correct how the manufacturer plans to address manufactured small UAS and witness a safety defect associated with his or her it. As stated above, such notification any tests necessary to determine aircraft. Should any person choose this would not automatically result in the compliance with this subpart. Some option, he or she could submit a rescission of the Declaration of occurrences may necessitate facility Declaration of Compliance to the FAA Compliance, but would involve the FAA inspection. For example, facility access identifying the means of compliance corresponding with manufacturers to would likely become necessary when used to correct the safety defect. That resolve the issue to ensure safety. the FAA and the manufacturer are person, by means of modifying the small Notification to the public and owners working together to address a safety UAS such that it is again in compliance of that make/model would also be a defect. with the operation over people critical step in ensuring continued (e) FAA Publication of Status of requirements, would become the safety. Such notification could take the Declarations of Compliance manufacturer of his or her specific small form of a notice on a manufacturer’s UAS, and would assume all website, electronic notification to The FAA proposes making available responsibilities that apply to owners who have registered the small on the FAA website the status of each manufacturers under this proposal. UAS with the manufacturer, or an manufacturer’s Declaration of update to the small UAS software Compliance for public access to enable (b) Public and FAA Notification Process advising the remote pilot of the change remote pilots to determine which small This proposed rule would require a in status. The FAA encourages UAS (by make, model, serial number, manufacturer to certify on its manufacturers to exercise diligence to and/or category declared) are eligible for Declaration of Compliance that it has ensure the intended audience receives operations over people. If the FAA established a process to notify the communications involving any rescinds a Declaration of Compliance,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3888 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

the FAA would notify the public of the to conduct Category 1 operations, a should consider the small unmanned rescission and would identify the small remote pilot could weigh the aircraft. To aircraft’s course, speed, and trajectory to UAS associated with the rescinded conduct Category 2 and 3 operations, determine whether the small unmanned Declaration of Compliance as no longer §§ 107.115(a) and 107.120(a)(1) would aircraft would go over or impact a eligible for operations over people. In require a remote pilot in command to person who is not directly involved in this way, remote pilots would be aware use a small UAS that is qualified and the flight operation (uninvolved of whether the model of small UAS they labeled to conduct those operations. person).89 To comply with §§ 107.19(c), are utilizing was eligible for operations To confirm a small UAS is eligible to 107.23(a), 107.31(a)(4), and 107.49(a)(3), over people. conduct Category 2 or 3 operations, a therefore, a remote pilot conducting remote pilot must ensure an FAA- operations over people would likely 12. Operational Requirements and accepted Declaration of Compliance consider several factors when making Remote Pilot Restrictions exists for his or her small UAS. A the determination of a stand-off distance The FAA proposes to include in situation may occur in which a small from uninvolved people, all of which § 107.49 a requirement that a remote UAS previously eligible for operations the remote pilot must tailor to the pilot ensure he or she is using a small over people in either Category 2 or intended operation. UAS eligible to conduct an operation Category 3 would either no longer be The FAA has not received over people. This verification would compliant with the standards with information to demonstrate that a need to occur as part of the pre-flight which compliance was declared or prescriptive stand-off distance would inspection. Advisory Circular 107–2 would be ineligible for such operations provide a safety benefit beyond would include updates with suggestions due to rescission of the Declaration of complying with part 107’s current concerning the pre-flight procedures a Compliance that previously applied to requirements; therefore, the FAA remote pilot could follow to be it. The remote pilot would have to verify maintains the position it articulated in compliant with this proposed rule. the flight eligibility status of his or her the 2016 final rule. Due to the large As a general matter, the FAA small UAS. variety of operations and types of small acknowledges pilot experience may be UAS that exist, and consistent with the relevant in determining whether the (a) Distances From People mitigations in part 107, the importance operation of a small UAS qualified to The FAA declines to propose that the of providing flexibility to the remote operate in either Category 2 or 3 adheres remote pilot maintain a specific pilot outweighs any benefit of having a to the safety level the FAA contemplates minimum distance from people during prescriptive standard. in this proposed rule. In this regard, the small UAS operations because the The remote pilot is best suited to ARC recommended that remote pilots existing requirements of part 107, determine what distance would be safe conducting operations over crowds be combined with the new proposed and thereby ensure operation of the required to have more training or subpart D, provide a sufficient manner small UAS would pose no undue hazard experience than other pilots, but did not of mitigating risks. Part 107 already to other aircraft, people, or property in recommend specifically what such requires the remote pilot to ensure the the event of a loss of control of the training or experience would involve. small UAS operation does not pose an aircraft for any reason. For example, a The FAA sees value in an experience undue hazard to other aircraft, people, remote pilot might factor in the traffic requirement, however, at this time, or property in the event of a loss of along nearby roads, current and lacks information and data to assess control of the aircraft for any reason.87 forecasted weather conditions, the how much training or time piloting a In addition, a prescriptive minimum likelihood of people gathering or particular aircraft is warranted. In order distance from people is not appropriate; transiting under or near the flight path, to gather information on what for some operations, such a distance and property located in or near the mitigations would be appropriate, the may be too burdensome, and for others, flight path. The remote pilot would use FAA requests comments on the it might be too conservative. The FAA this information, in addition to his or following questions: To conduct acknowledges, however, that the ARC her knowledge of the performance of the operations over open-air assemblies recommended a ‘‘small UAS must be small UAS under normal operating using a small unmanned aircraft that operated at a minimum distance of 20 conditions and probable failure modes can transfer up to 25 ft-lbs kinetic feet above people’s heads, or 10 feet such as lost link, fly-away, and power energy to a person upon impact, should laterally away from people’’ for Category failure, to identify a suitable horizontal the remote pilot-in-command have 2 and 3 operations.88 and vertical distance from people and additional skills, experience, or Section 107.19(c) requires the remote property to ensure the small UAS currency beyond what part 107 pilot in command to ensure the operation would not create an undue currently requires? If so, what kind of operation will not pose any undue hazard. These distances may include an skill, experience, or currency should be hazard to other people, other aircraft, or area around people and property. required (e.g., minimum time operating other property in the event of a loss of The FAA requests comment on the the small UAS to be used, minimum control of the small UAS. The FAA following question: Does a prescriptive number of take offs and landings, etc.)? believes § 107.19(c), as a performance- standard exist for a minimum vertical or How should that skill, experience, or based requirement, allows a remote horizontal distance that would apply currency be documented? The FAA will pilot in command to determine what equally across a large variety of consider carefully all input it receives specific stand-off distance (if any) is on this topic. appropriate to the specific small 89 81 FR 42064, 42129. In addition, § 107.23(a) To conduct Category 1 operations, prohibits operating a small UAS ‘‘in a careless or unmanned aircraft and operation that he reckless manner so as to endanger the life or § 107.110 would require a remote pilot or she is conducting. To determine this property of another.’’ Section 107.31(a)(4) requires to ensure the small unmanned aircraft stand-off distance, the preamble of the that the remote pilot in command maintain an weighs 0.55 pounds or less on takeoff 2016 final rule stated that a remote pilot ability to see the aircraft and make a determination and for the duration of the flight, that the unmanned aircraft does not endanger others. Section 107.49(a)(3) requires the remote including everything that is on board or 87 See §§ 107.19(c), 107.23(a), 107.31(a)(4) and pilot in command to conduct a preflight assessment otherwise attached to the aircraft. To 107.49(a)(3). of the risk to persons and property, factoring in confirm a small UAS aircraft is eligible 88 ARC Report at 11. their locations.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3889

operations and aircraft and that would which the people within the site have operations at closed- or restricted-access provide a safety benefit that outweighs received notice. Moreover, unlike sites because the general public would the importance of allowing the remote Categories 1 and 2, all Category 3 be unable to access the site. In this pilot the flexibility to assess each operations would be prohibited from regard, a closed- or restricted-access site unique situation? The FAA further occurring over open-air assemblies of would permit access to those involved requests data to support any comments people. in the activity that occurs on the site, identifying a prescriptive standard. For Categories 1 and 2, the FAA but not to the general public. Those proposes to permit operations at any (b) Prohibition on Operations Over a people who are permitted access to the location, in accordance with the other Moving Vehicle closed- or restricted-access site could be requirements of this proposed rule, part advised of precautions or other Part 107 currently prohibits the 107, and any other applicable laws and recommended actions to ensure safety operation of a small UAS over a moving regulations. The absence of any during a small UAS operation. vehicle in the absence of a waiver. The restrictions on the location of Category The FAA would expect a remote pilot FAA established this prohibition 1 or 2 operations is due to the fact that to ascertain whether a site is closed- or because the moving vehicle operating these categories present a low risk of restricted-access prior to conducting environment is dynamic, as the remote injuring people. A small UAS qualified Category 3 operations under this pilot in command cannot control it to conduct Category 1 or 2 operations provision. A remote pilot could directly. In addition, the potential forces could operate over open air assemblies accomplish this by identifying sites that that would result when a small and in public spaces with no applicable restrict access to the general public unmanned aircraft impacts a moving restrictions. vehicle on a road pose unacceptable In its report, the ARC recommended through, for example, public notices and risks due to head-on closure speeds. For the FAA prohibit flight over crowds or signage, flagging and barricading, example, the impact kinetic energy of a dense concentrations of people for ARC erecting temporary fencing, or providing small unmanned aircraft on a person Category 3 operations. The ARC also escorts, as appropriate. Remote pilots who is moving at 40 miles per hour on stated: would be responsible for monitoring a motorcycle would be much greater activity during the small UAS operation than on a person who is stationary. Category 3 UAS may only operate over to ensure access to the site remains people if: (1) the operation is conducted over closed or restricted. Remote pilots must Impact with a small unmanned aircraft a closed- or restricted-access work site with may also distract the driver of a moving the permission of the site’s owner or control vehicle and pedestrian access vehicle and result in an accident. operator; or (2) overflight of people is limited routes onto the site to prevent The FAA is considering, however, to those who are transient or incidental to the inadvertent or unauthorized entry of allowing the operation of small UAS operation, i.e., the overflight of people is persons onto the closed- or restricted- over moving vehicles in absence of a incidental to the operation and is not access site. 90 waiver. The agency seeks public sustained. In addition, this rule proposes to comment on whether it should take this Compared to Categories 1 and 2, require that a remote pilot verify that action, in this or a future rulemaking. Category 3 operations under this people with access to the closed- or The most useful comments on this issue proposed rule present a higher restricted-access site were provided will include data on whether operations likelihood of causing a casualty by blunt notice that a small UAS may operate over moving vehicles would either trauma. In this regard, Category 3 over them within the site. The FAA increase or decrease safety risks, operations could utilize heavier, faster, anticipates this notice will enhance the including distracted driving or other or higher-operated small UAS. situational awareness of the people over hazards to traffic. The FAA encourages Permitting Category 3 operations would whom the operations will occur. For the commenters to include information, allow for continued and uninterrupted purposes of this proposal, actual notice with supporting data, on how to operation at a site, minimize disruption could include a written notice posted at mitigate any risks they identify. of normal site operations, and limit the entry point to the restricted area. (c) Restricted Areas of Operation situations that could compromise the When a person receives a letter or site’s operational safety. Examples of Due to the increased risk of injury contract stating small UAS operations associated with the higher impact closed- or restricted-access sites over may occur over him or her, this would kinetic energy threshold, the FAA which Category 3 operations could be serve as sufficient actual notice, no proposes restricting the areas where conducted include, but are not limited matter the amount of time that passes Category 3 operations may occur. This to: between receipt of the information and rule would permit small UAS eligible • Agricultural fields in which workers are the small UAS operation. By this conducting agricultural operations; proposed rule, the FAA encourages for operations in Category 3 to fly over • people only when the operator conducts Bridge inspections that include workers operators to provide verbal notice in who may be conducting inspection or addition to the written notice in cases the operation over a closed- or construction activities; restricted-access site and when people • in which a verbal notification is Filming operations that include movie necessary to ensure the information is with access to the site have been set location employees, such as caterers, set notified that a small unmanned aircraft designers, and actors; and received and understood. The remote may fly over them. In the alternative, if • A wedding in which access is available pilot would not have to be the person the operation was over people not only to guests and a small UAS is conducting who provides the notice, but he or she within a closed- or restricted-access site, aerial photography or filming operations. must ascertain people below the small the small UAS operating in Category 3 Based on the increased risk associated unmanned aircraft have received notice must not sustain flight over one or more with Category 3 operations, the FAA before conducting a Category 3 people during its operation. For proposes to prohibit operating over operation over a closed- or restricted- example, small UAS conducting open-air assemblies of people, as well as access site. operations pursuant to Category 3 the other restrictions described above. Alternatively, Category 3 operations would be limited to transient flights The FAA proposes allowing Category 3 could take place outside a closed- or over people unless the operation occurs restricted-access site as long as the small in a closed- or restricted-access site in 90 ARC Report at 4. unmanned aircraft does not maintain

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:36 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3890 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

sustained flight over a person who is not existing aircraft may fulfill the proposed C. Waivers directly involved in the operation. This safety level of this rule. In the 2016 final rule, the FAA noted Accordingly, manufacturers of requirement would prohibit holding its process to integrate UAS is ongoing. existing small UAS may follow the above, or maintaining sustained flight As such, the FAA decided to proceed procedures in this proposed rule to above, any part of any person during a with an incremental approach, which establish the eligibility of their small Category 3 operation that occurs outside included waiver authority in the UAS to operate over people. Once a a closed- or restricted-access site. This regulatory text of part 107 to permit new manufacturer has demonstrated through would include hovering above any technologies and unique operational person’s head, flying back and forth an FAA-accepted Means of Compliance that the existing small UAS meets the circumstances that part 107 may over a person, or circling above an currently restrict. The FAA does not uninvolved person in such a way that safety levels in this proposed rule, it would submit a Declaration of propose any changes to the existing the small unmanned aircraft remains waiver process in part 107. The FAA above some part of that person. The Compliance establishing compliance with the proposed requirements in proposes, however, to amend 14 CFR intent of this proposed requirement is 107.205 to allow waivers for specific ensuring only momentary exposure to §§ 107.115(b)(5) and 107.120(b)(5). A manufacturer would identify those types of operations over people this any one person occurs for Category 3 proposal would otherwise limit, as well operations.91 Overall, restricting small UAS to which the declaration applied by listing the aircraft serial as to allow waivers for the anti-collision Category 3 operations from maintaining light requirement that applies to sustained flight over people enhances numbers on the Declaration of Compliance submitted to the FAA. Once operations at night and during civil safety by reducing the likelihood of twilight. injury by limiting protracted duration of submitted, the FAA would handle a a flight over a person or persons. Declaration of Compliance for an 1. Prohibition on Operations Over a existing small UAS in the same manner The ARC suggested permitting flights Moving Vehicle it proposes to handle a Declaration of to occur only over uninvolved people Compliance submitted for a newly This proposal would allow small UAS who may loiter beneath the aircraft. The manufactured small UAS. A operations over people in moving FAA declines to adopt such a suggestion manufacturer would also be responsible vehicles through the part 107 waiver because doing so would place a heavy for developing remote pilot operating process. Although this rule does not burden on the remote pilot to anticipate instructions for the existing aircraft, and address mitigations concerning the constantly a person’s actions during an making those instructions available to types of risks associated with operating operation, which could affect the remote remote pilots or owners of the small a small UAS over a person located in a pilot’s ability to operate the small UAS UAS. moving vehicle, the FAA would allow safely, as the obligation may present a The FAA emphasizes this proposal these operations if a waiver applicant is distraction. would require a manufacturer make the able to demonstrate that these In some circumstances, it may not be remote pilot operating instructions operations can be conducted safely possible for a small unmanned aircraft available; the FAA does not propose pursuant to the terms of the certificate to take off and land inside a closed- or requiring a manufacturer to locate of waiver. As stated above, the FAA restricted-access site. The proposed owners or remote pilots operating these does not propose altering the requirements for Category 3 operations small UAS and provide the instructions prohibition on operating over a moving would allow for takeoffs and landings to personally to them. Rather, if a remote vehicle in this NPRM, but seeks occur outside the site and transition to pilot owns an existing aircraft that a comments on this topic. the site to conduct the desired operation manufacturer has identified on a 2. Operations Over People provided the aircraft does not maintain Declaration of Compliance as eligible for sustained flight over uninvolved Category 2 or 3 operations, and the While this proposal would enable persons when outside the site. remote pilot intends to conduct certain routine operations over people, operations over people using that other operations would remain 13. Provisions Applicable to Existing aircraft, the remote pilot would be able prohibited. For example, operations Small UAS to access the remote pilot operating using small UAS that exceed the The FAA recognizes a significant instructions if the manufacturer posted Category 2 or 3 thresholds for kinetic number of small UAS have already been them online. energy transfer would remain sold and are operating in the NAS under Finally, the FAA proposes the remote prohibited. Under current regulations, part 107. Some remote pilots and pilot be permitted to label an existing an operator that wishes to conduct manufacturers of small UAS may wish small unmanned aircraft, not previously prohibited operation over people may to use existing small UAS to conduct labeled, in accordance with the labeling request a waiver under § 107.205(g). The operations over people. The FAA does requirements of this rule. The FAA FAA does not propose to change that not seek to preclude existing small UAS recognizes that requiring a manufacturer provision. Operators seeking to operate from conducting these operations, and to contact all remote pilots of a over people, but beyond the limits of recognizes the economic benefits of not particular make and model of small this rule’s requirements, would be able requiring current owners of small UAS UAS and provide labels to those persons to request a waiver under § 107.205(g). to procure new aircraft solely for the would be unreasonable. However, the Some operators of small UAS may purpose of operations over people when option for a remote pilot to label the seek a waiver of more than simply the aircraft would not preclude a operational restrictions applicable to 91 The FAA considers ‘‘exposure,’’ to mean the manufacturer from making a label Category 3. For operations over people amount of time during which the small unmanned available, either as a website download that would occur, for example, in an aircraft would be in a position over or a near a or for cost, which a remote pilot could aircraft that does not achieve the safety person in which, if it were to experience a failure, then affix to the aircraft. A remote pilot level the FAA proposes in this rule, the it would likely impact the person. For example, in the event a person is lying down, this rule would could choose to label his or her existing FAA may consider an application for not permit a small unmanned aircraft to maintain aircraft in any manner that meets the waiver of the proposed prohibition of sustained flight over any part of that person. requirements of the regulations. § 107.39. The FAA anticipates such

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3891

applications would consider the remote pilot in command certificates to proficiency course in obtaining a remote rationale the FAA has provided in this the Administrator, authorized pilot certificate. The FAA proposes proposed rule, in an effort to understand representatives of the National requiring recurrent training every 24 the FAA’s views on the acceptable level Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) or months, in lieu of recurrent knowledge of risk, as well as the agency’s Transportation Security Administration testing, however, so remote pilots expectations with regard to safety of (TSA), or any Federal, State, or local law maintain ongoing familiarity with small operations over people. As such, the enforcement officer, upon request from UAS operations and the provisions of FAA would continue to scrutinize any such officials. As noted above, part 107. Moreover, recurrent training, applications for waiver of § 107.39 in § 61.3(l) includes a parallel requirement which a remote pilot can complete light of the agency’s risk-based decision- for airman certificates, medical online, presents a less costly option and making process, and determine whether certificates, and other similar will achieve a level of assurance of any waiver application fulfills the documents, along with photo knowledge that is comparable to the waiver application requirements. In this identification. When the FAA assurance a recurrent test provides. In regard, the FAA expects any person who promulgated 14 CFR 61.3(l), the agency this regard, the FAA’s current use of seeks a waiver of § 107.39 would cited security concerns regarding the online training enables the FAA to tailor present a unique risk assessment of the identification of pilots as the primary the training to address the pilot’s areas intended area of operation that proves impetus for the requirement. 67 FR of knowledge in which improvement is the operation would either present a de 65858 (Oct. 28, 2002). The same necessary. The FAA intends to employ minimis risk or that the operator’s rationale applies to remote pilots. Law this type of mechanism to remote pilot proposed limitations or provisions enforcement officials, the training, in order to customize the would mitigate the risk sufficiently.92 Administrator, and the NTSB and TSA training. must be capable of correctly identifying The recurrent training the FAA D. Remote Pilot in Command remote pilots in command in the event contemplates in this proposal may take Requirements that an operation raises security different formats. The primary way the Since promulgating part 107, the FAA concerns or issues concerning safety in FAA anticipates remote pilots may determined that certain amendments to the NAS. Such a provision will enhance fulfill the recurrent training requirement part 107 would enhance clarity as well the ability of other government agencies would be to complete questions as consistency with other FAA and officials to conduct timely throughout the training, the completion regulations. As a result, this rule investigations in the interest of ensuring of which the FAA will consider includes a proposal to add to § 107.7 the safety and security pursuant to their satisfactory once the applicant achieves requirement for remote pilots to present authority. a score of 100 percent. The FAA may their remote pilot in command The FAA proposes requiring also allow small UAS training to occur certificate with small UAS rating, as presentation of both the remote pilot in within a proficiency program or other well as a form of identification, to command certificate and one of the approved program. The FAA would authorized individuals upon request. types of identification the remote pilot either offer, or review and approve, all Lastly, this rule proposes permitting could use to establish his or her identity such training that could fulfill the remote pilots to maintain currency of at a knowledge testing center. Section requirement of the proposed version of their remote pilot in command 107.67(b) states a person’s application § 107.65(b) and (c). certificates by participating in recurrent for a knowledge test must include proof The FAA anticipates the proposed training, rather than knowledge testing. of the applicant’s identity that contains change from recurrent knowledge the person’s photograph, signature, date testing to completion of recurrent 1. Presentation of Remote Pilot in of birth, and permanent mailing training will continue to serve as an Command Certificate address. This proposed requirement important risk mitigation measure. As Section 107.7 (‘‘Inspection, testing, would apply equally to remote pilots UAS operations in the NAS continue to and demonstration of compliance’’) who hold a certificate under 14 CFR evolve, training provides the requires a remote pilot in command, part 61 and obtained their remote pilot opportunity to re-emphasize the owner, or person manipulating the certificate by fulfilling the requirements requirements of part 107 and controls of a small UAS to present to the of § 107.61(d)(2). incorporate any changes the FAA has Administrator, upon request, the remote made to part 107 as a part of subsequent 2. Changes to Knowledge Testing pilot certificate with small UAS rating rulemakings, such as this one. A Framework and any other document, record, or training course provides the FAA with report the regulations of this chapter Following the implementation of part a way to ensure remote pilots are aware require. This proposed rule will align 107, the FAA re-evaluated its testing of the key requirements that affect them, the text of § 107.7 with 14 CFR 61.3(l), requirements for remote pilots. This address new or changed requirements in which requires pilots to present airman proposed rule would amend the part 107 as a result of subsequent certificates upon request. knowledge testing framework by rulemakings, and highlight the tools and The FAA proposes amending § 107.7 requiring remote pilots to complete resources available to remote pilots. to require remote pilots to present their recurrent training, rather than pass Such training would ensure remote knowledge tests, to maintain a current pilots maintain awareness of 92 For example, one waiver for operations over remote pilot in command certificate recommendations for decision-making people included a small unmanned aircraft that with small UAS rating. so they can continue to operate safely only weighed 18.5 grams, while another waiver within the boundaries part 107 has relies primarily on containment of the operational (a) Recurrent Knowledge Testing and established. environment and conclusions regarding reliability Training of the small unmanned aircraft, which weighs 8 kg. Because pilots could complete online or 17.7 lbs. See Waiver No. 107W–2016–00993A The FAA maintains the current initial training to fulfill the recurrent training (May 3, 2017) and Waiver No. 107W–2017–03788 testing requirement to evaluate a remote requirement, this rule would not require (Sept. 25, 2017). In both cases, the FAA first assessed the risks, then provided mitigation pilot’s knowledge for operating in the travel to any kind of knowledge testing measures sufficient to address the level of risk that NAS is critical, given the absence of a center every 24 calendar months. Upon the operation presented. requirement for a practical test or completion of the training course, the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3892 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

pilot would be able to print a addition, the FAA would provide reviews or any practical test criteria completion certificate, which the pilot educational items to the small UAS from the FAA also forms a basis for the would use to demonstrate aeronautical community through various means of FAA’s rationale in making the recurrent knowledge recency in accordance with communication such as FAASafety.gov, training area topics match the initial the proposed revisions to § 107.65. FAA.gov/UAS, and industry topic areas. The FAA has no means of The FAA uses the term ‘‘training’’ organizations. knowing remote pilots’ weaknesses or rather than ‘‘training course’’ in the The existing subject areas on the areas in which they lack experience or proposed regulatory text in the relevant recurrent knowledge test for remote recollection. As a result, the FAA’s sections that address training pilots include fewer topic areas than presumption that each pilot may lack requirements, which would provide the subject areas on the initial knowledge recollection with regard to every subject opportunity for the FAA to consider test. This proposed rule would amend area is reasonable. For the foregoing completion of special pilot proficiency this by requiring inclusion of the same reasons, the FAA now proposes to programs, such as an FAA-provided list of subject areas on both the initial abandon the distinctions in the topic WINGS course 93 specific to small UAS test and the recurrent training for pilots areas of initial knowledge tests (or operations, to suffice for fulfillment of who hold a remote pilot certificate training courses) and recurrent training. the training requirements. Such a under § 107.65(b). As for pilots who Those remote pilots who hold a program would offer tools and resources already hold a pilot certificate under 14 remote pilot certificate with a small to strengthen decision-making skills and CFR part 61 as described in § 107.65(c), UAS rating who completed initial thereby enable the remote pilot to this proposed rule would likewise knowledge testing or training prior to continue to ensure he or she operates require the initial training and the this rule becoming final would not have safely in accordance with part 107. recurrent training cover identical been tested or initially trained on Overall, the FAA expects a recurrent subject areas. The FAA has carefully operations at night. Although all remote online training course, pilot proficiency evaluated the topics applicable in each pilots who choose to exercise the program, or similar option would keep category and concludes that consistency privileges of their remote pilot in remote pilots informed about in pilots’ adequate knowledge in all command certificate could receive enhancements to the small UAS topic areas listed is important for training through an online recurrent industry while reducing costs associated ensuring safety of small UAS operations training course that would cover the with travel to knowledge testing centers. in the NAS. Topics such as weather, subject matter, a period of time would small unmanned aircraft loading, exist for some remote pilots in which (b) Aeronautical Knowledge Areas determining the performance of the operations over people would be The FAA re-evaluated the knowledge small UAS, the effects of drugs and permitted and those remote pilots topics that are required for initial alcohol, and radio communication would not have completed recurrent knowledge tests and those required for procedures are all sufficiently important training that includes instruction on training currently identified in to warrant a place in recurrent small night operations. As with all airman §§ 107.73 and 107.74, respectively. In UAS training. certificate holders, the FAA expects particular, the FAA reviewed the In addition, pilots who hold a part 61 such remote pilots would adhere to the associated knowledge testing standards certificate and therefore need to regulations under which they operate identified in the Remote Pilot—Small complete only an abbreviated listing of even when those regulations change. As Unmanned Aircraft System Airman topic areas should be required to a result, remote pilots who operate at Certification Standards (sUAS ACS) complete training on weather, small night without having first completed the document 94 and the resource guidance unmanned aircraft loading, and updated training this rule proposes identified in the Remote Pilot sUAS determining the performance of the would be operating in violation of ACS. As explained above, knowledge small UAS. Although the 2016 final rule § 107.29. The FAA would update its regarding operations at night is one of stated that the validation of skills guidance, training, and testing material the measures the FAA seeks to employ necessary for a pilot who holds a part to ensure information is available for to ensure the safety of operations at 61 certificate to complete flight review those remote pilots who seek to exercise night. As such, the FAA proposes for manned aircraft obviated the need to this new privilege, and would alert the adding a knowledge area that would address these topics in recurrent small UAS community accordingly, cover night operations for the initial training for unmanned aircraft, the FAA through various means of knowledge test and the training. This has now revisited its analysis and communication. area would include questions on night concluded such a distinction is not In addition, the regulatory text the physiology and night illusions. well-founded.95 For example, although FAA proposes with regard to eligibility The FAA also plans to update its a pilot who holds a part 61 certificate and recency requirements for a remote guidance, training, and testing material, will understand the effects of weather pilot certificate includes the phrase ‘‘in including the associated knowledge on a manned aircraft, such effects could a manner acceptable to the testing standards identified in the sUAS be very different for operations of small Administrator.’’ The FAA’s addition of ACS document and the resources listed UAS. Likewise, determining the this phrase would serve to ensure in that ACS, to ensure the information performance of a manned aircraft is remote pilots who already hold a remote is available for those remote pilots who distinct from the manner in which a pilot in command certificate under part seek to operate a small UAS at night. In pilot should determine the performance 107 and are not yet required to complete of a small UAS; in this regard, the their recurrent training would not need 93 WINGS is a voluntary pilot education and preflight check requirements of § 107.49 to re-take a knowledge test or complete proficiency program the FAA offers. The program addresses accident causal factors associated with are distinct from those codified in part training immediately, simply because common pilot errors, lack of proficiency, and faulty 91 and in other, similar regulations the subject area listings of §§ 107.73 and knowledge, and is available online. WINGS specific to manned aircraft. 107.74 have changed. Instead, remote provides the opportunity and the structure for The fact that remote pilots operating pilots who wish to operate a small UAS pilots to continue pilots’ aviation education. at night must take the updated 94 The FAA’s sUAS ACS is available at https:// under part 107 are not subject to flight www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/acs/media/ knowledge test or training before uas_acs.pdf. 95 See 81 FR 42064, 42162. operating at night.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3893

V. Other Amendments Following the promulgation of part 107, pose novel privacy issues, whether For purposes of consistency the FAA realized its use of the term those issues are addressed by existing throughout part 107, as well as clarity, ‘‘operate’’ in § 107.35 could result in the legal frameworks, and the means by this rule also includes proposals to perception that a single company or which privacy risks should be further make certain, specific amendments to operator was prohibited from employing mitigated. In recognizing the importance various provisions of part 107. These more than one remote pilot in command of addressing privacy concerns in the amendments are minor and concise. and conducting more than one small proper forum, the FAA has partnered UAS operation at the same time. The with other agencies with the mandate A. UAS Exemption-Holders FAA’s proposed change to this section and expertise to identify, develop, and The existing text of § 107.1 excludes would allow companies to run two or implement appropriate mitigation from the applicability of part 107 remote more simultaneous small UAS strategies to address such concerns. The pilots who hold an exemption for a UAS operations, provided each aircraft is FAA’s discussions with stakeholders operation pursuant to section 333 of under the control of its own remote have informed the FAA as it furthers Public Law 112–95. The text identifies pilot in command. plans for UAS integration. As the FAA 97 the remote pilot as the person who is VI. Privacy stated in a July 20, 2018 press release, excluded from the applicability of part Congress exclusively authorized the 107. The FAA has concluded this In the 2016 final rule, the FAA FAA to regulate aviation safety, the identification is imprecise, as the text acknowledged various organizations’ efficiency of navigable airspace, and air should identify the excluded party as and commenters’ concerns regarding the traffic control, among other things. The the exemption-holder, rather than the use of small UAS to collect information FAA further stated, ‘‘[l]aws traditionally remote pilot. In addition, on October 5, about individuals. In that rule, the FAA related to state and local police power— 2018, the President signed the FAA noted that privacy concerns were including land use, zoning, privacy, and Reauthorization Act of 2018.96 The beyond the scope of the FAA’s mission law enforcement operations—generally statute codified within title 49 of the to ensure safety and efficiency of are not subject to federal regulation.’’ As United States Code the authority aviation operations in the NAS, but a result, cities and municipalities, while previously provided in section 333 of discussed various methods by which the not permitted to have their own rules or Public Law 112–95. As a result, the FAA intended to continue addressing regulations governing the operation of citation within § 107.1(b)(3) should privacy concerns through engagement aircraft, may generally determine the reflect 49 U.S.C. 44807 as the exemption and collaboration with the public, location of aircraft landing sites. The stakeholders, and other agencies with authority. The FAA proposes re- FAA expects the Department of authority and subject matter expertise in phrasing the text of § 107.1(b)(3), Transportation’s UAS Integration Pilot accordingly. privacy law and policy. 98 Proposed regulations to address Program to provide the FAA with B. Remote Pilot in Command privacy concerns are beyond the scope insight on how best to involve local of the FAA’s mission. Nonetheless, the jurisdictions in the integration of UAS Section 107.19 outlines the into the airspace while considering local responsibilities of the remote pilot in FAA has consistently recognized the importance of stakeholder engagement interests in conjunction with aviation command under part 107. Following the safety. promulgation of part 107, the FAA regarding privacy implications associated with UAS integration and With regard to the information identified the need for a minor edit to manufacturers and operators may paragraph (c) of § 107.19, which incorporated privacy considerations into the UAS Test Site Program and the submit in accordance with this currently requires each remote pilot in proposed rule’s requirements, the FAA command to ‘‘ensure the small UAS Integration Pilot Program, under its contracting authority. conducted a privacy impact assessment unmanned aircraft will pose no undue (PIA) under section 522(a)(5) of division hazard to other people, other aircraft, or The FAA acknowledges unique characteristics and capabilities of UAS H of the FY 2005 Omnibus other property in the event of a loss of Appropriations Act, Public Law 108– control of the aircraft for any reason.’’ may pose uncertainties with regard to 447, 118 Stat. 3268 (Dec. 8, 2004) and The FAA amends the phrase ‘‘loss of individual privacy. However, these section 208 of the E-Government Act of control of the aircraft’’ to say ‘‘loss of concerns are generally related to 2002, Public Law 107–347, 116 Stat. control of the small unmanned aircraft,’’ technology and equipment, which may 2889 (Dec. 17, 2002). As part of the PIA, for clarity. The FAA’s intention in be installed on an unmanned (or the FAA analyzed the effect the promulgating § 107.19(c) was to ensure manned) aircraft, but are unrelated to proposed rule might have on collecting, the remote pilot in command remains the safe operation of the aircraft. News storing, and disseminating personally responsible for the safe operation of a helicopters, aerial surveys, film/ identifiable information (PII) of small unmanned aircraft when a loss of television production, law enforcement, manufacturers and UAS operators. The control of that small unmanned aircraft and other such manned aircraft have FAA also examined and evaluated occurs. The remote pilot in command is long placed cameras and other sensors protections and alternative information- not responsible for ensuring the safety on them, for a variety of purposes. handling processes in developing the of another person’s aircraft in the event Although the FAA regulates the safe proposed rule to mitigate potential of loss of control; as a result, this and efficient operation of aircraft within privacy risks. A copy of the draft PIA is proposed rule amends the text of the NAS, the FAA has never extended § 107.19(c), accordingly. its administrative reach to regulate the use of cameras and other sensors 97 Federal Aviation Administration, Press C. Operation of Multiple Small UAS Release—FAA Statement—Federal vs. Local Drone extraneous to the airworthiness or safe Authority, available at https://www.faa.gov/news/ The FAA proposes amending the operation of the aircraft in order to press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=22938. existing text of § 107.35, which protect individual privacy. Substantial, 98 82 FR 51903 (Nov. 8, 2017); Presidential prohibits contemporaneous operation of ongoing debate among policymakers, Memorandum for the Secretary of Transportation (Oct. 25, 2017), available at https:// more than one small unmanned aircraft. industry, advocacy groups and members www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/10/25/ of the public has occurred regarding: presidential-memorandum-secretary- 96 Public Law 115–254. The extent to which UAS operations transportation.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3894 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

posted in the docket for this 3 aircraft. This rule would also allow for proposes to find, in this proposed rule, rulemaking.99 operations at night. The proposed risk that a certificate under 49 U.S.C. 44703 mitigation measures of an illuminated VII. Section 44807 Statutory Findings is required. The FAA invites comments anti-collision light and increased airman on these findings. To determine whether certain UAS knowledge would provide sufficient risk may operate safely in the NAS pursuant mitigation for such operations. VIII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses to 49 U.S.C. 44807, the Secretary must Accordingly, the Secretary proposes A. Regulatory Evaluation find that the operation of the UAS to find that small UAS operations would not create a hazard to users of the subject to this proposed rule would not Changes to Federal regulations must NAS or the public. The Secretary must create a hazard to users of the NAS or undergo several economic analyses. also determine whether a certificate the public. The FAA invites comments First, Executive Order 12866 and under 49 U.S.C. 44703 (‘‘Airman on this proposed finding. Executive Order 13563 direct that each certificates’’) or section 44704 (‘‘Type B. Certificate Requirements Federal agency shall propose or adopt a certificates, production certificates, and regulation only upon a reasoned airworthiness certificates, and design Additionally, 49 U.S.C. 44807(b)(2) determination that the benefits of the requires the Secretary to determine and production organization intended regulation justify its costs. whether small UAS operations subject certificates’’), or a certificate of waiver Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act or certificate of authorization, is to this proposed rule pose a safety risk of 1980 (Public Law 96–354) requires required for the operation of small UAS sufficient to require airworthiness agencies to analyze the economic subject to this proposed rule. Using a certification or airman certification. impact of regulatory changes on small risk-based approach, the Secretary Due to the provisions in this proposed entities. Third, the Trade Agreement Act proposes to determine that small UAS rule, in addition to the existing operations under this proposed rule provisions in part 107, the risks of 1979 (Public Law 96–39) prohibits would operate safely in the NAS; the associated with small UAS operations agencies from setting standards that individual findings section 44807 over people are significantly distinct create unnecessary obstacles to the requires are as follows. from the risks that other types of aircraft foreign commerce of the United States. operations present. Under part 107, a In developing U.S. standards, the Trade A. Hazard to Users of the NAS or the remote pilot must make a determination Agreement Act of 1979 requires Public of whether the small UAS is in a agencies to consider international Section 44807(b)(1) requires the condition for safe operation prior to and standards and, where appropriate, that Secretary to determine which types of during flight operations. This proposed they be the basis of U.S. standards. small UAS operations, as a result of rule would also require a remote pilot Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform their size, weight, speed, operational to ensure that his or her unmanned Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4) requires capability, proximity to airports and aircraft weighs 0.55 pounds or less or agencies to prepare a written assessment populated areas, operation over people, has an FAA-accepted Declaration of of the costs, benefits, and other effects and operation within or beyond visual Compliance prior to operating over of proposed or final rules that include line of sight, or operation during the day people. Similarly, operations at night a Federal mandate likely to result in the or night do not create a hazard to users may only occur after the remote pilot expenditure by State, local, or Tribal of the NAS or the public. In the 2016 has taken the updated knowledge test or governments, in the aggregate, or by the final rule, the Secretary’s finding of training that includes content on night private sector, of $155 million or more acceptable risk was based on the operations and when the small annually (adjusted for inflation with following mitigations: Requiring unmanned aircraft maintains an base year of 1995). This portion of the operations to be conducted within illuminated anti-collision light. These preamble summarizes the FAA’s visual line of sight; limiting maximum proposed requirements serve to mitigate analysis of the economic impacts of this gross weight of the small unmanned the risks the proposed operations would proposed rule. We suggest readers aircraft to be 55 pounds; limiting the present. seeking greater detail read the full operating altitude to below 400 feet Small UAS operations that occur in regulatory evaluation, a copy of which above ground level (AGL); requiring accordance with this proposal and the is available in the docket for this remote pilots to hold valid, current requirements of part 107 would pose rulemaking. certificates; defining the area of significantly less risk than the level of operation; and prohibiting operations risk that heavier aircraft present. In conducting these analyses, FAA over any person who is not directly Moreover, small UAS operating under has determined that this proposed rule: participating in the operation. This part 107 must remain in a condition for (1) Has benefits that exceed costs; (2) is proposed rule would allow operations safe operation. Therefore, the Secretary not an economically ‘‘significant over uninvolved people; however, these proposes to find, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. regulatory action’’ as defined in section aircraft would still be required to 44807(b)(2), that airworthiness 3(f) of Executive Order 12866; (3) is comply with the other restrictions certification would be unnecessary for ‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s codified in part 107. The additional small UAS subject to this proposed rule. Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4) hazard posed by operating directly over Part 107 currently requires a remote would have a significant positive people would be mitigated through pilot in command certificate prior to economic impact on a substantial manufacturer requirements and conducting operations under part 107. number of small entities; (5) would not operational restrictions, including The FAA has carefully tailored the create unnecessary obstacles to the limited areas of operation for Category knowledge and training requirements of foreign commerce of the United States; part 107, subpart C, to ensure remote and (6) would not create a Federal 99 Upon finalization, PIAs are posted on the pilots in command are adequately aware mandate likely to result in the Department of Transportation’s Privacy Program of the restrictions and requirements of expenditure of more than $155 million page, available at https://www.transportation.gov/ annually under the Unfunded Mandates individuals/privacy/privacy-impact- part 107. This framework is a key assessments#Federal%20Aviation component of the Secretary’s Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4). %20Administration%20(FAA). determination. As a result, the Secretary These analyses are summarized below.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3895

1. Assumptions and Data benefit the economy and encourage Over the five-year period of analysis, The benefit and cost analysis for the innovation and growth across a variety the total present value cost of the regulatory evaluation is based on the of sectors, such as construction, proposed rule is about $14 million with following assumptions: education, infrastructure inspection, annualized costs of $3 million (using a insurance, marketing, and event, film seven percent discount rate). • The analysis is conducted in constant and sports photography. This proposed rulemaking would dollars with 2016 as the base year. Today, remote pilots who comply • Because the commercial small UAS have quantified cost savings. Part 107 industry may evolve differently from current with part 107 can fly a small UAS currently requires an applicant for a expectations, the FAA determines that a five- within a safe distance from people, but remote pilot certificate with a small year period of analysis is appropriate. are not able to operate over people who UAS rating to go to a knowledge testing • We use a three percent and seven are not participating in the operation. center and take the initial knowledge percent discount rate for the costs and Without this proposed rule, the only test to be eligible for the remote pilot in benefits as prescribed by OMB in Circular A– entities allowed to operate small UAS command certificate. To maintain the 4.100 over people in the NAS are public • The small UAS vehicle forecasts used in privileges of that certificate, remote entities holding an active certificate of pilots currently must pass a recurrent this analysis are based on the Federal waiver or authorization (COA), entities Aviation Administration’s FAA Aerospace knowledge test at a knowledge testing Forecast 2017–2037.101 with an FAA-issued exemption, entities center every 24 calendar months • Small unmanned aircraft that weigh 0.55 that hold a waiver to the prohibition on thereafter. This proposed rule would lbs. or less (Category 1) are not part of this operations over people provision of part remove the requirement for completing analysis as costs are zero to minimal. 107, or small UAS that have received a recurrent aeronautical knowledge test • The FAA estimates that 15 existing airworthiness certification from the at a knowledge testing center and models may satisfy the performance-based FAA who also operate with a COA. replace the requirement with requirements of the rule for Category 2 and When this proposed rule is finalized, completing online training. Category 3 operations with little or no individuals would be able to conduct As a result, the remote pilot in modification. These operations would be operations of a small UAS over people subject to the cost of obtaining a Declaration command who does not also hold a in the NAS and at night under part 107, of Compliance. The FAA also assumes current certificate under part 61 would so long as the activity is conducted by manufacturers would likely introduce a be relieved of costs associated with a small UAS that complies with the comparable number of compliant models in recurrent knowledge testing every 24 each of the subsequent years of the analysis. proposed provisions. • months. The cost savings include the The FAA estimates that the remote pilot 3. Costs and Savings Summary operating manual is 6 pages in length and elimination of the knowledge test fee; requires 150 hours to develop at an hourly A manufacturer would incur costs for the elimination of the mileage expense rate of $72.91. demonstrating compliance with the for travel to and from the knowledge • The FAA assumes that five percent of safety requirements of this proposed testing center; and the elimination of the submitted Declarations of Compliance (DoC) rule and providing a Declaration of opportunity cost of time studying for the documents would be rescinded, rewritten, Compliance to the FAA. For both knowledge test and travelling to the and resubmitted for acceptance. It is assumed Category 2 and Category 3 operations, knowledge testing center. In total, these that DoCs resubmitted to the FAA would be this proposed rule would also require costs savings average $460 every 24 accepted. calendar months per affected remote • The FAA assigns the United States the manufacturer to label the aircraft for Department of Transportation guidance on the appropriate category of operation pilot. the hourly value of time and hourly value of and to provide remote pilot operating The full regulatory evaluation for this travel time savings as to equal $25.40 for the instructions for the small UAS upon proposed rule presents a range of cost analysis period.102 sale, transfer, or use by someone other savings based on three varying fleet forecasts. Subsequently, over the five- 2. Benefits Summary than the manufacturer. Additionally, a small UAS manufacturer would be year period of analysis, this proposed This proposed rulemaking would responsible for the development of a change would provide a total present further integrate small UAS into the website or other notification process for value cost savings between $38 million NAS by enabling operations over people the purpose of notifying the public of and $135 million with annualized cost and nighttime operations. These would the continued eligibility of small UAS savings between $9 million and $33 for operations over people under this million (using a seven percent discount 100 https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_ rate). a004_a_4. Accessed August 3, 2017. proposed rule. The costs to the FAA 101 FAA Aerospace Forecast Fiscal Years 2017– from this proposed rule include notice The net present value cost savings 2037 at 30–33, available at http://www.faa.gov/ to a manufacturer that a Declaration of (less costs) of the proposed rule ranges data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/media/ Compliance has been accepted (or from $24 million to $121 million at a FY2017-37_FAA_Aerospace_Forecast.pdf. rescinded); the development of a seven percent discount rate with net 102 Time savings is estimated to be median hourly website for the FAA to notify the public annualized costs savings between $6 wage plus benefits as described in the U.S. of small UAS that have a Declaration of million and $29 million. The following Department of Transportation Revised Departmental Guidance on Valuation of Travel Compliance rescinded; and altering table presents quantified costs to Time in Economic Analysis dated September 27, knowledge test questions into a training manufacturers and the FAA and savings 2016. format. FAA costs are minimal. to remote pilots.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3896 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 6—COSTS AND SAVINGS OF PROPOSED RULE ($ MILLIONS) 5-YEAR PERIOD OF ANALYSIS *

7% PV 7% Annualized 3% PV 3% Annualized

Low case: Costs (Manufacturers and FAA) ...... $14 $3 $15 $3 Cost Savings (Remote Pilots) ...... (38) (9) (44) (10)

Net Cost Savings ...... (24) (6) (29) (6)

Base case: Costs (Manufacturers and FAA) ...... 14 3 15 3 Cost Savings (Remote Pilots) ...... (49) (12) (57) (12)

Net Cost Savings ...... (35) (9) (42) (9)

High case: Costs (Manufacturers and FAA) ...... 14 3 15 3 Cost Savings (Remote Pilots) ...... (135) (33) (158) (34)

Net Costs Savings ...... (121) (29) (143) (31) * Columns may not sum to total due to rounding. Savings are shown in parenthesis to distinguish from costs.

4. Benefit Cost Summary B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 1. Description of Reasons the Agency Is Considering the Action This rulemaking responds to The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 Congressional direction that instructs (Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a This rulemaking proposes principle of regulatory issuance that performance-based requirements to the Secretary of Transportation to agencies shall endeavor, consistent with allow small UAS to operate over people determine whether ‘‘certain unmanned the objectives of the rule and of or at night under part 107 without aircraft systems may operate safely in obtaining a waiver or exemption. 103 applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and the national airspace system. This informational requirements to the scale Currently under part 107, a remote pilot proposed rule has been initiated at the of the businesses, organizations, and must obtain a waiver or exemption request of the Administrator and the governmental jurisdictions subject to explicitly allowing operations over Secretary of Transportation after regulation. To achieve this principle, people or at night. As of July 10, 2017, consultation with the Office of agencies are required to solicit and the FAA has received 2,155 requests for Management and Budget, and the Office consider flexible regulatory proposals waiver to permit operation at night, 477 of Science and Technology Policy in the and to explain the rationale for their requests to permit operating over Executive Office of the President. This actions to assure that such proposals are people, and 228 requests to permit high-level interest reflects a strong given serious consideration.’’ The RFA operating over people at night.104 desire from industry for operating small covers a wide range of small entities, The proposed requirements would UAS over people and is another step including small businesses, not-for- allow small UAS to operate over people toward an eventual full integration of profit organizations, and small and during the hours of night while unmanned aircraft systems operating in governmental jurisdictions. minimizing the risk these operations the NAS. This rule would expand the Agencies must perform a review to may pose to the general public. For opportunities for part 107 remote pilots determine whether a rule will have a operations over people, the FAA’s and supports innovation in the significant economic impact on a proposed performance-based standards would establish three categories of small emerging UAS industry. substantial number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the UAS operations defined primarily by The operation of small UAS over agency must prepare a regulatory level of risk of injury posed. Additional people may increase safety risk. flexibility analysis as described in the manufacturer requirements and Although the FAA believes the RFA. operational restrictions beyond those probability of injury from operating The FAA believes this proposed rule already in part 107 would apply to small UAS over people is small, when would have a significant impact on a certain categories of small UAS to that small probability is multiplied by substantial number of small entities. mitigate the risks associated with each an increased number of operations, the Therefore, under Section 603(b) of the category. risk of the occurrence of injury RFA, the initial analysis must address: This rulemaking also proposes to remove the requirement for completing increases. The proposed performance- • Description of reasons the agency is based standards would establish three considering the action. a recurrent aeronautical knowledge test categories of small UAS operations • Statement of the legal basis and at a knowledge testing center and defined primarily by level of risk of objectives for the proposed rule. replaces the requirement with • injury posed. Additional manufacturer Description of the record-keeping and completing training that requires and operational requirements would other compliance requirements of the passing an online knowledge check by proposed rule. also apply to certain categories of small achieving a 100% score. As a result, the • All Federal rules that may duplicate, remote pilot in command who does not UAS to mitigate the risks of operating overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule. over people. • Description and an estimated number of 104 As of September 2017, part 107 Non-Airspace small entities to which the proposed rule will Waivers totaled 5,835. Of these 5,835 waivers, 3,915 apply. have been disapproved and 1,060 have been 103 See Public Law 115–254 347 (2018), codified • Description of Significant Regulatory approved. Of the remaining waivers, 543 are in at 49 U.S.C. 44807. Alternatives for Small Entities. process, with another 317 withdrawn.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3897

also hold a certificate under part 61 based requirements by using a means of The proposed rule would require a would be relieved of costs associated compliance by test, analysis, or small UAS manufacturer to establish with recurrent knowledge testing every inspection, or any combination of these and maintain a product support and 24 months. options. A manufacturer could perform notification process to notify the public any necessary tests contained in the and the FAA of any safety issues that 2. Statement of the Legal Basis and would render the aircraft ineligible for Objectives for the Proposed Rule means of compliance in-house or they could rent a testing facility with the operations over people. The FAA The FAA promulgates this rulemaking necessary equipment to show believes manufacturers of small UAS pursuant to the authority set forth in 49 compliance with the injury limitation would have such a system already U.S.C. 44807. Section 44807 directs the based on transfer of kinetic energy upon developed and in place to handle their Secretary of Transportation to determine impact. The manufacturer would certify warranties and to inform users of their whether ‘‘certain unmanned aircraft the results from this means of small UAS about new developments systems may operate safely in the compliance testing on its Declaration of and new products they are bringing to national airspace system.’’ If the Compliance to the FAA. the marketplace. This proposal does not Secretary determines that certain The proposed rule would require require the owner of a small UAS to unmanned aircraft systems may operate manufacturers of small UAS who use a send in a warranty card or provide the safely in the NAS, then the Secretary means of compliance the FAA has manufacturer any personal contact must ‘‘establish requirements for the accepted for Category 2 or Category 3 information. Therefore, the FAA safe operation of such aircraft systems operations, to make available to the believes the cost of this requirement in the national airspace system, Administrator the Declaration of would be minimal. The FAA notes a including operation related to research, Compliance and any other document, manufacturer could be an individual development, and testing of proprietary record, or report that the proposal that modifies a small UAS and then systems.’’ 105 requires, upon the FAA’s request. The sells it. According to the proposal, this This rulemaking is also promulgated individual would also be required to pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(1) and proposed rule would provide record retention requirements for have a notification and support process (2), which charge the FAA with issuing in place. The FAA envisions this regulations: (1) To ensure the safety of manufacturers who submit either a Declaration of Compliance or a means of process would be scaled to the aircraft and the efficient use of airspace; production, so the individual who sells and (2) to govern the flight of aircraft for compliance to the FAA. With today’s minimal cost of producing electronic a single aircraft could establish a much purposes of navigating, protecting and smaller scale process. For example, the identifying aircraft, and protecting documents and mass storage hardware devices, the FAA expects manufacturers manufacturer could simply email the individuals and property on the ground. owner of the small UAS and advise In addition, 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5) would keep all relevant documents, records, or reports required in an them of any safety issues. The FAA also charges the FAA with prescribing believes for a small-scale manufacturer regulations that the FAA finds necessary electronic format and properly back up their storage systems. Therefore, this or a modifier, the requirement to for safety in air commerce and national maintain a product support and security. Lastly, 49 U.S.C. 46105(c) requirement would add minimal to no costs to the manufacturers because notification process would also result in allows the Administrator to issue minimal costs. immediate orders to address an manufacturers would already have emergency related to safety in air computer systems, with sufficient 4. All Federal Rules That May commerce. memory available, to store and produce Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the The FAA intends this rule will be an the documents this proposal requires. Proposed Rule important step in further integrating The proposed rule would require a The FAA is unaware that the small UAS operations into the NAS. manufacturer to label a small unmanned proposed rule will overlap, duplicate or This rule would permit operations of aircraft qualified for Category 2 or conflict with existing Federal rules. small UAS over people and operations Category 3 operations with each at night without first obtaining a waiver. category for which the small UAS is 5. Description and an Estimated Number This proposed rule would also amend qualified to operate such that the label of Small Entities to Which the Proposed the knowledge testing requirements in is in English, legible, prominent, and Rule Will Apply part 107 to provide for recurrent affixed onto the small unmanned This proposed rule would apply to training to substitute for in-person aircraft by some permanent means. In two separate communities of small knowledge testing. With this proposed addition, the FAA proposes requiring entities: Manufacturers of small UAS rule, the FAA expects the small UAS remote pilots to ensure their small and entities that operate small UAS. The industry to continue finding new and unmanned aircraft are properly labeled FAA has not quantified the number of creative ways for utilizing small UAS, before conducting any operations over manufacturers that would be subject to and thereby grow the industry through people. The FAA believes the cost of the proposed rule because the FAA innovation. The FAA’s overall objective adding the additional labeling cannot reasonably predict how the in this proposed rule is to ensure safety information for the category for which market will develop for individual while encouraging new uses of small the small UAS is qualified to operate commercial uses of small UAS. UAS in the NAS. would be minimal given that UAS However, one database that the FAA has 3. Description of the Record-Keeping typically come with a label containing access to identifies 2,126 manufacturers and Other Compliance information such as the name of the of UAS worldwide.106 Out of these manufacturer, serial number, and model 2,126 manufacturers, over 72 percent Requirements of the Proposed Rule name or number. In addition, if the label are foreign entities. Additionally, The proposed rule would require the has worn out due to use or age, the Association of Unmanned Vehicle manufacturer to declare that a small remote pilot could satisfy the proposal Systems International (AUVSI) UAS meets applicable performance- by using a permanent marker, or etching the category into the body of the small 106 AUVSI Air Platform Database (accessed 105 49 U.S.C. 44807(c). unmanned aircraft. August 2018).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3898 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

examined the top 15 platforms used by NPRM because the RFA requires the As previously discussed in this section 333 exemption holders, and agency to consider significant regulatory section, the FAA considered and determined that only 3 of the 15 alternatives that meet the agency’s incorporated performance-based platforms are manufactured by U.S. statutory objectives and minimize the requirements that would accommodate entities, with over half (8 platforms) costs to small entities. The FAA rejected varying means of compliance and manufactured by DJI Industries, a the costlier alternatives due to policy potentially provide flexibility to small company based in China. It is not considerations and the undue burden manufacturers. However, the FAA did known how many of these imposed on small UAS operators. The not identify itemized cost data to manufacturers currently build, or will less costly alternatives and the FAA’s perform a sensitivity analysis of the build in the future, small UAS that may reasons for rejecting those alternatives costs for varying means of compliance fit within the bounds of this rulemaking. are discussed below. In addition, the for small manufacturers. Instead, the The FAA requests comments on the FAA discusses performance-based FAA estimates the cost of developing a number of U.S. owned and operated means of compliance that may provide means of compliance assuming it would small manufacturers of small UAS that additional flexibility and minimize involve the full costs of testing in a would be affected by this proposed rule. costs to small entities. research facility. The FAA requests information and data on types of means To be eligible for operations over • The FAA considered hands-on remote people, a manufacturer must submit a pilot flight training as part of the of compliance that would be flexible Declaration of Compliance that would requirements for operating a small UAS over and scalable and minimize costs to generally include the test report that is people or at night. However, at this time, the small manufacturers. generated by following an acceptable FAA does not have enough knowledge or C. International Trade Impact experience with the operation of small UAS means of compliance. Based on Assessment information from industry, the FAA on a large scale to assess whether training estimated the one-time cost for beyond part 107 requirements is warranted. The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 • The FAA considered allowing Category 3 (Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the developing the means of compliance to operations on a closed- or restricted-access be $200,000.107 The FAA considers this Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. site without requiring notice that the L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies cost as an upper bound; as methods operation was taking place. The FAA rejected become standardized, the cost will be this alternative due to the increased severity from establishing standards or engaging reduced. To provide flexibility to small of an injury resulting from a small unmanned in related activities that create entities, this rule proposes several aircraft impacting a person with up to 25 unnecessary obstacles to the foreign foot-pounds of kinetic energy. commerce of the United States. performance-based requirements that • would accommodate varying means of The FAA considered proposing a Pursuant to these Acts, the Category 4 to include operations in which a compliance. In this manner, the FAA establishment of standards is not small UAS may operate over people, considered an unnecessary obstacle to would build flexibility into the including flights over crowds or dense regulations, which would adapt to the the foreign commerce of the United concentrations of people, if: (1) The States, so long as the standard has a fast pace of small UAS innovation and manufacturer of the small UAS certifies the legitimate domestic objective, such as development. The FAA requests aircraft satisfies the same impact energy the protection of safety, and does not information and data on the cost of threshold as small UAS eligible to conduct operate in a manner that excludes developing varying means of Category 3 operations; (2) the small UAS imports that meet this objective. The compliance for small manufacturers. complies with industry consensus standards; and (3) the operation is conducted in statute also requires consideration of The FAA determines many of the compliance with a documented risk international standards and, where small UAS operations over people or at mitigation plan. The FAA rejected this appropriate, that they be the basis for night will be conducted by small alternative due to the increased severity of an U.S. standards. The FAA has considered business entities. Based on analysis injury resulting from a small unmanned the ongoing work of international conducted by AUVSI, over 85 percent of aircraft impacting a person with up to 25 organizations and other countries. No waivers granted have been to small foot-pounds of kinetic energy. international standards currently exist businesses.108 Therefore, the FAA • The FAA considered incorporating the for the types of operations the FAA determines this proposed rule would standards of 14 CFR 23.1401 or 27.1401 proposes in this rule. In addition, the have a positive significant economic (‘‘Anti-collision light system’’) for night operations under part 107. Part 107 does not FAA’s proposed requirements would impact on a substantial number of small contain aircraft certification rules or not create any obstacle to foreign entities. standards, and the FAA concludes the commerce. The FAA will maintain its 6. Description of Significant Regulatory reduced risk small UAS operations pose does awareness of other countries’ and Alternatives Considered for Small not warrant application of such standards. In international organizations’ work in addition, the diverse range of aircraft that Entities may operate under part 107 render developing potential standards relevant The FAA considered both more and prescriptive lighting requirements for all to small UAS operations. less costly alternatives as part of its types of operations at night impractical. D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment Prescribing lighting requirements would be Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 107 The FAA received aggregated cost data that overly burdensome for both the FAA and included the full rental of a research facility that manufacturers of small UAS, because they Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) has a drop tower, the set-up of the facility, testing would be forced to make tradeoffs that affect requires each Federal agency to prepare equipment costs, the cost of small UAS to be tested, both the weight of the aircraft and the a written statement assessing the effects and the cost of time experts spend on testing and aircraft’s power source and supply. of any Federal mandate in a proposed or analysis among other information. The FAA did not • The FAA considered the status quo. In receive itemized cost data to perform a sensitivity final agency rule that may result in an other words, requiring those entities that expenditure of $100 million or more (in analysis of the costs for varying means of want to perform operations over people or compliance. operations at night to go through the process 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, 108 (AUVSI) Association of Unmanned Vehicle local, and tribal governments, in the Systems International. As of July 31, 2017, 1,074 of obtaining a waiver. The FAA rejected this waivers had been issued of which 85 percent were alternative due to the undue burden it would aggregate, or by the private sector; such granted to small entities (entities with less than 10 impose on small UAS operators without an a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant employees). expectation of an increased level of safety. regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3899

uses an inflation-adjusted value of Compliance, and the development of • Manufacturer’s name, physical address, $155.0 million in lieu of $100 million. remote pilot operating instructions. and email address; • The assessment may be included in This proposed rule also eliminates the small unmanned aircraft system make, model name, and serial number; conjunction with other assessments, as information collection requirements • from the 2016 final rule as a result of whether the Declaration of Compliance it is here. is an initial declaration or an amended Although this proposed rule is a changes to the recurrent knowledge declaration, and if amended, the reason for significant regulatory action, it does not testing requirement. In addition, it may resubmittal; contain a mandate that would impose reduce the number of waiver • A process for notifying customers of costs on the private sector of more than applications the FAA receives because conditions that could render the small UAS $155 million annually.109 As a result, under this proposed rule, most ineligible for operations over people; and operations at night and some operations • certification that the manufacturer has the requirements of Title II of the Act do demonstrated that the small unmanned not apply. over people would be permissible in the absence of a waiver. aircraft satisfies the kinetic energy and E. Paperwork Reduction Act Below is a discussion of each of these exposed rotating parts standards through an accepted Means of Compliance. information-collection requirements in The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 detail. As required by the Paperwork The Means of Compliance (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires the FAA Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. demonstrates through test, analysis, or consider the impact of paperwork and 3507(d)), the FAA has submitted these inspection that the small UAS is eligible other information collection burdens proposed information collection for operations pursuant to Category 2 imposed on the public. According to the amendments to OMB for its review. and/or Category 3. The Means of 1995 amendments to the Paperwork Summary for Declaration of Compliance includes the following Reduction Act (as implemented by 5 Compliance and Means of Compliance: information: Detailed description of the CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an agency may The information collection addresses a means of compliance, and justification not collect or sponsor the collection of manufacturer’s submission of the (including any substantiating material) information, nor may it impose an Declaration of Compliance and the showing the means of compliance information collection requirement, Means of Compliance to the FAA for the establishes achievement of or unless it displays a currently valid purpose of demonstrating that the small equivalency to the safety level Office of Management and Budget UAS fulfills the applicable standards for identified. (OMB) control number. Category 2 and Category 3 operations. It Use: The FAA uses the Declaration of This rule proposes to add a new also addresses manufacturers’ Compliance and Means of Compliance information collection for the Operation compliance with the record retention to either accept or not accept that the of Small Unmanned Aircraft over requirements associated with submitting manufacturer has demonstrated People. This information collection justification to establish compliance. compliance with the requirements includes the estimated burdens for the The Declaration of Compliance applicable to Category 2 and/or Category Declaration of Compliance, Means of includes the following information: 3 operations.

TABLE 7—ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATE FOR DECLARATION OF COMPLIANCE AND MEANS OF COMPLIANCE [In hours]

Hours Hourly Year Initial Resubmitted Pages per page burden

1 ...... 15 0.75 50 1 787.5 2 ...... 15 0.75 50 1 787.5 3 ...... 15 0.75 50 1 787.5

Total ...... 2,362.5

The cost for the information remote pilot operating instructions must Use: In order to operate a small UAS collection on an hourly basis is a wage address, at a minimum: safely over people, the remote pilot of $72.91, for an annual cost of $57,417 • A system description that includes the would be responsible for knowing what for the small UAS manufacturers to required small UAS components, any system category of operations his or her small submit their declarations. Over the 3- limitations, and the declared category or UAS is eligible to conduct, and what year analysis period, the total cost is categories of operation; technical and operational limitations approximately $172,250 in 2016 dollars. • Modifications that will not change the apply to the operations. Accordingly, Summary for Remote Pilot Operating ability of the small UAS to meet the the FAA proposes to require Instructions: The information collection requirements for the category or categories of manufacturers to provide remote pilot addresses the manufacturer’s operation the small UAS is eligible to operating instructions with product- recordkeeping associated with the conduct, and specific information. development and maintenance of • Instructions for how to verify and change remote pilot operating instructions for the mode or configuration of the small UAS, small UAS operating over people. The if they are variable.

109 The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 private sector . . . or would reduce or eliminate the compliance with such duty.’’ Public Law 104–4 defines ‘‘Federal private sector mandate’’ as ‘‘any amount of authorization of appropriations for section 658 (1995). provision in legislation, statute, or regulation that Federal financial assistance that will be provided to . . . would impose an enforceable duty upon the the private sector for the purposes of ensuring

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3900 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 8—3-YEAR BURDEN ESTIMATES FOR REMOTE PILOT OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS [Hours]

Operating Hours Hourly Year instructions Pages per page burden

1 ...... 15 6 25 150 2 ...... 15 6 25 150 3 ...... 15 6 25 150

Total ...... 450

The cost per hour for the information qualified to conduct Category 2 requirement would also assist the FAA collection is a wage of $72.91, for an operations may also be qualified to in its oversight role because it provides annual cost of $10,937 for small UAS conduct Category 3 operations. The an efficient means for an inspector to manufacturers to develop and maintain manufacturer would label such a small evaluate whether an operation is remote pilot operating instructions. UAS with each category, as follows: consistent with the category or Over the 3-year analysis period, the total ‘‘Cat. 2, 3’’ or ‘‘Category 2, 3’’. The label categories of operation the small UAS cost is approximately $32,810 in 2016 could be painted onto, etched into, or may conduct. Because Category 3 dollars. affixed to the aircraft by some other operations would entail unique Summary for Labeling of Unmanned permanent means. operating limitations, the label on small Aircraft: Given that a small UAS could Use: The proposed labeling unmanned aircraft eligible to conduct be qualified to conduct more than one requirement would assist the remote category of operations, the FAA pilot to know what category of Category 3 operations would indicate to proposes requiring a manufacturer label operations his or her small UAS is the remote pilot that he or she must the small UAS with each category of eligible to conduct, and what technical adhere to the applicable operating operations the small UAS is qualified to and operational limitations apply to the limitations.110 conduct. For example, a small UAS operations. The proposed labeling

TABLE 9—3-YEAR BURDEN ESTIMATES FOR LABELING UNMANNED AIRCRAFT [Hours]

Number of Hours Hourly Year platforms per redesign burden

1 ...... 15 2 30 2 ...... 15 2 30 3 ...... 15 2 30

Total ...... 90

The FAA assumes that a manufacturer FAA maintains the current initial in ensuring the remote pilots’ familiarity would redesign a label already affixed to testing requirement to evaluate a remote with small UAS operations under part the aircraft, and that the label redesign pilot’s knowledge for operating in the 107. As a result, this proposed rule and redesign approval would take a NAS is critical, given the absence of a would replace the recurrent knowledge maximum of two hours at an hourly requirement for a practical test or testing requirement with a requirement wage of $72.91, for an annual cost of proficiency course in obtaining a remote to complete an online recurrent training, $2,187. Over the 3-year analysis period, pilot certificate. The FAA, however, has which the FAA may tailor to address the total cost is approximately $6,562 in concluded that requiring recurrent any knowledge areas in which the 2016 dollars. training in lieu of recurrent knowledge remote pilot needs improvement. Thus, Summary for Replacing Recurrent testing will achieve the necessary each remote pilot eligible to take Knowledge Testing Requirement with assurance the FAA seeks with regard to recurrent knowledge training as a result Recurrent Training. The FAA is remote pilots’ ongoing familiarity with of this proposed rulemaking would no proposing to revise existing information small UAS operations and the longer be required to take a knowledge collection 2120–0021, Certification: provisions of part 107. Recurrent test. Pilots and Flight Instructors, to reflect a training, which a remote pilot can Use: A training course affords the reduction in the information collection complete online, presents a less costly FAA the ability to ensure remote pilots burden as a result of replacing recurrent option and will achieve a level of are aware of the key requirements that in-person knowledge testing with assurance of knowledge that is affect them, address new or changed recurrent online training. comparable to the assurance a recurrent requirements in part 107 as a result of Following the implementation of part test provides. subsequent rulemakings, and highlight 107, the FAA re-evaluated its testing The FAA maintains that completion the tools and resources available to requirements for remote pilots. The of training every two years is important remote pilots. Such training would

110 The labeling requirement this rule proposes is regulations, as required by proposed §§ 107.73(a) people as a subject area on both the test and not the sole means by which a remote pilot in and 107.74(a) in this rule. As a result, initial training. command will be aware of the operating limitations knowledge testing and recurrent training applicable to Category 3 operations. Remote pilots implemented after the effective date of this in command must maintain awareness of updated proposed rule would include operations over

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3901

ensure remote pilots stay current and boundaries part 107 has established. savings in terms of the annual aid in their decision-making so they can The table below shows the hourly information collection burden. continue to operate safely within the

TABLE 10—3-YEAR BURDEN ESTIMATE—SAVINGS FROM ELIMINATING RECURRENT TESTING [Hours]

Applicant Year Pages per time Low case Low case Base case Base case High case High case application (hours) pages hours pages hours pages hours

1 ...... 70 3 915,692 39,244 1,039,015 44,529 2,264,918 97,068 2 ...... 70 3 1,673,944 71,740 1,899,440 81,405 4,140,494 177,450 3 ...... 70 3 2,164,218 92,752 2,868,812 122,949 8,362,221 358,381

Total ...... 70 3 4,753,854 203,737 5,807,267 248,883 14,767,633 632,899 Rows and Columns may not sum to total due to rounding. Recurrent testing is not required until 2018.

TABLE 11—3-YEAR BURDEN ESTIMATES FOR RELIEF FROM RECURRENT TESTING [$Millions]

Savings ($Millions)—by scenario Year Hourly value of time Low Base High

1 ...... $25.40 $1.0 $1.1 $2.5 2 ...... 25.40 1.8 2.1 4.5 3 ...... 25.40 2.4 3.1 9.1

Total ...... 5.2 6.3 16.1 Rows and Columns may not sum to total due to rounding.

Individuals and organizations may the categorical exclusion identified in the supply, distribution, or use of send comments on the information paragraph 5–6.6 of FAA Order 1050.1F energy. collection requirement to the address and involves no extraordinary C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting listed in the ADDRESSES section at the circumstances. International Regulatory Cooperation beginning of this preamble by April 15, 2019. Comments also should be IX. Executive Order Determinations Executive Order 13609, Promoting 113 submitted to the Office of Management A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism International Regulatory Cooperation, and Budget, Office of Information and promotes international regulatory Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk The FAA has analyzed this proposed cooperation to meet shared challenges Officer for FAA, New Executive Office rule under the principles and criteria of involving health, safety, labor, security, Building, Room 10202, 725 17th Street Executive Order 13132, Federalism.111 environmental, and other issues and to NW, Washington, DC 20053. The agency has determined this action reduce, eliminate, or prevent would not have a substantial direct unnecessary differences in regulatory F. International Compatibility and requirements. The FAA has analyzed Cooperation effect on the States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and this proposed rule under the policies In keeping with U.S. obligations the States, or on the distribution of and agency responsibilities of Executive under the Convention on International power and responsibilities among the Order 13609, and has determined this Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to various levels of government and proposal would have no effect on conform to International Civil Aviation therefore would not have federalism international regulatory cooperation. Organization (ICAO) Standards and implications. Recommended Practices to the D. Executive Order 13771, Reducing maximum extent practicable. The FAA B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations Regulation and Controlling Regulatory has reviewed the corresponding ICAO That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Costs Standards and Recommended Practices Distribution, or Use This proposed rule is expected to be and has identified no differences with an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory these regulations. The FAA analyzed this proposed rule action. Details on the estimated cost under Executive Order 13211, Actions savings of this proposed rule can be G. Environmental Analysis Concerning Regulations that found in the rule’s economic analysis. FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA Significantly Affect Energy Supply, actions that are categorically excluded Distribution, or Use.112 The agency has X. Tribal Outreach from preparation of an environmental determined this rule would not be a Consistent with Executive Order assessment or environmental impact ‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 13175, Consultation and Coordination statement under the National executive order and would not be likely with Indian Tribal Governments,114 and Environmental Policy Act in the to have a significant adverse effect on FAA Order 1210.20, American Indian absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has determined this notice of 111 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999). 113 77 FR 26413 (May 1, 2012). proposed rulemaking action qualifies for 112 66 FR 28355 (May 18, 2001). 114 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3902 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation • Provided information to The Choctaw with a comment, the agency does not Policy and Procedures,115 the FAA Nation of Oklahoma, which is participating place it in the docket. It is held in a 118 ensures that federally recognized Tribes in the UAS Integration Pilot Program. separate file to which the public does (Tribes) are given the opportunity to Through this program, the FAA will work with The Choctaw Nation to ensure safe UAS not have access, and the FAA places a provide meaningful and timely input operations for the purposes of agriculture, note in the docket that it has received regarding proposed Federal actions that public safety, and infrastructure inspections. it. If the FAA receives a request to have the potential to affect uniquely or Such operations may include operations over examine or copy this information, it significantly their respective Tribes. At people and operations at night. treats it as any other request under the this point, the FAA has not identified The FAA will continue to respond to Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. any unique or significant effects, tribes that express interest in or 552). The FAA processes such a request environmental or otherwise, on tribes concerns about UAS operations, and under Department of Transportation resulting from this proposed rule. As the will engage in government-to- procedures found in 49 CFR part 7. FAA contemplated in the 2016 final government consultation with tribes as rule, the FAA has conducted outreach to C. Availability of Rulemaking appropriate, in accordance with Documents tribes and responded to those tribes Executive Orders and FAA guidance. seeking information about small UAS An electronic copy of rulemaking operations conducted within their XI. Additional Information documents may be obtained from the territory. A. Comments Invited internet by— The FAA continues to evaluate how it 1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking might address such concerns within the The FAA invites interested persons to Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); broader UAS integration effort.116 In participate in this rulemaking by 2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and particular, the FAA is currently engaged submitting written comments, data, or Policies web page at http:// in steps to fulfill the President’s recent views. The agency also invites www.faa.gov/regulations_policies; or direction to the Secretary to establish a comments relating to the economic, 3. Accessing the Government pilot program under which State, local, environmental, energy, or federalism Publishing Office’s web page at https:// and tribal governments can submit impacts that might result from adopting www.govinfo.gov/. proposals to the Secretary to test and the proposals in this document. The Copies may also be obtained by evaluate the integration of civil and most helpful comments reference a sending a request to the Federal public UAS operations into the low- specific portion of the proposal, explain Aviation Administration, Office of altitude NAS.117 The pilot program the reason for any recommended Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence involves cultivating relationships with change, and include supporting data. To Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or State, local, and tribal jurisdictions to ensure the docket does not contain by calling (202) 267–9677. Commenters promote the safe operation of UAS and duplicate comments, commenters must identify the docket or notice enable the development of UAS should send only one copy of written number of this rulemaking. technologies and their use in comments, or if comments are filed All documents the FAA considered in agriculture, commerce, emergency electronically, commenters should developing this proposed rule, management, human transportation, and submit only one time. including economic analyses and other sectors. The FAA will file in the docket all technical reports, may be accessed from The FAA has also conducted outreach comments it receives, as well as a report the internet through the Federal to tribes to ensure they are familiar with summarizing each substantive public eRulemaking Portal referenced above. the provisions of part 107 and how they contact with FAA personnel concerning might apply in Indian country, and that this proposed rulemaking. Before acting D. Small Business Regulatory they are aware of FAA’s plans for on this proposal, the FAA will consider Enforcement Fairness Act additional rulemakings to integrate UAS all comments it receives on or before the The Small Business Regulatory into the NAS. As part of that outreach, closing date for comments. The agency Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 the FAA has: may change this proposal in light of the (SBREFA) requires FAA to comply with comments it receives. • Provided material on the 2016 final rule small entity requests for information or to participants at the mid-year conference of B. Proprietary or Confidential Business advice about compliance with statutes the National Congress of American Indians Information and regulations within its jurisdiction. (Spokane, Washington, June 27–30, 2016); A small entity with questions regarding Commenters should not file • Presented at a workshop at the National this document may contact its local proprietary or confidential business Tribal Transportation Conference (Anaheim, FAA official, or the person listed under California, October 4, 2016); information in the docket. Such the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT • Responded to inquiries from the information must be sent or delivered Shoshone-Bannock Tribes and Muscogee directly to the person identified in the heading at the beginning of the preamble. To find out more about (Creek) Nation regarding use of UAS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT (September and October 2016); SBREFA online, visit http:// section of this document, and marked as • Presented information on UAS at a www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ proprietary or confidential. If submitting meeting of the Tribal Transportation Self- rulemaking/sbre_act/. Governance Program Negotiated Rulemaking information on a disk or CD ROM, mark Meeting (Shawnee, Oklahoma, October 18, the outside of the disk or CD ROM, and List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 107 2016); and identify electronically within the disk or Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, CD ROM the specific information that is Reporting and recordkeeping 115 FAA Order No. 1210.20 (Jan. 28, 2004), proprietary or confidential. requirements, Security measures, Signs available at http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/ Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), if the FAA is media/1210.pdf. and symbols, Small unmanned aircraft, aware of proprietary information filed 116 81 FR 42064, 42189. Unmanned aircraft. 117 82 FR 51903 (Nov. 8, 2017); Presidential Memorandum for the Secretary of Transportation 118 Federal Aviation Administration, UAS The Proposed Amendment (Oct. 25, 2017), available at https:// Integration Pilot Program (May 7, 2018), available www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/10/25/ at https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnerships/ In consideration of the foregoing, the presidential-memorandum-secretary-transportation. uas_integration_pilot_program/. See also Federal Aviation Administration

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:36 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3903

proposes to amend chapter I of title 14, § 107.7 Inspection, testing, and completed an initial knowledge test or Code of Federal Regulations as follows: demonstration of compliance. training, as applicable, under § 107.73 (a)(1) A remote pilot in command, or § 107.74, after [the effective date of a PART 107—SMALL UNMANNED owner, or person manipulating the flight subsequent final rule]; and AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS controls of a small unmanned aircraft (2) The small unmanned aircraft has system must present his or her remote lighted anti-collision lighting visible for ■ 1. The authority citation for part 107 pilot certificate with a small UAS rating at least 3 statute miles. The remote pilot is revised to read as follows: and identification that contains the in command may reduce the intensity Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40101 note, information listed at § 107.67(b) for of, but may not extinguish, the anti- 40103(b), 44701(a)(5), 46105(c), 46110, inspection upon a request from: collision lighting if he or she determines 44807. (i) The Administrator; that, because of operating conditions, it ■ 2. Amend § 107.1 by revising (ii) An authorized representative of would be in the interest of safety to do paragraphs (a) and (b)(3) to read as the National Transportation Safety so. follows: Board; * * * * * (iii) Any Federal, State, or local law ■ 8. Revise § 107.35 to read as follows: § 107.1 Applicability. enforcement officer; or (a) Except as provided in paragraph (iv) An authorized representative of § 107.35 Operation of multiple small (b) of this section, this part applies to the Transportation Security unmanned aircraft. the registration, airman certification, Administration. A person may not manipulate flight and operation of civil small unmanned (2) A remote pilot in command, controls or act as a remote pilot in aircraft systems within the United owner, or person manipulating the flight command or visual observer in the States. This part also applies to the controls of a small unmanned aircraft operation of more than one unmanned qualification of civil small unmanned system must, upon request, make aircraft at the same time. ■ aircraft systems to operate over human available to the Administrator any 9. Revise § 107.39 to read as follows: document, record, or report required to beings in the United States. § 107.39 Operation over human beings. (b) * * * be kept under the regulations of this chapter. No person may operate a small (3) Any operation that the holder of unmanned aircraft over a human being an exemption under section 333 of * * * * * (c) Any person holding an FAA- unless: Public Law 112–95 or 49 U.S.C. 44807 (a) That human being is directly accepted Declaration of Compliance elects to conduct pursuant to the participating in the operation of the under subpart D of this part must, upon exemption, unless otherwise specified small unmanned aircraft; in the exemption. request, make available to the (b) That human being is located under ■ 3. Amend § 107.3 by adding the Administrator: a covered structure or inside a (1) The Declaration of Compliance definitions of ‘‘Casualty’’ and stationary vehicle that can provide required under subpart D of this part; ‘‘Declaration of Compliance’’ in reasonable protection from a falling and alphabetical order to read as follows: small unmanned aircraft; or (2) Any other document, record, or (c) The operation meets the § 107.3 Definitions. report required to be kept under the requirements of at least one of the * * * * * regulations of this chapter. operational categories specified in (d) Any person holding an FAA- Casualty means an Abbreviated Injury subpart D of this part. Scale level 3 or greater injury. accepted Declaration of Compliance ■ 10. Amend § 107.49 by revising under subpart D of this part must, upon * * * * * paragraphs (d) and (e) and adding request, allow the Administrator to Declaration of Compliance means a paragraph (f) to read as follows: inspect its facilities, technical data, and record submitted to the FAA that any manufactured small UAS and § 107.49 Preflight familiarization, certifies the small unmanned aircraft witness any tests necessary to determine inspection, and actions for aircraft system conforms to the Category 2 or compliance with that subpart. operation. Category 3 requirements under subpart ■ 6. Amend § 107.19 by revising * * * * * D of this part. paragraph (c) to read as follows: (d) If the small unmanned aircraft is * * * * * powered, ensure that there is enough ■ 4. Amend § 107.5 by revising § 107.19 Remote pilot in command. available power for the small unmanned paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) and adding * * * * * aircraft system to operate for the paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows: (c) The remote pilot in command intended operational time; must ensure that the small unmanned (e) Ensure that any object attached or § 107.5 Falsification, reproduction or aircraft will pose no undue hazard to alteration. carried by the small unmanned aircraft other people, other aircraft, or other is secure and does not adversely affect * * * * * property in the event of a loss of control the flight characteristics or (b) * * * of the small unmanned aircraft for any controllability of the aircraft; and (2) Denial of a Declaration of reason. (f) If the operation will be conducted Compliance; * * * * * over human beings under subpart D of (3) Suspension or revocation of any ■ 7. Amend § 107.29 by revising this part, ensure that the aircraft meets certificate, waiver, or Declaration of paragraph (a) to read as follows: the requirements of § 107.110, Compliance issued or accepted by the § 107.115(a), or § 107.120(a), as Administrator under this part and held § 107.29 Operation at night. applicable. by that person; or (a) No person may operate a small ■ 11. Amend § 107.61 by revising (4) A civil penalty. unmanned aircraft system at night paragraph (d) to read as follows: ■ 5. Amend § 107.7 by revising unless: paragraph (a) and adding paragraphs (c) (1) The remote pilot in command of § 107.61 Eligibility. and (d) to read as follows: the small unmanned aircraft has * * * * *

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3904 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

(d) Demonstrate aeronautical (h) Determining the performance of human beings, in addition to those knowledge by satisfying one of the the small unmanned aircraft; permitted by § 107.39(a) and (b). following conditions, in a manner (i) Physiological effects of drugs and acceptable to the Administrator: alcohol; § 107.105 Prohibition on operations over moving vehicles. (1) Pass an initial aeronautical (j) Aeronautical decision-making and knowledge test covering the areas of judgment; No person may operate a small knowledge specified in § 107.73; or (k) Airport operations; unmanned aircraft over a human being (2) If a person holds a pilot certificate (l) Maintenance and preflight located in a moving vehicle. (other than a student pilot certificate) inspection procedures; and § 107.108 Limitations on operations over issued under part 61 of this chapter and (m) Operation at night. human beings. meets the flight review requirements ■ 14. Revise § 107.74 to read as follows: Except as provided in § 107.39(a) and specified in § 61.56, complete training (b), a remote pilot in command may covering the areas of knowledge § 107.74 Small unmanned aircraft system training. conduct operations over human beings specified in § 107.74. only as Category 1, 2, or 3 operations ■ 12. Revise § 107.65 to read as follows: Training for pilots who hold a pilot certificate (other than a student pilot authorized by §§ 107.110, 107.115, and § 107.65 Aeronautical knowledge recency. certificate) issued under part 61 of this 107.120. A person may not exercise the chapter and meet the flight review § 107.110 Category 1 operations. privileges of a remote pilot in command requirements specified in § 61.56 covers with small UAS rating unless that the following areas of knowledge: To conduct Category 1 operations, a person has accomplished the following (a) Applicable regulations relating to remote pilot in command must use a in a manner acceptable to the small unmanned aircraft system rating small unmanned aircraft that weighs Administrator within the previous 24 privileges, limitations, and flight 0.55 pounds or less on takeoff and calendar months: operation; throughout the duration of each (a) Passed an initial aeronautical (b) Effects of weather on small operation under this category, including knowledge test covering the areas of unmanned aircraft performance; everything that is on board or otherwise knowledge specified in § 107.73; (c) Small unmanned aircraft loading; attached to the aircraft. (b) Completed recurrent training (d) Emergency procedures; § 107.115 Category 2 operations. covering the areas of knowledge (e) Crew resource management; (a) Remote pilot in command specified in § 107.73; or (f) Determining the performance of the requirements. To conduct Category 2 (c) If a person holds a pilot certificate small unmanned aircraft; operations, a remote pilot in command (other than a student pilot certificate) (g) Maintenance and preflight must use a small unmanned aircraft issued under part 61 of this chapter and inspection procedures; and system that is qualified and labeled for meets the flight review requirements (h) Operation at night. Category 2 operations pursuant to specified in § 61.56, completed training paragraph (b) of this section. covering the areas of knowledge Subpart D—[Redesignated as Subpart (b) Eligibility. To be qualified to specified in § 107.74. E] conduct Category 2 operations, the (d) A person who has passed a ■ 15. Redesignate subpart D as subpart small unmanned aircraft system must: recurrent aeronautical knowledge test in E. (1) Be designed, produced, or a manner acceptable to the ■ 16. Add new subpart D to read as modified such that it: Administrator or who has satisfied the follows: training requirement of paragraph (c) of (i) Will not cause injury to a human being that is equivalent to or greater this section prior to [the effective date Subpart D—Operations Over Human than the severity of injury caused by a of a subsequent final rule] within the Beings previous 24 calendar months is transfer of 11 foot-pounds of kinetic considered to be in compliance with the Sec. energy upon impact from a rigid object; requirement of paragraph (b) or (c) of 107.100 Applicability. (ii) Does not contain any exposed this section, as applicable. 107.105 Prohibition on operations over rotating parts that could lacerate human moving vehicles. ■ 13. Revise § 107.73 to read as follows: skin upon impact with a human being; 107.108 Limitations on operations over and § 107.73 Knowledge and training. human beings. (iii) Does not contain any safety 107.110 Category 1 operations. defects identified by the Administrator. An initial aeronautical knowledge test 107.115 Category 2 operations. and recurrent training covers the 107.120 Category 3 operations. (2) Display a label indicating following areas of knowledge: 107.125 Means of compliance. eligibility to conduct Category 2 (a) Applicable regulations relating to 107.130 Variable mode and variable operations. The label must be in English small unmanned aircraft system rating configuration of small unmanned aircraft and be legible, prominent, and privileges, limitations, and flight systems. permanently affixed to the small operation; 107.135 Declaration of Compliance. unmanned aircraft. (b) Airspace classification, operating 107.140 Previously manufactured small (3) Have current remote pilot unmanned aircraft systems. operating instructions that apply to the requirements, and flight restrictions 107.145 Record retention. affecting small unmanned aircraft 107.150 Relabeling by remote pilot in operation of the small unmanned operation; command for Category 2 and 3 aircraft system. The person who (c) Aviation weather sources and operations. designed, produced, or modified the effects of weather on small unmanned small unmanned aircraft system must aircraft performance; § 107.100 Applicability. make available the instructions upon (d) Small unmanned aircraft loading; This subpart prescribes the eligibility sale, transfer, or use of the aircraft by (e) Emergency procedures; standards and operating requirements someone other than the person who (f) Crew resource management; for small unmanned aircraft systems designed, produced, or modified the (g) Radio communication procedures; that may conduct operations over small unmanned aircraft system. Such

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3905

instructions must address, at a (b) Eligibility. To be qualified to accepted a Declaration of Compliance minimum: conduct Category 3 operations, the for that small unmanned aircraft system (i) A system description that includes small unmanned aircraft system must: in accordance with § 107.135. the required small unmanned aircraft (1) Be designed, produced, or system components, any system modified such that it: § 107.125 Means of compliance. limitations, and the declared category or (i) Will not cause injury to a human (a) To meet the requirements of categories of operation; being that is equivalent to or greater § 107.115(b)(1) for operations in (ii) Modifications that will not change than the severity of the injury caused by Category 2, or the requirements of the ability of the small unmanned a transfer of 25 foot-pounds of kinetic § 107.120(b)(1) for operations in aircraft system to meet the requirements energy upon impact from a rigid object; Category 3, the means of compliance for the category or categories of (ii) Does not contain any exposed must consist of test, analysis, or operation the small unmanned aircraft rotating parts that could lacerate human inspection that the Administrator has system is eligible to conduct; and skin upon impact with a human being; determined is acceptable. The means of (iii) Instructions for how to verify and and compliance may include consensus change the mode or configuration of the (iii) Does not contain any safety standards. small unmanned aircraft system, if they defects identified by the Administrator. (b) An applicant requesting FAA are variable. (2) Display a label indicating acceptance of a means of compliance (4) Be subject to a product support eligibility to conduct Category 3 must submit the following information and notification process. Anyone who operations. The label must be in English to the FAA in a manner specified by the designs, produces, or modifies a small and be legible, prominent, and Administrator: unmanned aircraft system under this permanently affixed to the small (1) Detailed description of the means paragraph (b) must maintain product unmanned aircraft. of compliance; and support and notification procedures to (3) Have current remote pilot (2) Justification, including any notify the public and the FAA of: operating instructions that apply to the substantiating material, showing the (i) Any defect or condition that causes operation of the small unmanned means of compliance establishes the small unmanned aircraft system to aircraft system. The person who achievement of or equivalency to the no longer meet the requirements of this designed, produced, or modified the safety level identified in subpart; and small unmanned aircraft system must §§ 107.115(b)(1) and 107.120(b)(1). (ii) Any identified safety defect that make available the instructions upon causes the small unmanned aircraft sale, transfer, or use of the aircraft by § 107.130 Variable mode and variable system to exceed a low probability of someone other than the person who configuration of small unmanned aircraft systems. casualty. designed, produced, or modified the (5) Operate only after the person who small unmanned aircraft system. Such A small unmanned aircraft system designed, produced, or modified the instructions must address, at a may be eligible for one or more small unmanned aircraft system has minimum: categories of operation over human received notification that the FAA has (i) A system description that includes beings under this subpart, as long as a accepted the Declaration of Compliance the required small unmanned aircraft remote pilot in command cannot for that small unmanned aircraft system system components, any system inadvertently switch between modes or in accordance with § 107.135. limitations, and the declared category or configurations. categories of operation; § 107.135 Declaration of Compliance. § 107.120 Category 3 operations. (ii) Modifications that will not change (a) Remote pilot in command the ability of the small unmanned (a) Required information. Prior to requirements. To conduct Category 3 aircraft system to meet the requirements declaring a small unmanned aircraft operations, a remote pilot in command: for the category or categories of system to be compliant with the (1) Must use a small unmanned operation the small unmanned aircraft requirements of this subpart for aircraft system that is qualified and system is eligible to conduct; and Category 2 or 3 operations, an applicant labeled for Category 3 operations (iii) Instructions for how to verify and must submit a Declaration of pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section; change the mode or configuration of the Compliance for acceptance by the FAA, (2) Must not operate the small small unmanned aircraft system, if they in a manner specified by the unmanned aircraft over open air are variable. Administrator, that includes the assemblies of human beings; and (4) Be subject to a product support following information: (3) May only operate the small and notification process. Anyone who (1) Applicant’s name; unmanned aircraft above any human designs, produces, or modifies a small (2) Applicant’s physical address; being if the operation meets one of the unmanned aircraft system under this (3) Applicant’s email address; following conditions: paragraph (b) must maintain product (4) The small unmanned aircraft (i) The operation is within or over a support and notification procedures to system make and model name; closed- or restricted-access site, and any notify the public and the FAA of: (5) The small unmanned aircraft human being located within the closed- (i) Any defect or condition that causes system serial number or range of serial or restricted-access site is on notice that the small unmanned aircraft system to numbers that are the subject of the a small unmanned aircraft may fly over no longer meet the requirements of this Declaration of Compliance; them; or subpart; and (6) Whether the Declaration of (ii) The small unmanned aircraft does (ii) Any identified safety defect that Compliance is an initial declaration or not maintain sustained flight over any causes the small unmanned aircraft an amended declaration; human being not directly participating system to exceed a low probability of (7) If the Declaration of Compliance is in the operation of the small unmanned fatality. an amended declaration, the reason for aircraft or located under a covered (5) Operate only after the person who the re-submittal; structure or inside a stationary vehicle designed, produced, or modified the (8) Certification that the applicant: that can provide reasonable protection small unmanned aircraft system has (i) Has demonstrated that the small from a falling small unmanned aircraft. received notification that the FAA has unmanned aircraft, or specific

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3906 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

configurations of that aircraft, satisfies demonstrating how the small unmanned that is on board or otherwise attached to § 107.115(b)(1)(i) and (ii), or aircraft system meets the requirements the aircraft; or § 107.120(b)(1)(i) and (ii), or both, of this subpart within 10 business days (b) Category 2 and 3 operations. (1) through an accepted means of from the date of issuance of the The FAA has accepted a Declaration of compliance; proposed notice. Compliance in accordance with (ii) Has satisfied § 107.115(b)(4) or (iii) If the FAA does not receive the § 107.135; and § 107.120(b)(4), or both; and information required by paragraph (2) The small unmanned aircraft is (iii) Will, upon request, allow the (d)(3)(ii) of this section within 10 labeled for the appropriate category of Administrator to inspect its facilities, business days from the date of the operations in English such that the label technical data, and any manufactured issuance of the proposed notice, the is legible, prominent, and permanently small unmanned aircraft system and FAA will issue a notice rescinding the affixed to the small unmanned aircraft. witness any tests necessary to determine Declaration of Compliance. compliance with this subpart; and (4) If the Administrator determines § 107.145 Record retention. (9) Other information as required by that an emergency exists in accordance A person who submits a Declaration the Administrator. with paragraph (d)(2)(iii) of this section, of Compliance or means of compliance (b) FAA acceptance. If the FAA the FAA will exercise its authority under this subpart must retain the determines the applicant has under 49 U.S.C. 46105(c) to issue an following substantiating data: demonstrated compliance with the order rescinding a Declaration of (a)(1) For the Declaration of requirements of this subpart, it will Compliance without initiating the Compliance, the holder of the notify the applicant that it has accepted process in paragraph (d)(3) of this Declaration of Compliance must store the Declaration of Compliance. If the section. the detailed description of the means of FAA determines the applicant has not (e) Petition to reconsider the compliance and justification, including provided sufficient evidence to rescission of a Declaration of any substantiating material, for two demonstrate compliance, the FAA will Compliance. A person subject to an years after the cessation of production of notify the applicant that it has not order of rescission under paragraph the small unmanned aircraft system to accepted the Declaration of Compliance. (d)(3) of this section may petition the support the Declaration of Compliance; (c) Notification of a safety issue. Prior FAA to reconsider the rescission of a and to initiating rescission proceedings Declaration of Compliance by (2) Any accompanying data must pursuant to paragraphs (d)(1) through submitting a request to the FAA in a contain detailed information on the type (3) of this section, the FAA will notify manner specified by the Administrator of means of compliance and the results the applicant if a safety issue has been within 60 days of the date of issuance or justification used to demonstrate the identified for the Declaration of of the rescission. small unmanned aircraft system meets Compliance. §§ 107.115(b) and 107.120(b), as (d) Rescission. (1) No person may (1) A petition to reconsider the applicable. operate a small unmanned aircraft rescission of a Declaration of system identified on a Declaration of Compliance must demonstrate at least (b)(1) For a means of compliance, the Compliance that the FAA has rescinded one of the following: information described in paragraph (a) pursuant to this subpart while that (i) A material fact that was not present of this section must be stored for as long Declaration of Compliance is rescinded. in the original response to the as the means of compliance is accepted (2) The FAA may rescind a notification of the safety issue and an by the FAA; and Declaration of Compliance if any of the explanation for why it was not present (2) Accompanying data or information following conditions occur: in the original response; must contain: (i) A small unmanned aircraft system (ii) The FAA made a material factual (i) Test procedures that outline the for which a Declaration of Compliance error in the decision to rescind the test methodology, if applicable; and was accepted no longer complies with Declaration of Compliance; or (ii) Justification, including any § 107.115(b)(1) or § 107.120(b)(1); (iii) The FAA did not correctly substantiating material, showing the (ii) The FAA finds a Declaration of interpret a law, regulation, or precedent. means of compliance establishes Compliance is in violation of § 107.5(a); (2) Upon consideration of the achievement of or equivalency to the or information submitted under paragraph safety level identified in (iii) The Administrator determines an (e)(1) of this section, the FAA will issue §§ 107.115(b)(1) and 107.120(b)(1), as emergency exists related to safety in a notice either affirming the rescission applicable. accordance with the authority in 49 or withdrawing the rescission. U.S.C. 46105. (f) Inapplicability of part 13, subpart § 107.150 Relabeling by remote pilot in command for Category 2 and 3 operations. (3) If a safety issue identified under D, of this chapter. Title 14 CFR part 13, paragraph (c) of this section has not subpart D, does not apply to the If a Category 2 or Category 3 label been resolved, the FAA may rescind the procedures of paragraphs (d) and (e) of affixed to a small unmanned aircraft is Declaration of Compliance as follows: this section. damaged or destroyed such that it is no (i) The FAA will issue a notice longer legible, a remote pilot in proposing to rescind the Declaration of § 107.140 Previously manufactured small command must relabel the aircraft in Compliance. The notice will set forth unmanned aircraft systems. English such that the label is legible, the agency’s basis for the proposed A remote pilot in command may prominent, and will remain on the small rescission and provide the holder of the operate a small unmanned aircraft unmanned aircraft for the duration of Declaration of Compliance with 10 system manufactured prior to [the the operation before conducting business days from the date of issuance effective date of a subsequent final rule] operations over human beings. The label of the proposed notice to submit over human beings under the following must correctly identify the category or evidentiary information to refute the circumstances: categories of operation over human proposed notice. (a) Category 1 operations. The small beings that the small unmanned aircraft (ii) The holder of the Declaration of unmanned aircraft weighs 0.55 pounds is qualified to conduct in accordance Compliance must submit information or less on takeoff, including everything with this subpart.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3907

■ 17. Amend § 107.205 by revising (b) Section 107.29(a)(2) and (b)—Anti- Issued under the authority provided by 49 paragraph (b) and adding paragraph (j) collision light required for operations at U.S.C. 106(f), 40101 note; and 44807, in to read as follows: night and during periods of civil Washington, DC on January 29, 2019. twilight. Elaine L. Chao, § 107.205 List of regulations subject to Secretary, Department of Transportation. * * * * * waiver. Daniel K. Elwell, * * * * * (j) Section 107.105—Prohibition on Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation operations over moving vehicles. Administration. [FR Doc. 2019–00732 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\13FEP2.SGM 13FEP2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Vol. 84 Wednesday, No. 30 February 13, 2019

Part III

Department of Energy

10 CFR Parts 430 and 431 Energy Conservation Program for Appliance Standards: Proposed Procedures for Use in New or Revised Energy Conservation Standards and Test Procedures for Consumer Products and Commercial/Industrial Equipment; Proposed Rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3910 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 2019. See section V, ‘‘Public some documents listed in the index, Participation,’’ for details. such as those containing information 10 CFR Parts 430 and 431 Meeting: DOE will hold a public that is exempt from public disclosure, meeting on Thursday, March 21, 2019, may not be publicly available. [EERE–2017–BT–STD–0062] from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The meeting The docket web page can be found at: will also be broadcast as a webinar. See https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D= RIN 1904–AD38 section V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ for EERE-2017-BT-STD-0062. The docket web page contains instructions on how Energy Conservation Program for webinar registration information, to access all documents, including Appliance Standards: Proposed participant instructions, and public comments, in the docket. See Procedures for Use in New or Revised information about the capabilities section V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ for Energy Conservation Standards and available to webinar participants. further information on how to submit Test Procedures for Consumer ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be comments through http:// Products and Commercial/Industrial held at the U.S. Department of Energy, www.regulations.gov. Equipment Forrestal Building, Room 8E–089, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and DC 20585. Sofie Miller, Senior Advisor, U.S. Renewable Energy (EERE), Department Interested persons are encouraged to Department of Energy, Office of Energy of Energy. submit comments, identified by Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 1000 ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking ‘‘Process Rule NOPR’’ and docket Independence Avenue SW, Washington, (NOPR) and request for comment. number EERE–2017–BT–STD–0062 DC 20585. Telephone: (202) 586–5000. and/or the regulatory information Email: [email protected]. SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of number (RIN) 1904–AD38. Comments Francine Pinto, U.S. Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’ or ‘‘the Department’’) may be submitted using any of the Energy, Office of the General Counsel, proposes to update and modernize the following methods: GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Department’s current rulemaking • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// Washington, DC 20585. Telephone: methodology titled, ‘‘Procedures, www.regulations.gov. Follow the (202) 586–7432. Email: Francine.Pinto@ Interpretations, and Policies for instructions for submitting comments. hq.doe.gov. Consideration of New or Revised Energy • Email: [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Conservation Standards for Consumer Include ‘‘Process Rule NOPR’’ and Products’’ (‘‘Process Rule’’). In docket number EERE–2017–BT–STD– Table of Contents overview, in this document, DOE is 0062 and/or RIN number 1904–AD38 in I. Summary of Proposal proposing to clarify that the Process the subject line of the message. Submit II. Introduction Rule applies to the establishment of new electronic comments in WordPerfect, A. Authority or revised energy conservation Microsoft Word, PDF, or ASCII file B. Background on the Process Rule standards and test procedures for both format, and avoid the use of special III. Discussion of Specific Revisions to the consumer products and commercial/ characters or any form of encryption. Process Rule A. The Process Rule Will Be Binding on industrial equipment. This proposed • Postal Mail: Sofie Miller, U.S. rule would make the specified the Department of Energy Department of Energy, Office of Energy B. The Process Rule Will Apply to Both rulemaking procedures binding on DOE, Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 1000 Consumer Products and Commercial and it would also revise language in Independence Avenue SW, Washington, Equipment certain provisions to make it consistent DC 20585, Room 6A–013, Washington, C. The Application of the Process Rule to with the Energy Policy and DC, 20585. If possible, please submit all ASHRAE Equipment Conservation Act of 1975 (‘‘EPCA’’), as items on a compact disc (CD), in which D. Priority Setting amended, and other applicable law. It case it is not necessary to include E. Coverage Determinations also proposes to expand early printed copies. F. Early Stakeholder Input to Determine the Need for Rulemaking opportunities for public input on the • Hand Delivery/Courier: Sofie Appliance Program’s priority setting 1. Standards Miller, U.S. Department of Energy, a. Avenues for Early Stakeholder Input: and rulemaking activities, to define a Office of Energy Efficiency and Early Assessment Review significant energy savings threshold for Renewable Energy, 1000 Independence b. Other Avenues for Early Stakeholder updating energy conservation standards, Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585. Input to commit to publishing final test Telephone: (202) 586–5000. If possible, c. Elimination of ANOPRs From the procedures at least 180 days in advance please submit all items on a CD, in Process Rule of a standards proposal, and to delineate which case it is not necessary to include d. Decision-Making Process for Issuing a procedures for rulemaking under the printed copies. Determination Not To Amend Current Standards separate direct final rule and negotiated No telefascsimilies (faxes) will be rulemaking authorities, among other 2. Test Procedures accepted. For detailed instructions on G. Significant Savings of Energy Threshold issues. DOE may consider additional submitting comments and additional H. Finalization of Test Procedures Prior to changes to the Process Rule in a future information on the rulemaking process, Issuance of a Standards NOPR proceeding. In addition to requesting see section V of this document (Public I. Adoption of Industry Standards written comments on its proposal, DOE Participation). J. Direct Final Rules will also hold a public meeting at DOE Docket: The docket for this activity, 1. DOE’s Authority Under the DFR Headquarters to discuss this proposal which includes Federal Register Provision and obtain additional input. notices, comments, and other 2. Interested Persons Fairly Representative of Relevant Points of View DATES: Comments: DOE will accept supporting documents/materials, is 3. Adverse Comments comments, data, and information available for review at http:// K. Negotiated Rulemaking regarding this notice of proposed www.regulations.gov. All documents in 1. Utilizing the Negotiated Rulemaking rulemaking before and after the public the docket are listed in the http:// Process, Including the Establishment of meeting, but no later than April 15, www.regulations.gov index. However, the Appliance Standards and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3911

Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee significant energy savings threshold that product and covered equipment. (42 (ASRAC) must be met before DOE will update an U.S.C. 6293 and 6314) Manufacturers of 2. Inclusion of Negotiated Rulemaking in energy conservation standard; (7) covered products and covered the Process Rule clarifying DOE’s commitment to publish equipment must use the prescribed DOE 3. Suggestions Regarding Implementation of Negotiated Rulemakings a test procedure six months before a test procedure as the basis for certifying L. Other Revisions and Issues related standards NOPR; (8) articulating to DOE that their products and 1. DOE’s Analytical Methodologies, DOE’s authority under the Negotiated equipment comply with the applicable Generally Rulemaking Act and EPCA’s direct final energy conservation standards adopted 2. Cumulative Regulatory Burden rule (‘‘DFR’’) provision, while clarifying under EPCA and when making any 3. Should DOE Conduct Retrospective that negotiated rulemakings and DFRs other representations to the public Reviews of the Energy Savings and Costs are two separate processes with their regarding the energy use or efficiency of of Energy Conservation Standards? own sets of requirements; and (9) those products. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c), 4. Certification, Compliance, and Enforcement (CCE)-Related Issues addressing other miscellaneous issues. 6295(s) 6314(a), and 6316(a)) Similarly, IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review DOE welcomes written comments from DOE must use these test procedures to A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 the public on any subject within the determine whether the products comply and 13563 scope of this proposal (including related with standards adopted pursuant to B. Review Under Executive Order 13771 topics not specifically raised in this EPCA. Id. C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility NOPR). In addition, pursuant to EPCA, any Act DOE continues to contemplate new or amended energy conservation D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction additional topics regarding its process standard for covered products (and at Act of 1995 for undertaking appliance standards least certain types of equipment) must E. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 rulemakings that may lead to additional be designed to achieve the maximum F. Review Under Executive Order 13132 rulemaking proceedings to update the improvement in energy efficiency that is G. Review Under Executive Order 12988 Process Rule. In particular, DOE technologically feasible and H. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates continues to think about potential economically justified. (42 U.S.C. Reform Act of 1995 changes to its analytical methodologies 6295(o)(2)(A) and 6316(a)) Furthermore, I. Review Under the Treasury and General and models for assessing the costs and the new or amended standard must Government Appropriations Act, 1999 benefits of appliance standards result in a significant conservation of J. Review Under Executive Order 12630 rulemakings. energy (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B), K. Review Under the Treasury and General 6313(a)(6), and 6316(a)), and comply Government Appropriations Act, 2001 II. Introduction L. Review Under Executive Order 13211 with any other applicable statutory M. Review Under the Information Quality A. Authority provisions. Bulletin for Peer Review In overview, the Department of B. Background on the Process Rule V. Public Participation Energy’s Process Rule was developed to DOE conducted a formal effort A. Attendance at the Public Meeting guide implementation of the Appliance B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared between 1995 and 1996 to improve the Standards Program, which is conducted General Statements for Distribution process it follows to develop energy pursuant to Title III, Parts B 1 of the C. Conduct of the Public Meeting conservation standards for covered Energy Policy and Conservation Act of D. Submission of Comments appliance products. This effort involved 1975 (‘‘EPCA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’), Public Law VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary many different stakeholders, including 94–163 (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309, as manufacturers, energy-efficiency I. Summary of Proposal codified), for consumer products, and advocates, trade associations, State Part C 2 for certain industrial equipment DOE generally uses the procedures set agencies, utilities, and other interested (42 U.S.C. 6311–6317, as codified), forth in its Process Rule (found in 10 parties. The result was the publication CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A) added by Public Law 95–619, Title IV, 3 of a final rule on July 15, 1996, titled, when prescribing energy conservation § 441(a). Under EPCA, DOE’s energy ‘‘Procedures, Interpretations and standards for both consumer products conservation program for covered Policies for Consideration of New or and commercial equipment pursuant to products consists essentially of four Revised Energy Conservation Standards the Energy Policy and Conservation Act parts: (1) Testing; (2) labeling; (3) the for Consumer Products.’’ 61 FR 36974. of 1975 (Pub. L. 94–163, codified at 42 establishment of Federal energy This document was codified at 10 CFR U.S.C. 6291, et seq.). In this document, 4 conservation standards; and (4) part 430, subpart C, appendix A. DOE is proposing to update and certification and enforcement The Process Rule was designed to modernize its Process Rule by procedures. The Federal Trade provide guidance to stakeholders as to addressing the following major topics: Commission (‘‘FTC’’) is primarily how DOE would implement its (1) Emphasizing that the procedures responsible for labeling, and DOE rulemaking responsibilities under EPCA outlined in the Process Rule are binding implements the remainder of the for the Appliance Program. As part of on the agency; (2) formalizing DOE’s program. Subject to certain criteria and this enhanced process, supplementing past practice of applying the Process conditions, DOE is required to develop the traditional notice-and-comment Rule to both consumer products and test procedures to measure the energy rulemaking process under the commercial equipment; (3) clarifying efficiency, energy use, or estimated 4 the Process Rule’s application with annual operating cost of each covered As explained in the final rule for the Process regard to equipment covered by Rule, this rule came within the scope of the Administrative Procedure Act’s exemption from ASHRAE Standard 90.1; (4) expanding 1 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the notice-and-comment rulemaking for procedural the Process Rule to test procedure U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A. rules at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). 61 FR 36974, 36980 rulemakings, as well as energy 2 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the (July 15, 1996). Although DOE’s current rulemaking conservation standards rulemakings; (5) U.S. Code, Part C was redesignated Part A–1. to consider potential revisions to the Process Rule committing to both an ‘‘early look’’ 3 All references to EPCA in this document refer might similarly warrant exemption from notice-and- to the statute as amended through the EPS comment requirements, DOE nonetheless seeks process and other robust methods for Improvement Act of 2017, Public Law 115–115 input from the interested public regarding potential early stakeholder input; (6) defining a (January 12, 2018). avenues to improve DOE’s procedures.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3912 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 59992. Originally, the comment period comments provided important input to DOE has invited and promoted for this RFI was scheduled to end on DOE’s current proposal to modernize extensive stakeholder involvement in its February 16, 2018. However, several the Process Rule, and the issues raised energy conservation standards and test stakeholders requested a 30-day in those public comments are addressed procedure rulemakings. An important extension to file comments. (Letter subsequently in this document. Once legacy of the Process Rule has been both dated January 29, 2018 from Air- finalized, DOE envisions promulgation to educate and learn from the many Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration of a Process Rule that increases stakeholders who participate in DOE’s Institute (‘‘AHRI’’), the Association of transparency and public engagement appliance rulemaking efforts. Some of Home Appliance Manufacturers and achieves meaningful burden the successes that have resulted from (‘‘AHAM’’), and the National Electrical reduction, while at the same time the Process Rule include: (1) More Manufacturers Association (‘‘NEMA’’), continuing to meet the Department’s involvement of a wider variety of to John Cymbalsky, U.S. Department of statutory obligations under EPCA. stakeholders in DOE’s appliance Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and rulemaking process; (2) improved Renewable Energy, Buildings III. Discussion of Specific Revisions to technical analyses in support of the Technologies Program). Consequently, the Process Rule appliance rules due to enhanced input DOE extended the comment period until A. The Process Rule Will Be Binding on from stakeholders at an early stage of March 2, 2018. 83 FR 5374 (Feb. 7, the Department of Energy the rulemaking process; (3) improved 2018). Subsequently, DOE posted a In the December 2017 RFI, DOE asked solutions to issues and problems notice on its website on March 2, 2018, stakeholders whether DOE should make because of increased stakeholder which stated that the comment period compliance with the Process Rule involvement; and (4) more open was further extended until March 5, mandatory. 82 FR 59992, 59997. At the dialogue and improved relationships 2018, due to a brief closure of the January 9, 2018, Process Rule public between stakeholders and also between Federal government in the Washington meeting, most stakeholders agreed that stakeholders and DOE. DC area. the Process Rule should be binding on While there have been many positive To explore the issues in the December the Department. (AHRI, January 9, 2018 results from the Process Rule, DOE 2017 RFI, DOE convened a public Public Meeting Transcript at pp. 24, proposes to further improve the Process meeting on January 9, 2018, which was 169, 265; AHAM, January 9, 2018 Public Rule in this document. These proposals attended by a wide range of Meeting Transcript at pp. 31, 168; Spire, would address: (1) Processes that may stakeholders. The Department also January 9, 2018 Public Meeting no longer track the current legal simultaneously hosted a webinar, which Transcript at pp. 54–55; Southern requirements of EPCA; (2) processes that was attended by approximately 150 do not take into account the maturation additional persons. At this all-day White Corporation (‘‘Bradford White’’); California of DOE’s appliance program to the point public meeting, a wide variety of topics Investor Owned Utilities (comprised of Pacific Gas that modernization is necessary; (3) that were addressed, including, but not and Electric Company, Southern California Gas DOE has not rigorously followed the limited to: (1) Direct final rules; (2) Company, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Process Rule in many instances; (4) the negotiated rulemaking; (3) elimination Southern California Edison) (collectively referred to as ‘‘CA IOUs’’); California Energy Commission need for regulatory reform to reduce the of the statutory requirement for an (‘‘CEC’’); CSA America, Inc. (‘‘CSA’’); Daikin U.S. costs and burdens of rulemaking; and advance notice of proposed rulemaking Corp. (‘‘Daikin’’); Edison Electric Institute (‘‘EEI’’); (5) the need to clarify that the Process and alternate means to gather additional Energy Solutions; George Washington University Rule applies to commercial/industrial information early in the process; (4) (‘‘GW’’); Mile High Equipment, LLC. (‘‘Ice-O- Matic’’); joint comments filed by the Air- equipment. In evaluating and seeking to application of the process rule to Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute expand the positive impacts of the commercial equipment; (5) use of (‘‘AHRI’’), Air Movement and Control Association Process Rule, as well as remedying the industry standards in DOE test International Inc. (‘‘AMCA’’), American Lighting above-described negative developments, procedures; (6) timing of the issuance of Association (‘‘ALA’’), Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (‘‘AHAM’’), Hearth, Patio this proposal will address the changed DOE test procedures; (7) certification, & Barbecue Association (‘‘HPBA’’), Heating Air- landscape of the rulemaking process compliance and enforcement; (8) Conditioning & Refrigeration Distributors under EPCA, and endeavor to improvements to DOE’s analyses; and International (‘‘HARDI’’), National Association of modernize the Process Rule.5 (9) any other issues or topics raised by Manufacturers (‘‘NAM’’), National Electrical Manufacturers Association (‘‘NEMA’’), and On December 18, 2017, DOE issued an stakeholders. Plumbing Manufacturers International (‘‘PMI’’) RFI (December 2017 RFI) to address Overall, DOE experienced a high level (collectively, ‘‘the Joint Commenters’’); Lennox potential improvements to DOE’s of engagement from stakeholders and International Inc. (‘‘Lennox’’); Lochinvar; Lutron Process Rule so that it could to achieve the interested public regarding potential Electronics Co., Inc. (‘‘Lutron’’); Manufactured 6 Housing Institute (‘‘MHI’’); Miles & Stockbridge P.C. meaningful burden reduction while changes to the Process Rule. Such (‘‘Miles & Stockbridge’’); North American continuing to achieve the Department’s Association of Food Equipment Manufacturers statutory obligations in the development 6 The following organizations or individuals (‘‘NAFEM’’); National Consumer Law Center of appliance energy conservation provided comments in response to the December (‘‘NCLA’’) and the Consumer Federation of America 18, 2017 RFI (82 FR 59992): ABB; Acuity Brands, (‘‘CFA’’); National Conference of State Legislatures standards and test procedures. 82 FR Inc. (‘‘Acuity Brands’’); American Boiler (‘‘NCSL’’); Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships Manufacturers Association (‘‘ABMA’’); American (‘‘NEEP’’); Nor-Lake, Inc. (‘‘Nor-Lake’’); Northwest 5 In November 2010, DOE also issued a statement Public Power Association (‘‘APPA’’); American Power and Conservation Council (‘‘NPCC’’); intended to expedite its rulemaking process. The Public Gas Association (‘‘APGA’’); Joint National Propane Gas Association (‘‘NPGA’’); Office statement is currently available at http:// Commenters of the Appliance Standards Awareness of Information and Regulatory Affairs (‘‘OIRA’’); www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_ Project (ASAP), Alliance to Save Energy, American Plumbing Heating Cooling Contractors Association standards/pdfs/changes_standards_process.pdf. In Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), (‘‘PHCC’’); Regal Beloit Corporation (‘‘Regal’’); this proposal, DOE is undertaking a thorough Consumer Federation of America (CFA), National Sierra Club and Earth Justice; Rheem; Southern review of its Process Rule to determine the Consumer Law Center (NCLC), Natural Resources Company Services Inc. (‘‘Southern Company’’); procedures it will follow in considering new or Defense Council (NRDC), Northeast Energy Spire Inc. (‘‘Spire’’); Sub Zero Group, Inc. (‘‘Sub amended energy conservation standard and test Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP), and the Northwest Zero’’); Schneider Electric; ITW-Food Equipment procedures. As a result, if adopted, this proposed Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) (filing joint and Group (‘‘Traulsen/Kairak’’); United Technologies rule would supersede those portions of the collectively identified as, ‘‘the ASAP Joint (‘‘UT-Carrier’’); Whirlpool Corporation November 2010 statement pertaining to the Comment’’); Atlas Copco North America (‘‘Atlas (‘‘Whirlpool’’); Daikin; Westinghouse Lighting; and elimination of these early rulemaking steps. Copco’’); Big Ass Solutions (‘‘BAF’’); Bradford Chris Soares.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3913

Company, January 9, 2018 Public or provide greater predictability with 59996. At the January 9, 2018, Process Meeting Transcript at p. 268; NEMA, respect to how DOE will act in the Rule public meeting, DOE also asked January 9, 2018 Public Meeting standards-setting process. (NRDC, No. stakeholders how the agency should Transcript at p. 265; AGA, January 9, 74 at p. 3) Other commenters also treat equipment covered by the 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at p. supported maintaining flexibility in the American National Standards Institute 37) Process Rule and maintaining it as (‘‘ANSI’’)/American Society of Heating, One commenter at the January 9, guidance. (CA IOUs, No. 65 at pp. 3, 5; Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning 2018, public meeting recommended that NEEP, No. 77 at pp. 1, 5; ASAP Joint Engineers (‘‘ASHRAE’’)/Illuminating any amended Process Rule retain Comment, No. 75 at p. 9) Engineering Society of North America flexibility for DOE. (ASAP, January 9, DOE acknowledges the important (‘‘IESNA’’) Standard 90.1 (‘‘ASHRAE 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at pp. points made by commenters on this Standard 90.1’’), if DOE were to amend 266–268) Two commenters, Spire and issue. In the December 2017 RFI, DOE the Process Rule to include commercial Southern Company, suggested a savings stated that it has declined to follow the equipment. DOE pointed out that EPCA or escape clause, respectively, to procedures in the Process Rule in a provides a separate set of procedural address this problem. According to number of cases in the recent past. 82 requirements and timelines for ASHRAE Spire, this would mean that DOE must FR 59992, 59993. And, DOE agrees that equipment that are different than those follow the Process Rule unless there is substantive improvements must be in the Process Rule. (DOE, January 9, a conflict with EPCA. (Spire, January 9, made in the Process Rule to promote 2018 Public Meeting Transcript at pp. 2018, Public Meeting Transcript, at p. greater transparency, consistency, and 183–184) 266) Southern Company stated that if it meaningful participation in DOE Commenters generally supported the is difficult to follow the Process Rule, rulemakings. principle that the Process Rule the matter can be sent to negotiated DOE has carefully considered all the procedures should explicitly apply to rulemaking and the group can decide comments on this matter and has both new and amended energy whether to change the procedure. determined that requiring mandatory conservation standards for both covered (Southern Company, January 9, 2018 compliance on the part of DOE with its consumer products and industrial and Public Meeting Transcript, at p. 268) own Process Rule would clearly commercial covered equipment, but Commenters who took the position promote a rulemaking environment that with modified provisions specific to that the Process Rule should be binding is both predictable and consistent (i.e., ASHRAE equipment. (AHRI, January 9, on the Department generally argued that one where all stakeholders know what 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at p. the Department should be held to expect during the rulemaking 25; Spire, January 9, 2018 Public accountable for complying with its own process). Accordingly, DOE is proposing Meeting Transcript, at p. 184; EEI procedures so that the public will have language for the amended Process Rule January 9, 2018 Public Meeting confidence in the transparency and to make clear that its provisions are Transcript, at p. 184; AHAM, January 9, fairness of DOE’s regulatory process, binding on the agency. This approach 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at p. including the certainty that mandatory would promote DOE’s efforts to achieve 184; AHRI, January 9, 2018 Public application would bring. (Joint meaningful burden reduction in the Meeting Transcript, at pp. 184–185; Commenters, No. 51 at pp. 2, 19, 32; context of standards setting and Joint Comment, No. 51 at pp. 2, 32–33; EEI, No. 72 at p. 2; Atlas Copco North compliance, as well as testing NPCC, No. 35 at pp. 7, 16; Spire, No. 57 America, No. 54 at p. 7; ALA, No. 55 at requirements, while continuing to at p. 15; PHCC, No. 63 at p. 2; Southern p. 2; Lennox, No. 62 at p. 1; PHCC, No. achieve the Department’s statutory Company, No. 70 at p. 2; APPA, No. 36 63 at p. 3; Southern Company, No. 70 obligations in the development of at p. 3; Ice-O-Matic, No. 29 at p. 1; Nor- at p. 2; Public Power Association, No. appliance standards. Lake, No. 68 at pp. 1–2; Acuity Brands, 36 at p. 4; NPCC, No. 35 at p. 22; Ice- DOE hopes that this approach will No. 46 at p. 4; CA IOUs, No. 65 at p. O-Matic, No. 29 at p. 1; Spire, No. 57 at promote a rulemaking environment that 5; NAFEM, No. 47 at p. 3; CEC, No. 53 p. 2; Sub-Zero, No. 43 at p. 4) is open, consistent, and predictable for at p. 5; NEEP, No. 77 at p. 3; ASAP Joint Conversely, several commenters all stakeholders. Furthermore, DOE Comment, No. 75 at p. 7; Lennox, No. expressed that it would be potentially anticipates that going forward, the 62 at p. 2, 8) harmful to the Department’s Appliance rulemaking process with its binding Some of the commenters expressed Program if DOE were to eliminate all application on the Department, will the reasons for their support of this flexibility in the Process Rule. These result in reduced burden to stakeholders principle. For instance, Acuity Brands commenters supported application of through a more consistent set of stated that a consistent approach would the Process Rule, including its goal, procedures. ease compliance burdens by applying among others, of promoting the same set of rules across the board. transparency and early stakeholder B. The Process Rule Will Apply to Both (Acuity Brands, No. 46 at p. 4) The engagement, as long as DOE also meets Consumer Products and Commercial North American Association of Food its statutory obligations. (Sierra Club Equipment Equipment Manufacturers (‘‘NAFEM’’) and Earth Justice, No. 66 at p. 2) The By its terms (and specifically by its agreed that a consistent approach California Energy Commission (‘‘CEC’’) title), the current Process Rule is reduces administrative burdens and and Natural Resources Defense Council applicable only to consumer products. costs. NAFEM also stated that the (‘‘NRDC’’) stated that DOE should not be However, in practice, DOE has routinely Process Rule need not be identical as it subject to prescriptive requirements that followed the procedures set forth in the relates to consumer products and limit its flexibility and restrict its ability Process Rule when establishing commercial equipment given that there to respond to the circumstances of each standards for commercial equipment. In could be differences in the two markets rulemaking. Such an approach, in CEC’s its December 2017 RFI, DOE requested that necessitate differences in the view, would increase DOE’s litigation comment as to whether the agency standard-setting process. (NAFEM, No. risk. (CEC, No. 53, at p. 8) At the same should amend the Process Rule to 47 at p. 3) The Joint Commenters stated time, NRDC, along with others, clarify that it is equally applicable to the that since the procedures for developing expressed openness to revisions to the consideration of standards for energy efficiency standards for both Process Rule that would make it clearer commercial equipment. 82 FR 59992, consumer products and commercial

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3914 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

equipment are largely the same, with agency prior to promulgation of new or equipment, DOE should act promptly to the exception of ASHRAE equipment, it amended regulations. publish a NOPR with the expectation makes sense to have one set of that the applicable ASHRAE Standard C. The Application of the Process Rule expectations regardless of whether the 90.1 levels will be adopted as a final to ASHRAE Equipment regulated product/equipment has rule within 18 months. (Joint residential or commercial applications. As noted previously, at the January 9, Commenters, No. 51 at p. 33) (Joint Commenters, No. 51 at p. 33) 2018, Process Rule public meeting, DOE Lennox stated that the Process Rule Spire stated that it sees no legal requested comment as to how the should be applied to commercial impediment to extending the agency should treat ASHRAE equipment equipment except when it would requirements of the Process Rule to subject to ASHRAE Standard 90.1, in conflict with special statutory commercial equipment. (Spire, No. 57 at the event DOE were to amend the provisions specific to commercial p. 15) Process Rule to formally apply to equipment rulemakings, such as One commenter, the American Boiler commercial equipment. In relevant part, provisions for adopting ASHRAE 90.1 Manufacturers Association (‘‘ABMA’’), EPCA provides that ASHRAE industry standards. For commercial did not agree that a Process Rule equipment is subject to unique statutory equipment covered by ASHRAE developed for consumer products can be requirements and its own set of Standard 90.1, Lennox pointed out that equally applied to commercial timelines. More specifically, pursuant to DOE must adopt the industry standard equipment. It states that in many EPCA’s statutory scheme for covered unless ‘‘clear and convincing evidence’’ ASHRAE equipment, DOE is required to sectors, including the boiler industry dictates otherwise. (42 U.S.C. consider amending the existing Federal that it represents, consumer products do 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) It stated that if DOE energy conservation standards for not resemble their commercial simply adopts ASHRAE Standard 90.1 certain enumerated types of commercial counterparts in terms of size, standards, the additional provisions in and industrial equipment (generally, complexity, and application, to name the Process Rule are not necessary. commercial water heaters, commercial just a few distinctions. ABMA stated However, if DOE considers packaged boilers, commercial air- that this is particularly true for the promulgating regulations more stringent conditioning and heating equipment, largest commercial equipment than ASHRAE 90.1 standards, Lennox and packaged terminal air conditioners engineered for a specific application argued that DOE should follow the and heat pumps) when ASHRAE that have sales in the single digits Process Rule. Moreover, according to Standard 90.1 is amended with respect Lennox, the Process Rule should clarify annually in some instances. ABMA to such equipment. (42 U.S.C. the high bar for what constitutes ‘‘clear advocated that there needs to be a way 6313(a)(6)(A)) For each type of and convincing evidence’’ for to differentiate between the equipment equipment, EPCA directs that if promulgating a standard more stringent with a similar name but possessing ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended, than ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (Lennox, significant differences in terms of DOE must adopt amended energy No. 62 at p. 8) The Joint Commenters processes and features, including conservation standards at the new agreed with Lennox that an amended capacity. (ABMA, No. 71 at pp. 2–3) efficiency level in ASHRAE Standard Process Rule should develop an Overall, DOE agrees with commenters 90.1 as the uniform national standard interpretation of what the higher bar of that a modernized and amended Process for such equipment, unless DOE ‘‘clear and convincing’’ evidence means Rule should apply to both consumer determines by rule, and supported by for the establishment of energy products and industrial and commercial clear and convincing evidence, that a conservation standards. The Joint equipment, and that the Process Rule more-stringent standard would result in Commenters stated that in recent years, must contain language that clarifies this significant additional conservation of DOE has published rules that adopt coverage. Historically, DOE has applied energy and is technologically feasible more stringent standards than the the Process Rule to both consumer and and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. national uniform consensus ASHRAE industrial and commercial rules. This 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)–(II)) 90.1 energy efficiency standards and has proposal would make clear that such Several stakeholders expressed their not taken steps to demonstrate that their practice will continue. To promote a views as to how DOE should handle findings meet a higher threshold of consistent process that reduces the ASHRAE equipment. The Joint evidentiary proof. They stated that regulatory burden of the rulemaking, Commenters stated that ASHRAE EPCA provides a statutory presumption DOE proposes to apply the same equipment occupies a unique place that standards more stringent than those procedures in the Process Rule to both under EPCA. They asserted that the required by ASHRAE Standard 90.1 are consumer products and industrial and language and intent of EPCA reflects the not necessary, and that presumption can commercial equipment rulemakings, underlying policy that the stakeholder- be rebutted only on the basis of ‘‘clear except as discussed in section III.C for driven process of ASHRAE Standard and convincing evidence.’’ (Joint ASHRAE equipment. In response to 90.1 is working and that DOE should Commenters, No. 51 at p. 34) (Also see, ABMA, DOE does not see the defer to that process. The Joint AHRI, January 9, 2018 Public Meeting procedural safeguards of the Process Commenters argued that amendments to Transcript at p. 188, for the proposition Rule in any way negatively impacting the Process Rule should set apart that DOE should codify the clear and the detailed consideration to be ASHRAE equipment and acknowledge convincing burden of proof standard for accorded a given type of product or the expectation that DOE will normally when DOE seeks to go beyond the equipment in the context of an codify the industry consensus standards ASHRAE levels.) individual standards or test procedure adopted in Standard 90.1 as the uniform The Joint Commenters also stated that rulemaking. On the contrary, DOE has national standard. Furthermore, they DOE needs evidence to support its tentatively concluded that formally stated that DOE should undertake some assumptions in every case, and it needs applying the Process Rule to form of early stakeholder engagement even more evidence when the ‘‘clear commercial and industrial equipment for ASHRAE equipment. They stated and convincing’’ standard applies. The will enhance the consideration of such that if ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is commenter argued that the ‘‘clear and equipment by ensuring that there is amended to increase minimum convincing’’ standard is more proper time and information before the efficiency requirements for covered demanding than the ‘‘reasonable’’

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3915

standard required for non-ASHRAE evaluating whether it can proceed with 6313(a)(6)(A)(i)) by increasing the rulemakings. The Joint Commenters a rulemaking to potentially establish energy efficiency level for that added that an assumption is not even more-stringent standards than those equipment. Id. at 10042. In other words, ‘‘reasonable’’ in the absence of any adopted by ASHRAE, DOE will seek, if the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1 evidence of its validity (i.e., unless it is from interested stakeholders and the leaves the standard level unchanged or supported by ‘‘substantial evidence,’’ public, data and information to assist in lowers the standard, as compared to the which EPCA requires in the case of making this determination, prior to level specified by the national standard standards for consumer products under publishing a proposed rule to adopt adopted pursuant to EPCA, DOE does 42 U.S.C. 6306(b)(2)). The Joint more stringent standards. Moreover, not have the authority to conduct a Commenters gave as an example the DOE proposes that clear and convincing rulemaking to consider a higher single package, vertical unit rulemaking evidence would exist only if: standard for that equipment pursuant to in which DOE raised the standard level Given the circumstances, facts, and 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A). DOE over the ASHRAE minimums, arguing data that exists for a particular subsequently reiterated this position in that if DOE had developed the required ASHRAE amendment, DOE determines final rules published in the Federal evidence, the agency would have there is no substantial doubt that the Register on July 22, 2009 (74 FR 36312, reached a different and better result. more stringent standard would result in 36313), May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28928, (Joint Commenters, No. 51 at pp. 34–35) a significant additional conservation of 28937), and July 17, 2015 (80 FR 42614, One commenter (AHRI) stated that to energy, is technologically feasible and 42617). the extent DOE plans on conducting an economically justified. In the American Energy ASHRAE rulemaking that goes above This high bar would mean that only Manufacturing Technical Corrections the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 standards in extraordinary circumstances would Act (AEMTCA), Public Law 112–210 level, the full Process Rule should DOE conduct a rulemaking to establish (Dec. 18, 2012), Congress modified apply. Also, if DOE is doing a six-year more-stringent standards for covered several provisions related to ASHRAE review of ASHRAE standards and DOE ASHRAE equipment. In the event that Standard 90.1 equipment. In relevant is initiating that review, AHRI argued DOE determines that such a rule is part, DOE must act whenever ASHRAE that the full Process Rule should apply. possible, all of the Process Rule Standard 90.1’s ‘‘standard level or However, if a rule is being conducted requirements would apply. However, for design requirements under that based upon and consistent with an the typical situation wherein DOE is standard’’ are amended. (42 U.S.C. ASHRAE change, AHRI suggested that adopting the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 6313(a)(6)(A)(i)) Furthermore, that the process should be the same as it is level(s), DOE would follow the EPCA statutory amendment required that DOE now. (AHRI, January 9, 2018 Public statutory requirements and not be must conduct an evaluation of each Meeting Transcript at pp. 185–186) required to follow additional Process class of covered equipment in ASHRAE In this proposal, DOE has tentatively Rule requirements. Standard 90.1 ‘‘every 6 years.’’ (42 determined that the amended Process Making clear that DOE will adopt the U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) Rule will contain a new section that action taken by ASHRAE except in rare In practice, DOE’s review in making clearly delineates the procedure DOE circumstances raises the question as to this assessment has been strictly limited will follow for evaluating amendments how broadly DOE is triggered by to the specific standards for the specific to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and ASHRAE action in amending Standard equipment for which ASHRAE has conducting related rulemakings. First, 90.1. For example, if ASHRAE acts to made a change (i.e., determined down to DOE’s statutory obligations for ASHRAE amend its standard at the equipment the equipment class level). DOE believes equipment will be reiterated in this new class level for air-cooled variable that this is the best reading of the section. Through its amended Process refrigerant flow (VRF) multi-split air statutory provisions discussed Rule, DOE is also announcing its conditioners greater than or equal to previously, because if ASHRAE were to tentative decision that, going forward, 65,000 Btu/h and less than 135,000 Btu/ change the standard for a single DOE anticipates adopting the revised h, is DOE triggered to consider amended equipment class, but DOE then ASHRAE levels as contemplated by standards: (1) Only for that specific considered itself triggered at the EPCA, except in very limited equipment class that was actually equipment category level or equipment circumstances as discussed below. (42 amended in ASHRAE 90.1; (2) for the type level, the process would arguably U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II)) DOE’s entire equipment category of VRF no longer comport with the statutory commitment to adopting the amended equipment, or (3) for the entire covered scheme. More specifically, in such ASHRAE Standard 90.1 level(s) as its equipment type of small commercial cases, DOE would be addressing certain regular practice will result in reducing package air conditioning and heating classes of ASHRAE equipment for the regulatory burden on stakeholders equipment? EPCA does not specifically which standards had not changed, so it and will promote consistency and define the term ‘‘amended’’ in the would be impossible for DOE to adopt simplicity when DOE is addressing context of ASHRAE Standard 90.1. the ASHRAE level as the statute ASHRAE equipment. Although the statute is not entirely clear envisions (as it would already be the With respect to DOE’s consideration on this matter, DOE has maintained a same as the existing Federal standard). of more-stringent standards than the consistent position for over a decade, at Instead, DOE could only consider ASHRAE levels, DOE tentatively takes least since it interpreted what would adoption of more-stringent standard the position that for DOE to utilize its constitute an ‘‘amended standard’’ in a levels. Such interpretation would statutory authority to establish more- final rule published in the Federal arguably run counter to the ‘‘follow stringent standards than the Register on March 7, 2007. 72 FR 10038. ASHRAE’’ statutory structure set in amendments to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 In that rule, DOE stated that the place by Congress. Furthermore, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. statutory triggering event requiring DOE Congress specifically and recently 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II), DOE will be to adopt uniform national standards added a 6-year-lookback provision for required to meet a very high bar to based on ASHRAE action is for covered ASHRAE equipment at 42 demonstrate the ‘‘clear and convincing ASHRAE to change a standard for any U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i), a provision evidence’’ threshold that is articulated of the equipment listed in EPCA section which arguably instructs DOE in terms in this latter subsection. When 342(a)(6)(A)(i) (42 U.S.C. of how and when to address covered

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3916 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

equipment upon which ASHRAE has preparation of its Regulatory Agenda DOE on the proposed determination not acted in a timely manner. However, each spring. In particular, DOE would notice. Subsequently (and in a change DOE believes that ASHRAE not acting to point interested parties to the from DOE’s past practice), DOE would amend Standard 90.1 is tantamount to a Regulatory Agenda posted to assess the written comments and then decision that the existing standard www.reginfo.gov the previous fall and publish its final decision on coverage as remain in place. Thus, as required by 42 would request input concerning which a separate notice, an action which U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C), DOE would need to rulemaking proceedings should be in would be completed prior to the find clear and convincing evidence, as particular action categories in the spring initiation of any rulemaking for related defined above, to issue a standard more Regulatory Agenda and the timing of test procedures or energy conservation stringent than the existing standard for such rulemakings. If stakeholders standards. If the final decision the product. DOE welcomes comments, believe that the Department is pursuing determines that coverage is warranted, data, and information on this topic. a rule that should not be prioritized, DOE will proceed with its typical they would have the opportunity to use D. Priority Setting rulemaking process for both test this mechanism to so inform DOE. If procedures and standards, applying the The current Process Rule at 10 CFR stakeholders believe DOE should act requirements of the Process Rule, as part 430, subpart C, Appendix A, more quickly on another rulemaking amended. Specifically, DOE would not section 3(d) outlines DOE’s priority- they could make that point as well. issue any RFIs, notices of data setting analysis, which considers ten Through this revised process, DOE has availability (‘‘NODAs’’), or any other factors: (1) Potential energy savings; (2) tentatively concluded that increased mechanism to gather information for the potential economic benefits; (3) stakeholder input early in the purpose of initiating a rulemaking to potential environmental or energy rulemaking process, combined with the establish a test procedure or energy security benefits; (4) applicable public availability of the Regulatory conservation standard for the proposed deadlines for rulemakings; (5) Agenda, would meet the same objectives covered product prior to finalization of incremental DOE resources required to as DOE’s previous priority-setting the coverage determination. DOE will complete the rulemaking process; (6) analysis. also finalize coverage for a product at other relevant regulatory actions E. Coverage Determinations least six months prior to publication of affecting products; (7) stakeholder a proposed rule to establish a test recommendations; (8) evidence of In addition to specifying a list of procedure. And, DOE will complete the energy efficiency gains in the market covered residential and commercial test procedure rulemaking at least six absent new or revised standards; (9) products, EPCA contains provisions that months prior to publication of a status of required changes to test enable the Secretary of Energy to proposed energy conservation standard. procedures; and (10) other relevant classify additional types of consumer This timing does not present any legal factors. The current Process Rule products and industrial/commercial issue because adding coverage for a requires that the results of this analysis equipment as ‘‘covered’’ within the product and establishing test procedures will be used to develop rulemaking meaning of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6292(b); and standards is a purely discretionary priorities and proposed schedules for see also 42 U.S.C. 6295(l) for consumer act without legal deadline. the development and issuance of all products; 42 U.S.C. 6312 for commercial rulemakings which will then be and industrial equipment) This The Joint Commenters, citing to 42 documented and distributed for review authority allows DOE to consider U.S.C. 6292(b)(1)(A), argued that DOE and comment. 10 CFR part 430, subpart regulating additional products/ should exercise its authority to identify C, Appendix A, section 3(a). The equipment that further the goals of new ‘‘covered products’’ in a limited Process Rule also states that each fall, EPCA; that is, to conserve energy for the fashion, extending only to those DOE will issue, simultaneously with the Nation as long as the statutory threshold products for which EPCA regulation is Administration’s Regulatory Agenda, a requirements are met. ‘‘necessary or appropriate’’ to the final set of rulemaking priorities, the If DOE determines to initiate the achievement of EPCA’s purposes. They accompanying analysis, and the coverage determination process, it will further argued that DOE’s authority to schedules for all priority rulemakings first publish a notice of proposed identify new ‘‘covered products’’ is that it anticipates within the next two determination, limited to the issue of limited to products that consume at years. Id. at section 3(c). coverage, in which DOE will explain least enough energy to satisfy a stated In this document, while DOE intends how such products/equipment that it minimum energy consumption to continue considering the 10 factors in seeks to designate as ‘‘covered’’ meet the criterion. The Joint Commenters urged its priority-setting, DOE proposes to statutory criteria for coverage and why that coverage determinations be made revise the process discussed above. In such coverage is ‘‘necessary or on a product-specific basis with each the past, DOE has not successfully appropriate’’ to carry out the purposes new covered product being defined fulfilled its prioritization objectives as of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6292(b)(1)) In the separately with sufficient clarity to outlined in the Process Rule, perhaps in case of commercial/industrial ensure that products serving different part because DOE determined that the equipment, DOE follows the same purposes are not treated as a single analysis described in the current process, except that the Department covered product. They added that each Process Rule is reflected in the need only show the coverage product should individually satisfy the Regulatory Agenda, which is available determination is ‘‘necessary’’ to carry minimum energy consumption to the public. In any event, DOE sees out the purposes of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. requirement and qualify as a ‘‘necessary value in streamlining and clarifying the 6312) DOE’s authority to add or appropriate’’ target for regulation. reporting of its priority-setting activities commercial equipment is more limited The Joint Commenters advocated that in the revised Process Rule. Going than its authority to add consumer the Process Rule should be amended to forward, DOE is proposing that products because Congress specified the require that proposed and final coverage stakeholders would have the particular types of equipment that could determinations under 42 U.S.C. 6292(b) opportunity to provide input on be added. (42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(B)) specifically identify each of the prioritization of rulemakings through a Stakeholders would then be given 60 products at issue and provide a separate request for comment as DOE begins days to submit written comments to justification for the coverage of each.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3917

They further added that DOE has failed F. Early Stakeholder Input To Determine Project (‘‘ASAP’’) Joint Commenters did to satisfy these requirements in the past. the Need for Rulemaking not support a separate ‘‘quick look’’ process to determine whether a full Moreover, the Joint Commenters 1. Standards recommended that a final coverage rulemaking is necessary. The ASAP determination be in place before In the December 2017 RFI, DOE Joint Commenters argued that existing substantive rulemaking on test sought comment on whether the Process law already provides the necessary procedures or energy conservation Rule should be revised to eliminate its framework for DOE to quickly standards commences so that the public current provisions related to the determine, after notice and comment, clearly understands which products are publication of an advanced notice of that no change is warranted for a covered, thus avoiding unnecessary proposed rulemaking (‘‘ANOPR’’) particular standard. (ASAP Joint confusion, wasted resources, and the because of statutory amendments that Comment, No. 75 at p. 6) eliminated the ANOPR requirement failure to address critical issues. Lastly, In response to the Joint Comment, and/or to include additional the Joint Commenters suggested that the DOE agrees generally with the need for preliminary rulemaking steps. 82 FR current Process Rule requires a an early assessment review at the 59992, 59995. DOE received a number reopening of comment on the beginning of the rulemaking process to of comments regarding both the justification for a coverage allow DOE to focus its resources elimination of the ANOPR and the determination during the first appropriately, and an understanding of inclusion of other avenues for early rulemaking in which substantive any changed circumstances since the stakeholder input, which are discussed regulation is imposed and if broader in further detail, along with DOE’s last final rule would certainly be coverage is required, a new coverage response, in the subsections relevant to that inquiry. DOE notes that determination must be proposed and immediately following. it discusses significant energy savings in finalized before initiating a rulemaking detail later in this proposal (see section to regulate the broader range of a. Avenues for Early Stakeholder Input: III.G). An assessment of the potential products. (Joint Comment, No. 51 at pp. Early Assessment Review energy savings at issue would also be an 9–10) Whirlpool and Lutron expressed In response to comments discussed important consideration when support for these views. (See Whirlpool, below, DOE proposes adding a process evaluating the need for further No. 76 at p. 1; Lutron, No. 50 at p. 2) for an early assessment review of a rulemaking. Thus, DOE is proposing to DOE agrees with the points raised by potential rule. For example, the Joint adopt provisions in the revised Process the Joint Commenters, discussed above, Commenters recommended that DOE Rule that would provide for an early that DOE should exercise its authority to should adopt ‘‘a quick hard look assessment review of the suitability of identify new ‘‘covered products’’ in a process’’ for use at an early juncture in further rulemaking, thereby allowing limited fashion. To this end, DOE the rulemaking to determine whether a both the agency and interested proposes to extend coverage only to: (1) standard needs to be amended. The stakeholders to conserve and target limited resources so as to achieve the Those consumer products for which Joint Commenters stated that this type greatest benefit. Therefore, as the first EPCA regulation is ‘‘necessary or of preliminary evaluation procedure step in any proceeding to consider appropriate’’ to the achievement of would allow DOE to focus its resources establishing or amending any energy EPCA’s purposes and which meet on rulemakings offering the potential for conservation standard, DOE proposes to statutory consumption criterion, and (2) significant energy savings. In those publish a notice in the Federal Register to that commercial/industrial instances where opportunities for announcing that DOE is considering equipment for which EPCA regulation is energy savings are not significant or an initiation of a proceeding, and as part of ‘‘necessary’’ to the achievement of amended standard is not technologically that notice, DOE would request EPCA’s purposes. DOE agrees that any feasible or economically justified, DOE could make a determination to not submission of related comments, proposed new covered products/ amend standards. The Joint Commenters including data and information showing equipment should be narrowly defined argued that such an approach would whether any new or amended standard with sufficient clarity so that the continue to allow DOE to meet its is economically justified, proposed coverage corresponds to that statutory obligations, while focusing the technologically feasible or would result which is intended. regulatory process on those areas where in a significant savings of energy. If DOE DOE does not agree with the Joint the most benefit can be obtained and at receives sufficient information Commenter’s suggestion that all the same time reducing the burden on suggesting that it could justify a coverage determinations must be stakeholders. As part of this ‘‘quick hard determination that no new or amended reopened as a matter of course in the look,’’ the Joint Commenters standard would meet the applicable first substantive rulemaking on the recommended that DOE should publish statutory criteria, DOE would engage in newly covered product/equipment. an RFI seeking information that would notice and comment rulemaking to After completing notice and comment assist the Department in determining make that determination. If DOE does on a proposed coverage determination whether anything has changed not receive sufficient information or the and issuing a final determination, DOE (technologically, economically, or information received is inconclusive believes it is appropriate to accord such otherwise) since the last final rule as with regard to the statutory criteria, process finality. However, if during the would necessitate amended standards. DOE would undertake the preliminary substantive rulemaking proceeding DOE Under this preliminary assessment stages of a rulemaking to issue or amend finds it necessary and appropriate to procedure, the Joint Commenters an energy conservation standard. expand or reduce the scope of coverage, presume that standards would not need Beginning such a rulemaking, however, the Department agrees with the Joint amendment unless DOE or stakeholders would not preclude DOE from later Commenter’s that a new coverage identify significant changes since the making a determination that a new or determination process at that point last rulemaking. (Joint Commenters, No. amended energy conservation standard should be initiated and finalized prior 51 at pp. 4–6) is not economically justified, to moving forward with the test In contrast to the Joint Commenters, technologically feasible or would not procedure or standards rulemaking. the Appliance Standards Awareness result in a significant savings of energy.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3918 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

b. Other Avenues for Early Stakeholder standard that DOE would undertake at p. 3; EEI, No. 72 at p. 3; ASAP Joint Input would be the framework document and Comment, No. 75 at p. 7; PHCC, No. 63 In response to comments discussed preliminary analysis or an ANOPR. at p. 2) The Northeast Energy Efficiency below, DOE will continue to seek early These documents, as opposed to Partnerships (‘‘NEEP’’) commented that stakeholder input after the early ‘‘informal’’ data gathering, would data collection early in the rulemaking assessment review. A number of provide the necessary robust analysis to process helps to ensure a successful rule commenters stressed the importance of determine whether to move forward in the end. It further stated that DOE has early stakeholder input during the with a proposed standard. RFIs and several available options for obtaining rulemaking process. (UT-Carrier, No. 41 NODAs could be issued, as appropriate, advanced information: ANOPRs, at p. 4; Sub Zero, No. 43 at p. 4; Ice-O- in addition to these analytical Framework Documents, Preliminary Matic, No. 29 at p. 1; NAFEM, No. 47 documents, and the Department will Analyses, NODAs, and/or RFIs. Because at p. 2) The California Investor-Owned continue to rely on a variety of notices of the wide breadth of consumer Utilities (‘‘CA IOUs’’) urged that as part (including those mentioned by the appliances and commercial equipment of such engagement, DOE should commenters) to ensure opportunities for that DOE regulates, NEEP commented perform testing and research so as to public input in the rulemaking process. that DOE should select the tool that is most appropriate for a given products/ generate publicly-available information c. Elimination of ANOPRs From the equipment rulemaking. (NEEP, No. 77 at to inform the process. (CA IOUs, No. 65 Process Rule p. 3) at p. 5) Other commenters touted early A number of commenters spoke In response to these comments, DOE stakeholder input as a means of specifically about the use of ANOPRs has tentatively concluded that there are understanding the industry’s own during the rulemaking process, multiple procedures the agency could efforts to advance energy efficiency. including whether DOE should follow adopt as part of the revised Process Rule (See e.g., Schneider Electric, No. 69 at through on removal of that step in the that achieve the aims of early p. 2) CEC stated that for newly covered rulemaking process, given the statute’s information gathering in the rulemaking products, a Framework Document is rescission of such requirements. Several process. The ANOPR might be likely appropriate, whereas for commenters did not support the preferable in a given proceeding. previously covered products, a Request elimination of the ANOPR from the Alternatively, an RFI or Notice of Data for Information would probably be Process Rule, stating that it helps to Availability would allow for early adequate. CEC added that depending on ensure early stakeholder input in the stakeholder input through a request for the product, a Preliminary Technical process. (Bradford White, No. 42 at pp. comments in circumstances where DOE Support Document or Notice of Data 1–2; Atlas Copco, No. 54 pp. 7–8; Ice- may not have sufficient information to Availability should typically precede a O-Matic, No. 29 at p. 2; Spire, No. 57 at develop an ANOPR. DOE might issue a NOPR. (CEC, No. 53 at p. 4) p. 14; ABMA, No. 71 at p. 2; Lennox, Framework Document and Preliminary In response to these comments, DOE No. 62 at p. 7) Acuity Brands added that Analysis where DOE received agrees that early stakeholder input is an ANOPRs can improve the quality of information in response to the early important part of the rulemaking proposed rules/standards, in part by look that might have been inconclusive process, particularly when it comes to obtaining prompt input on topics such with regard to the need for a new or information exchange. In the November as defining terms and scope and setting amended standard, and DOE seeks 6, 2010, policy statement (https:// criteria for data modeling. Without additional input to help make that www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ stakeholder involvement at the front _ _ determination. These alternate tools appliance standards/pdfs/changes end of the process, the commenter _ should equally promote transparency in standards process.pdf), DOE stated that argued that there is a higher risk of DOE’s process and allow for early ‘‘the energy conservation standards proceeding with erroneous assumptions, information exchange. In all cases, rulemaking process typically began with which could negatively impact the however, contrary to DOE’s November a framework document, followed by a NOPR. As part of the ANOPR (or at a 2010 policy statement, DOE will preliminary analysis. Only after these similar preliminary stage), Acuity provide for some form of preliminary two steps were completed did the Brands recommended that DOE should data gathering and public comment Department issue a proposed rule for undertake consideration of the effect of process, including either an ANOPR or public comment. While the framework any current standards, in order to assess Framework Document and Preliminary document and preliminary analysis the usefulness, scope, and parameters of Analysis, prior to issuing a proposed provide useful information, there are a new rulemaking. (Acuity Brands, No. rule. more efficient ways of gathering data. 46 at pp. 3–4) The National Propane Gas Accordingly, in appropriate cases, the Association (‘‘NPGA’’) did not favor the d. Decision-making Process for Issuing a Department will gather the needed elimination of ANOPRs because early Determination Not To Amend Current preliminary data informally and begin stakeholder engagement encourages the Standards the public rulemaking process with the exchange of valuable information and DOE received a number of comments issuance of a proposed rule for public transparency. (NPGA, No. 59 at p. 2) In regarding the potential for DOE’s comment.’’ DOE now proposes, contrast, two commenters supported the issuance of a determination not to however, that after conducting the early elimination of the ANOPR in order to amend a current energy conservation assessment review process described reflect the Congress’s change to the standard. These comments fell within above, if the Department does not statute, reminding that DOE has two groups—those that supported the receive sufficient information suggesting alternative ways to achieve the same potential for such a determination and that it could justify a determination that objectives. (Sierra Club and Earth those that did not. no new or amended standard would Justice, No. 66 at p. 5; NPCC, No. 35 at Commenters at the January 9, 2018, meet the applicable statutory criteria, or p. 7, 15; CEC, No. 53 at p. 4) public meeting supported DOE’s review the information received is inconclusive Others expressed support for either an of the suitability of pursuing amended with regard to the statutory criteria, the ANOPR or a similar method for early standards for a given type of product or preliminary stages of a rulemaking to stakeholder involvement. (Southern equipment at the start of a rulemaking. issue or amend an energy conservation Company, No. 70 at p. 4; APPA, No. 36 In cases where covered products have

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3919

undergone multiple amended standards development shows a diminishing rate experience. It stated that the Process rulemakings to date, these commenters of return with each rulemaking. The Rule was aimed at prioritizing asserted that DOE’s analyses have company stressed that DOE has the regulatory activity in a manner demonstrated diminishing returns that ability under EPCA to allow a standard consistent with the statute as written at either left little room for technical to remain static after first determining that point in time, and it relied on improvement to move energy efficiency from available data that there will be scarce appropriated funds that Congress beyond the current minimum efficiency little return from a future rulemaking. In had provided for the program. A standard or indicated that the highest its view, the current approach of fully modern Process Rule, NEMA argued, efficiency models have already achieved reviewing a given standard creates high needs to fit with both DOE’s experience a significant share of the market. These levels of ‘‘non-valued added work’’ for and the statute as it is now written. commenters added that, in their view, the Department of Energy and (NEMA, January 9, 2018, Public Meeting DOE and stakeholders understand that stakeholders. (Ice-O-Matic, No. 29 at Transcript at p. 48) With a modernized amending the standards for certain p. 1) version of the Process Rule, NEMA products/equipment would be unlikely NEMA commented that the Process asserted that DOE should be able to to result in significant energy savings Rule must fit within the statutory determine very quickly in the next and present either serious economic or parameters and take into account DOE’s rulemaking cycle for any given covered technological obstacles to further experience with EPCA over the past product or equipment, whether the improve efficiency. For such products/ several decades. (NEMA, January 9, current situation has changed so equipment, these commenters suggested 2018, Public Meeting Transcript at pp. significantly as to warrant a different that DOE should exercise the 45–48) In NEMA’s view, DOE’s Energy conclusion. (NEMA, January 9, 2018, opportunity to issue a determination Conservation Program has reached in Public Meeting Transcript at pp. 48–49) pursuant to EPCA that the applicable some cases, or is reaching in other cases, AHRI added that it did not believe standards will remain unchanged ithout a point of maturity for many covered that a determination not to amend the going through the usual costly suite of products. (NEMA, January 9, 2018, current standards for a given product or analyses (i.e., market, manufacturer Public Meeting Transcript at pp. 48–49) equipment would require the impact teardown, and LCC analyses) The energy savings to date stemming development of additional criteria and multiple rounds of amendment from these standards are very large, and beyond those already used by DOE in its proposals and comment periods. In their the program, by that metric, has analyses. It argued that this assessment collective view, the continued achieved a measure of success. NEMA should be made pursuant to EPCA and application of this approach, is neither argued that for a number of regulated suggested developing a process for required by statute, nor a good use of products, DOE’s rulemaking experience doing so. (AHRI, January 9, 2018 Public DOE’s resources. AHRI in particular indicates that the limit of efficiency Meeting Transcript, at p. 250) Lennox argued that DOE should more recommended that the Process Rule improvements through further actively consider ‘‘no amended should specify that the opportunity to rulemaking has occurred or is fast standard’’ scenarios, and to this end, issue a notice determining that no new approaching. In NEMA’s view, DOE DOE should apply presumptions against standard is needed will occur early in should re-examine its approach used to- over-regulation as part of this the rulemaking process so that DOE, date for undertaking rulemakings to consideration. By having robust industry, and other stakeholders can amend a given standard for a covered product. (NEMA, January 9, 2018, presumptions against new or more allocate time and resources to focus on Public Meeting Transcript at p. 46) stringent regulations—for instance, by those products/equipment that are the According to NEMA, this approach of applying an approach that avoids new best candidates for improvement based continuing the pursuit of a full-blown efficiency standards where 20 percent or on technological feasibility and multi-year regulatory process under the more of consumers would be economic opportunity. It added that Administrative Procedure Act in the ‘‘economically harmed’’—these such an approach would need to be face of likely diminishing returns on presumptions would, in Lennox’s view, designed to meet all statutory timelines energy savings is costly for both the protect manufacturers from over- and requirements. (AHRI, January 9, government and the stakeholders who regulation. Lennox argued that applying 2018, Public Meeting Transcript at pp. participate in DOE’s rulemakings. In this type of approach would be better 25–27, 182–183, 250; AHAM, January 9, NEMA’s view, if the public is going to than trying to develop a one-size-fits-all 2018, Public Meeting Transcript at pp. continue to invest in this regulatory approach definition of significant 30–32, 177–179) process, where products have been energy savings. (See Lennox, No. 17 at Other industry commenters held subject to multiple rulemakings over pp. 14–15) similar views. The American Public time, it should be on the basis that there Spire argued that the Process Rule Power Association (‘‘APPA’’) supported are very significant economic benefits to should specify appropriate decision the inclusion of guidelines regarding the be realized at a reasonable cost. (NEMA, criteria to preclude the adoption of issuance of determinations that no January 9, 2018, Public Meeting standards that impose net costs on too amended standards are warranted, Transcript at pp. 46–47) Accordingly, many purchasers or that are overly particularly in cases where it would NEMA suggested that when reviewing regressive for which average payback apply to products for which little energy whether a covered product is a suitable periods are unreasonably long and that savings would result due to declining candidate for amended standards, DOE would have excessive adverse impacts shipments. (APPA, No. 36 at p. 4) Ice- should inquire whether further efforts at on manufacturers. (Spire, No. 57 at p. O-Matic supported the inclusion of such amending the standards are really 22) Spire added that DOE should be guidelines and argued in favor of needed. (Id.) required to provide more than formalizing a process for the immediate NEMA also commented that when the ‘‘’substantial evidence’’ in support of a assessment of whether an amended current Process Rule was first adopted proposed standard, particularly in those standard is required. It argued that in 1996, DOE had little experience with instances where a ‘‘clear and many covered products and equipment rulemakings, and part of the intent convincing’’ standard ‘‘is required by have undergone multiple rulemakings, behind the Process Rule was to find an anyone attempting to refute EERE’s and the pace of normal technological efficient means forward for gaining that findings.’’ Id. In its opinion, DOE and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3920 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

interested parties with a dissenting view energy-consuming products of the most While DOE considers four factors in of a proposed standard should share the efficient set of already efficient products screening energy conservation standard same evidentiary burden. (Id.) that remain in the marketplace (instead design options, Nor-Lake pointed out NAFEM also argued in favor of of establishing new minimum energy that DOE does not consider the applying a ‘‘no amended standards’’ conservation standards for a given economic impact to manufacturers from determination. It asserted that because covered product where the regulatory revising a standard until after a certain products have gone through limit has effectively been reached). proposed standard has been selected. In multiple rounds of standards NEMA mentioned that both the current its view, the Process Rule should also rulemaking, improvements in energy Process Rule and Executive Orders gauge the economic impact to savings are becoming harder to obtain at encourage consideration of non- manufacturers during the ‘‘screening’’ costs the market is able to bear. In its regulatory approaches to achieving phase; otherwise, DOE may only be left view, regulations are outpacing product statutory goals—and where the EPCA with options that all have economically and equipment design and life-cycles, program has reached maturity, other detrimental impacts on manufacturers, and the data about the real world approaches may offer better ways of often with only minimal energy outcomes of the last round of achieving incremental, permanent conservation results. Accordingly, Nor- rulemaking are not available by the time energy savings over time. (NEMA, Lake argued that the inclusion of this the next rulemaking starts. NAFEM January 9, 2018, Public Meeting evaluation at the earliest stage of the stated that EPCA allows for a Transcript at pp. 50–52) rulemaking process (i.e., screening determination that no new standards are Acuity Brands also suggested that analysis) may save many unnecessary needed and that DOE needs to consider DOE should develop a ‘‘quick look’’ steps in the protracted regulatory taking this route in appropriate cases. process before engaging in ‘‘serial’’ process. (Nor-Lake, No. 68 at pp. 2–3) (NAFEM, No. 47 at pp. 4–5) rulemakings for covered products in After careful consideration, DOE EEI and Southern Company indicated order to assess early on whether new, that with some products there is little responds to these comments as follows. higher energy conservation standards margin for improvement, so for these In those instances where the early hard are warranted. In its view, such early products, it makes no sense to invest look either suggested that a new or determinations will save time and resources for only limited further gain amended energy conservation standard resources by avoiding standards updates in energy savings. (EEI, January 9, 2018, might be justified or in which the that would not produce significant Public Meeting Transcript at pp. 251– information was inconclusive on this energy savings. It added that adopting 252; Southern Company, January 9, point, DOE has tentatively decided to such an approach would focus DOE’s 2018 Public Meeting Transcript at p. develop a process by which it will process on ensuring that proposed 253) examine the potential costs and benefits With respect to the contours of a standards offer actual utility and value of a new standard that will enable it to possible approach that DOE could to consumers and towards DOE’s energy more expeditiously review and follow, NEMA referred to the Direct efficiency goals, in part by accounting determine whether to amend a given Heating Equipment final rule as an for technological advancements, energy conservation standard. The instance providing lessons for other changes in marketplace demand, and process would apply both to instances future rulemaking proceedings. In that other real-world dynamics. (Acuity where DOE is establishing a new case, DOE determined early on not to Brands, No. 46 at p. 8) standard and in cases where DOE is amend the energy conservation standard In contrast, the Northwest Power and weighing whether to amend an already- by comparing the current market for the Conservation Council (‘‘NPCC’’) existing standard. Performing this task covered product against the market that expressed the view that EPCA already in an expeditious manner—i.e., it evaluated six years earlier. NEMA provides DOE with more than sufficient something short of initiating the usual argued that section 325(m) (42 U.S.C. guidance and flexibility to make a ‘‘no three-year process involved in 6295(m)) provides the opportunity to new standards’’ determinations without proposing and finalizing a new quickly look and determine early on needing to add criteria to the Process standard—is consistent with the statute whether standards need further Rule. (NPCC, No. 35 at p. 21) NEEP (see 42 U.S.C. 6295(m) (providing that amending. (NEMA, January 9, 2018, articulated a similar view, asserting that the Secretary shall publish either a Public Meeting Transcript at pp. 49–50) there would be no benefit to adding notice of determination that standards In NEMA’s view, a modernized version criteria to the Process Rule for reaching for a product do not need to be amended of the Process Rule should invite public no amended standards determinations. or a proposal with new standards). In comment at the outset of every (NEEP, No. 77 at p. 5) The CEC also determining whether to move forward rulemaking proceeding examining a stated that the statutory criteria in EPCA with a given standards rulemaking, DOE given energy conservation standard as to are already adequate and allow for a intends to address a series of issues that, whether DOE should: (1) Amend that determination of ‘‘no amended while more expeditious than a complete standard after accounting for what has standards.’’ It did not, however, object rulemaking analysis, will nonetheless be been accomplished with that particular to DOE revising the Process Rule to supported by a thorough analysis to product/equipment since the previous conform to EPCA. (CEC, No. 53 at p. 7) ensure that DOE proceeds with only rulemaking and (2) discuss any changes The CA IOUs acknowledged that EPCA those rulemakings that are likely to (technological or otherwise) that have allows for a ‘‘no new standards’’ yield a significant conservation of occurred since that time. It further determination, but they asserted that energy and be technologically feasible asserted that DOE’s modernized Process DOE would need to go through the and economically justified. That process Rule could also inquire as to whether complete rulemaking process to would consider a variety of factors, such the prior rulemaking contained any determine the impact of updated as whether there are sufficiently erroneous conclusions or assumptions. standards. Consequently, they opposed developed, cost-effective technological Additionally, NEMA stated that DOE the suggestion that a no new standards improvements that would allow a given should focus on asking whether there determination could be made through a product to achieve an enhanced level of are opportunities for increasing truncated (i.e., abbreviated or quick) efficiency. The level of improvement deployment by customers and users of process. (CA IOUs, No. 65 at p. 9) under consideration would need to be

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3921

consistent with the threshold for should not proceed with the Ice-O-Matic, No. 29 at p. 2; Nor-Lake, significant energy conservation, as rulemaking. DOE would review these No. 68 at p. 2; Lutron, No. 50 at p. 2; discussed elsewhere in this document. comments and, subject to its statutory ABMA, No. 71 at p. 4; and Whirlpool, In evaluating the prospects of proposing obligations, determine whether it agrees No. 76 at p. 1) Ice-O-Matic argued that a new standard—or in determining that with the submitted information. If DOE DOE has conducted rulemakings in the no new standard is needed—DOE would agrees that the test procedure is not past producing ‘‘a very small total first look to the projected energy savings justified at that time, it would not energy reduction’’ while requiring that are likely to result using available pursue the rulemaking and would manufacturers and stakeholders to information solicited from the public publish a notice to that effect. expend many months and years of work through an ANOPR, preliminary However, these documents would for a very small total payback, thereby analysis, RFI or NODA, as appropriate. offer stakeholders the chance to provide ‘‘resulting in negative impacts on DOE would then compare these DOE with feedback on such test consumers due to higher product and projected savings against the procedures, including information about equipment prices.’’ (Ice-O-Matic, No. 29 technological feasibility of, and likely industry-based test procedures that may at p. 2) ABMA, which focused its costs necessary to meet, the amended meet the same need as those proposed attention on issues related to boilers, standards needed to achieve these by DOE. supported the use of a baseline for energy savings. DOE disagrees with G. Significant Savings of Energy significant energy savings, particularly commenters who insist DOE must Threshold since, in its view, current boiler designs always go through the full analysis, may be close to the point of diminishing because if potential amended standards DOE received numerous comments returns with respect to improved can be shown to be lacking in terms of regarding whether it should determine efficiency for this product. (ABMA, No. significant energy savings, technological or otherwise apply a threshold with 71 at p. 4) feasibility, or economic justification, respect to whether the projected energy savings for a given standard would be In ascertaining what constitutes DOE cannot adopt them regardless of ‘‘significant’’ energy savings, Nor-Lake whether DOE makes such determination significant for purposes of satisfying the statutory requirements under EPCA. urged DOE to solicit comments from at an early stage or upon completion of stakeholders and suggested that DOE its full suite of analyses. (See 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B) (providing, should follow a number of steps. (Nor- In the Department’s view, applying among other things, that the Secretary Lake, No. 68 at p. 2) First, it suggested this new approach would enable DOE to may not prescribe an amended or new more readily ascertain whether the standard that ‘‘will not result in that DOE should only promulgate an expenditure on a rulemaking of its significant conservation of energy’’)) amended energy conservation standard limited resources and those of interested Applying such a threshold would if it will result in ‘‘significant’’ energy parties is merited for a given regulated determine whether DOE proceeds savings. Nor-Lake criticized DOE’s product or equipment. DOE believes forward with a rulemaking to amend or approach to date, arguing that the that this proposed approach, if adopted, establish energy conservation standards agency has rarely determined that would enable it to focus its efforts in the for a given covered product or covered incremental energy savings were not most efficient manner possible, while equipment. Comments are discussed significant—including cases where the satisfying its legal obligations. immediately below, followed by DOE’s projected incremental savings amounted DOE seeks comment on its initial response. to less than a 1 percent gain in decision-making process for A number of industry commenters efficiency. It also stated that there is determining whether to proceed with a suggested during the January 9, 2018, currently no definition for the term standard rulemaking, including what public meeting that DOE should ‘‘significant’’ as it relates to energy specific criteria, factors, or determine an appropriate threshold of savings. Second, it suggested that DOE circumstances it should apply when what constitutes significant energy should more rigorously examine conducting this proposed approach. savings. AHRI, for example, indicated whether an existing (or proposed) that using a reasonable threshold for standard imposes ‘‘significant’’ costs on 2. Test Procedures energy savings would permit DOE and manufacturers and solicit comments on As with the early stakeholder input industry to allocate resources to how to define ‘‘significant’’ process for energy conservation improve technologies that will have the manufacturer costs and other impacts. standards, DOE believes that early greatest impact. (AHRI, January 9, 2018 The company pointed to DOE stakeholder input is also very important Public Meeting Transcript at pp. 28–29, rulemakings and Office of Hearings and during test procedure rulemakings. 264; AHAM, January 9, 2018 Public Appeals orders that appear to endorse, Consequently, DOE proposes to publish Meeting Transcript at p. 32; Spire, or at least accept, that a 10-percent to a notice in the Federal Register January 9, 2018 Public Meeting 20-percent impact on earnings is not announcing whenever DOE is Transcript at 261) significant to a manufacturer, a stance considering initiation of a rulemaking Interested parties who submitted with which the commenter appeared to for new or revised test procedures. written comments also indicated that disagree. Third, it suggested that DOE Particularly when considering amended DOE should focus on standards should evaluate the economic impact of test procedures, DOE would follow an rulemakings that produce significant proposed energy conservation standards early assessment process similar to that energy savings. In that vein, they on manufacturers earlier in the process described in the preceding sections suggested that DOE should take steps to than it currently does under the Process discussing DOE’s consideration of new define a threshold level for significant Rule. Nor-Lake also suggested that DOE or amended energy conservation energy savings, which some argued should articulate criteria, whether by standards. As part of such notice, DOE would help avoid producing regulations rule or through guidance, for issuing a would request submission of related yielding a small reduction in energy ‘‘no amended standard determination,’’ comments, including data and usage but requiring a significant which would be justified when the information substantively showing that expenditure of resources to meet and energy savings from an incremental an amended test procedure rule is not resulting in higher product and increase in the energy conservation necessary at that time and that DOE equipment prices for consumers. (See standard for a given product would not

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3922 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

result in significant energy savings and/ ‘‘significant’’ laid out in NRDC v. energy savings (typically quantified in or when the economic impact on Herrington. (NEEP, No. 77 at p. 5) terms of the number of quadrillion manufacturers from a revised standard Separately, the CA IOUs suggested British thermal units or ‘‘quads’’ of would be significant, in isolation or that DOE should continue reviewing energy saved) projected over a 30-year relative to the energy savings to be standards, even in cases where several period. gained. (Nor-Lake, No. 68 at pp. 2–3) rounds of rulemaking have already been In further examining the Herrington Lutron asserted that setting a conducted, because the potential decision, however, DOE has tentatively threshold for ‘‘significant conservation savings from an updated standard concluded that the court’s opinion of energy’’ in the Process Rule is needed which were determined not to be affords DOE a degree of latitude with to plan for future rulemakings and to significant in one round of rulemaking respect to determining whether a given add clarity to those rulemakings. By may become significant in a later round level of energy savings constitutes establishing a threshold for this term, it of rulemaking due to technological ‘‘significant’’ energy savings for argued that DOE can limit the variability innovation. (CA IOUs, No. 65 at p. 8) purposes of satisfying the requirements in how this term has been applied, They also urged DOE not to adopt a no- under EPCA. Specifically, in DOE’s which would reduce the overall burden standard standard since such an view, the agency may, consistent with on regulated industries. The company, approach would prevent individual the Herrington decision, apply a specific citing to a recommendation from the States from adopting their own levels. In numeric and/or percentage threshold Joint Commenters, suggested a threshold their view, such an approach can rather than the more general conceptual of ‘‘one quad (or equivalent amount of prevent significant, cost-effective energy approach it has applied in years past energy savings in kWh) saved over 30 savings from being realized. (Id. at p. 9) when considering potential new or years’’ be used. (Lutron, No. 50 at p. 2) 7 In response to these comments, DOE amended energy conservation standards (See also APPA, No. 36 at p. 4 has undertaken a review of how it authorized under EPCA. Such threshold (suggesting that DOE should apply applies the concept of ‘‘significant may be determined in absolute terms criteria for energy savings such as a conservation of energy’’ in its (i.e., setting a uniform level of threshold difference of under 2–4 rulemaking process, including how it significance for each product or percent between the standard under has interpreted the court’s mandate in equipment type—a total quads saved consideration and max-tech or savings Natural Resources Defense Council v. threshold), in relative terms (i.e., setting Herrington, 768 F.2d 1355 (DC Cir. over a 30-year period of less than 0.2 a level of significance based on a 1985) (hereinafter, ‘‘NRDC v. quads) and Sullivan-Palatek, No. 64 at percentage of energy use), or a Herrington’’, the ‘‘Herrington case’’ or p. 1 (criticizing DOE’s recent combination of both. DOE is considering ‘‘Herrington’’). The following discussion rulemaking efforts on compressors, applying such a threshold to ensure that reflects DOE’s understanding of that commercial packaged boilers, and limited agency resources are devoted to term in light of the court case, a pumps, which it asserted provided the analysis of those standards response to comments on this issue, and energy savings of 0.6 percent, 0.6 rulemakings that are most likely to yield DOE’s proposed approach moving percent, and 1.0 percent, respectively)) substantial benefits to consumers and forward. Other commenters, however, asserted the Nation. DOE is concerned with the that such an approach was unnecessary EPCA provides that the Secretary of Energy may not prescribe an amended direct economic impacts that are likely or flat-out opposed it. (NPCC, No. 22, at to flow from imposing standards that are p. 9; CEC, No. 53 at p. 8; NRDC, No. 74 or new energy conservation standard if the Secretary determines that such projected to yield relatively lower at p. 3; NEEP, No. 77 at p. 5) In Joint standard will not result in significant energy savings—standards that may Comments filed by ASAP, those groups conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C. produce little in overall benefits in stated that DOE must comply with the 6295(o)(3)(B); 42 U.S.C. energy and cost savings for consumers meaning provided by the U.S. Court of 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a)) A when compared to the costs related to Appeals for the District of Columbia in determination of significant energy the manufacture and purchase of NRDC v. Herrington for ‘‘significant’’ savings is made for each type of covered products and equipment meeting these energy savings. (ASAP Joint Comment, product or covered equipment when kinds of standards. This approach gives No. 75 at pp. 6, 8) This position was conducting an energy conservation effect to the Herrington court’s reference also supported by NRDC. (See NRDC, standards rulemaking. Congress did not to not forego energy savings that are No. 74, at p. 1) The CEC added that if define the statutory term ‘‘significant ‘‘cost-free.’’ However, this approach DOE were to decide that a baseline for conservation of energy’’ (nor has DOE would also limit the first-cost impacts to significant energy savings was done so in regulation), but the United consumers to those instances where a necessary, the determination of that States Court of Appeals for the District given rulemaking is expected to baseline would need to be done on a of Columbia Circuit (‘‘D.C. Circuit’’) generate significant energy savings and case-by-case basis and require updating added a judicial gloss to the other substantial benefits. to reflect market changes for the product understanding of that term in NRDC v. In the aftermath of Herrington, DOE at issue, as well as studies of the Herrington. In Herrington, the court largely focused on the court’s existing product stock and specific sales held that it was unlikely that Congress ‘‘genuinely trivial’’ language, without data. (CEC, No. 53 at p. 8) NEEP asserted intended for DOE to pass up a ‘‘cost-free accounting for the fact that this language that there is no benefit in adding criteria chance to save energy unless the was in reference to ‘‘cost-free’’ standards for considering the establishment of a amount of energy saved was genuinely when determining the significance of baseline for energy savings with respect trivial,’’ but stressed that it was not potential energy savings. This approach to qualifying for a ‘‘not significant’’ dictating any specific definition of resulted in a low bar for setting determination. It emphasized that DOE significance to DOE with respect to the standards.8 However, in examining should adhere to the definition of application of this term. Id. at 1373. With this decision in mind, DOE 8 The language contained in DOE’s 1989 final rule 7 Although Lutron referenced the submission establishing energy conservation standards for from the Joint Commenters with respect to the one conducted numerous rulemakings for a refrigerators and small gas furnaces is illustrative of quad threshold, that comment contained no variety of covered products and the agency’s understanding of how it was to reference to, or discussion on, that particular issue. equipment that yielded a range of determine ‘‘significant energy savings’’ in the post-

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3923

DOE’s regulatory history post- 1374. The court suggested that a savings improvement of a given Herrington through July 10, 2017 (i.e., threshold that exceeded this value ‘‘is percentage, the analysis would end, and publication of the final rule for walk-in inconsistent with the congressional DOE would determine that no coolers and freezers—see 82 FR 31808), decision to authorize discretionary significant energy savings would likely DOE set standards for covered products standards for [these] appliances.’’ Id. at result from setting new or amended and equipment a total of 57 times 1375–76. However, the court standards. This step would ensure (excluding instances where DOE set no- acknowledged that DOE may set energy promulgation of those standards most standard standards or adopted the savings thresholds so long as the levels likely to confer substantial benefits to standard levels from ASHRAE Standard ‘‘show some awareness of the range of consumers and the Nation by 90.1). This figure also reflects, in certain energy savings congress thought worth eliminating from further consideration cases, the same products or equipment pursuing.’’ Id. at 1372. Thus, DOE has those potential standards that are being regulated more than once. Of that some latitude when determining projected to result in low energy total, 23 of those rulemakings adopted significant energy savings. In this savings. standards that DOE projected would regard, one factor of particular relevance If either one of these thresholds is achieve less than 0.50 quad of energy is the fact that DOE has completed reached, DOE would then conduct savings over the standard 30-year period multiple cycles of standards analyses to ascertain whether a standard that DOE uses when analyzing the rulemakings for those products and can be prescribed that produces the impacts of its standards (which yielded equipment for which Congress has maximum improvement in energy a total of 4.24 quads in energy savings); mandated standards since the efficiency that is both technologically in contrast, the remaining 34 Herrington decision. With now decades feasible and economically justified (and rulemakings each resulted in over 0.50 of completed rulemakings that have still constitutes significant energy quad of energy savings over the same steadily increased the stringency of the savings at the level determined to be period (for a total of 109 quads in energy energy conservation standards for a economically justified). See 42 U.S.C. savings).9 These figures suggest that wide variety of products and 6295(o)(2)(A). Because technological instituting an appropriate threshold for equipment, evaluating the significance feasibility is already determined energy savings may significantly reduce of the energy savings produced by a through the max-tech analysis, DOE the burdens of regulation without given standard—along with the would then focus on performing an significantly reducing energy savings. likelihood of additional energy economic justification analysis under 42 In this proceeding, DOE is seeking a efficiency improvements (i.e., the U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i). middle ground with regard to what prospect for diminishing returns) and In performing this analysis, DOE constitutes a significant savings of the likely increasing cost of additional would consider the total amount of energy to help improve both the efficiency gains—must be viewed energy savings at issue at each trial predictability and transparency of its against that backdrop. standard level (‘‘TSL’’). Assuming that rulemaking process when setting After careful consideration, DOE has DOE uses a minimum numerical standards for the various products and tentatively decided to apply a threshold- threshold and a separate percentage equipment it regulates. Looking to the based analysis that, in DOE’s view, is threshold, the projected savings for any statute, the Herrington court discussed both comprehensive and workable given TSL would be measured against DOE’s authority to prescribe a while remaining cognizant of the goals these two thresholds. DOE would discretionary standard for an appliance and requirements of EPCA. This perform its economic analysis to if, among other criteria, the national ‘‘hybrid’’ approach would examine determine whether an economically energy consumption of the appliance energy savings through the twin lenses justified level (producing the maximum exceeds 0.014335 quads per year, which of the total amount of projected energy amount of energy savings possible) can corresponds to 1.449 quads of source savings and the relative percentage be reached that meets or exceeds either energy over 30 years. Herrington at increase in efficiency/decrease in energy of these thresholds. The analysis would usage that could be obtained from proceed to compare that projected Herrington environment. Specifically, that rule’s setting or amending standards for a savings against the amount that the preamble stated: given product/equipment. examined product/equipment consumes Under section 325(l)(3)(B) of the Act, the Under the first step of this approach, at each TSL. Department is prohibited from adopting a standard the projected energy savings from a In DOE’s view, this approach would for a product if that standard would not result in ‘‘significant’’ energy savings. While the term potential maximum technologically enable the agency to more readily ‘significant’ has never been defined in the Act, the feasible (‘‘max-tech’’) standard would be ascertain whether pursuing a standards Department believes that a standard level option evaluated against a given numerical rulemaking for a given product/ need not meet a threshold level of energy savings threshold. This initial step would be equipment would yield energy savings to be considered a ‘‘significant’’ saver of energy. The U.S. Court of Appeals, NRDC v. Herrington, 768 performed to ascertain whether a that the Secretary would consider F.2d 1355 (DC Cir. 1985), concluded that potential standard satisfies 42 U.S.C. significant under EPCA. It would also Congressional intent in using the word 6295(o)(3)(B) to ensure that DOE avoids provide the public with greater ‘‘significant’’ was to mean ‘‘non-trivial.’’ Id. at 1373. setting a standard that ‘‘will not result transparency and predictability Thus, for this rulemaking, DOE believes that each candidate standard considered results in significant in significant conservation of energy.’’ If regarding how DOE’s analytical process energy savings. the projected max-tech energy savings would work with respect to the setting 54 FR 47916, 47920 (Nov. 17, 1989). does not meet or exceed this numerical of standards through the use of these 9 These totals were drawn from DOE’s analysis of threshold (with any lower level minimum energy savings thresholds and rulemakings done since the inception of the expected to achieve even less energy potentially allow industry to improve its Appliance Standards Program. It is noted that these values reflect: (1) The lower end of any range of savings), those max-tech savings would product planning. Further, DOE believes energy savings reported in a final rule, and (2) the then be compared to the total energy that following this approach would reported values for analytical periods less than 30 usage of the product/equipment to encourage the development of gradual years (i.e., without extrapolation of those values to calculate a potential percentage efficiency improvements independent of 30 years). Nonetheless, in DOE’s view, these totals should be sufficient to represent the trends under improvement in energy efficiency/ mandatory regulatory requirements and discussion vis-a`-vis DOE’s energy conservation reduction in energy usage. If this help focus utility and energy efficiency standards rulemakings. comparison does not yield an energy advocacy efforts on development of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3924 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

standards that generate greater energy Based on an examination of all past and a percentage threshold value of 10 savings and that yield more meaningful DOE standards rulemakings, DOE is percent. DOE requests comments, impacts through fewer regulatory considering using a quad threshold information, and data regarding whether actions.10 value (over a 30-year period) of 0.5 quad these values represent an appropriate threshold for determining significant 10 While this discussion does not delve into the and result in lower than expected savings when energy savings. details of how the max-tech and economic justification analyses are performed, there are a performing the relevant economic analysis. To aid in understanding the energy Similarly, there may be cases where technology- number of variables that may come into play conservation standards rulemaking depending on the product/equipment at issue that switching may occur that could impact the analysis. may not be readily apparent during the max-tech Also, depending on the pricing impacts of adopting process envisioned by DOE, the below analysis but appear in the more comprehensive more stringent efficiency standards, the projected chart is included to visualize DOE’s economic justification analysis. For example, fuel- savings may be less if potential purchasers of the decision-making approach. switching (e.g., in the context of furnaces) may more efficient product opt to repair their current affect the projected energy savings from a standard product, rather than replace it. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3925

Quick Look: DOE posts RFI noting agency contemplating a rulemaking

Agency receives substantive conunents indicating the rule is not technologically feasible or economicallv justified Agency provides opportunity for early stakeholder input via and RFI, framework document or other methodology

Agency receives substantive conunents indicating the rule is not technologically feasible or economically justified

NO

Agency conducts significant energy savings threshold test

Rule passes significant ener~y savin~s threshold

YES

NOPR

NO Rule results in a significant savings of energy and is technologically feasible and economicallv iustified

YES

Agency undergoes notice and comment mlemaking to issue a no-standard Final Rule standard

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP13FE19.000 3926 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 6450–01–C (Joint Commenters, No. 51 at p. 19) test procedure is finalized and is H. Finalization of Test Procedures Prior Several other commenters simply stated published in the Federal Register.’’ (UT- to Issuance of a Standards NOPR that test procedures should be finalized Carrier, No. 41 at p. 2) Big Ass Fans prior to DOE initiating a rulemaking to (‘‘BAF’’) recommended that new test Currently, the Process Rule states that propose new or amended standards. procedures be finalized 6 to 18 months DOE will propose any modifications to (See, e.g., Bradford White, No.42 at p. 2; before DOE proposes a new energy a test procedure prior to issuing an ABMA, No. 71 at p. 3) conservation standard. (BAF, No. 73 at ANOPR for energy conservation As stated previously, DOE is p. 2) The Joint Commenters standards and finalize those proposing that test procedures used to recommended that test procedure modifications prior to issuing a NOPR evaluate proposed standards be amendments be finalized 6 months for energy conservation standards. finalized at least 180 days prior to before initiating a standards rulemaking However, DOE has deviated from this publication of a NOPR proposing new or and that test procedures for newly schedule in the past and conducted test amended standards. DOE believes that covered products be finalized 1 year procedure and standards rulemakings 180 days provides interested parties before initiating a standards rulemaking. concurrently. DOE recognizes that a with sufficient time to evaluate the new (Joint Commenters, No. 51 at p. 19) finalized test procedure allows or amended test procedure. DOE seeks Several other commenters simply stated interested parties to provide more comment on the appropriateness of this that test procedures should be finalized effective comments on proposed 180-day period. prior to DOE initiating a rulemaking to standards. Further, if the test procedure Currently, the Process Rule states that propose new or amended standards. is finalized sufficiently in advance of DOE will propose any modifications to (See, e.g., Bradford White, No.42 at p. 2; the issuance of proposed standards, a test procedure prior to issuing an ABMA, No. 71 at p. 3) manufacturers will have experience ANOPR for energy conservation As stated previously, DOE is using the new test procedure, which standards and finalize those proposing that test procedures used to may provide additional insights into the modifications prior to issuing a NOPR evaluate proposed standards be proposed standards. As a result, DOE for energy conservation standards. finalized at least 180 days prior to proposes to require that test procedures However, DOE has deviated from this publication of a NOPR proposing new or used to evaluate new or amended schedule in the past and conducted test amended standards. DOE believes that standards will be finalized at least 180 procedure and standards rulemakings 180 days provides interested parties days before publication of a NOPR concurrently. DOE recognizes that a with sufficient time to evaluate the new proposing new or amended standards. finalized test procedure allows or amended test procedure. DOE seeks Commenters were in general interested parties to provide more comment on the appropriateness of this agreement that test procedures should effective comments on proposed 180-day period. be finalized before DOE proposes new standards. Further, if the test procedure or amended standards. For example, is finalized sufficiently in advance of I. Adoption of Industry Standards Acuity Brands stated that manufacturers the issuance of proposed standards, The current Process Rule does not need time to develop baseline data manufacturers will have experience discuss the verbatim adoption of using the finalized test procedure before using the new test procedure, which industry standards as DOE test evaluating the proposed efficiency may provide additional insights into the procedures. That being said, DOE is levels. (Acuity Brands, No. 46 at pp. 4– proposed standards. As a result, DOE obligated to adopt industry standards in 5) Similarly, the ASAP Joint proposes to require that test procedures certain cases. For example, under EPCA, Commenters expressed support for used to evaluate new or amended DOE is required to use industry finalizing test procedures prior to DOE standards will be finalized at least 180 standards developed or recognized by proposing new or amended standards days before publication of a NOPR ASHRAE for several categories of ‘‘because it allows manufacturers and proposing new or amended standards. covered equipment. (42 U.S.C. other stakeholders to better assess the Commenters were in general 6314(a)(4)(A)) Additionally, if these effects of proposed standard levels.’’ agreement that test procedures should industry standards are amended, EPCA (ASAP Joint Commenters, No. 75 at p. be finalized before DOE proposes new requires that DOE amend its test 5) or amended standards. For example, procedures as necessary to be consistent Commenters also provided more Acuity Brands stated that manufacturers with the amended industry standard specific suggestions regarding the need time to develop baseline data unless it determines, by rule published timing of test procedure and standards using the finalized test procedure before in the Federal Register and supported rulemakings. For instance, UT-Carrier evaluating the proposed efficiency by clear and convincing evidence, that stated that an ‘‘[e]nergy conservation levels. (Acuity Brands, No. 46 at pp. 4– the amended test procedure would be standard rulemaking should only be 5) Similarly, the ASAP Joint unduly burdensome to conduct or initiated 3–6 months after the related Commenters expressed support for would not produce test results that test procedure is finalized and is finalizing test procedures prior to DOE reflect the energy efficiency, energy use, published in the Federal Register.’’ (UT- proposing new or amended standards and estimated operating costs of that Carrier, No. 41 at p. 2) Big Ass Fans ‘‘because it allows manufacturers and equipment during a representative (‘‘BAF’’) recommended that new test other stakeholders to better assess the average use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2), procedures be finalized 6 to 18 months effects of proposed standard levels.’’ (3) and (4)(B)) As for covered products before DOE proposes a new energy (ASAP Joint Commenters, No. 75 at p. and equipment where use of an industry conservation standard. (BAF, No. 73 at 5) standard is not mandated by EPCA, DOE p. 2) The Joint Commenters Commenters also provided more still routinely adopts industry standards recommended that test procedure specific suggestions regarding the as DOE test procedures. In many cases, amendments be finalized 6 months timing of test procedure and standards aspects of these industry standards are before initiating a standards rulemaking rulemakings. For instance, UT-Carrier modified by DOE upon incorporation and that test procedures for newly stated that an ‘‘[e]nergy conservation into the DOE test procedure. DOE covered products be finalized 1 year standard rulemaking should only be recognizes that modifications to these before initiating a standards rulemaking. initiated 3–6 months after the related standards impose a burden on industry.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3927

For instance, manufacturers will face seeks comment on this proposal. rulemaking, and the use of DFR’s should increased costs if the DOE modifications Further, given DOE’s past adoption of be limited in practice. (EEI, No. 72 at p. require different testing equipment or test procedures that did vary from the 2). The National Consumer Law Center facilities. industry test, DOE seeks comment on (‘‘NCLC’’) supported the DFR process Some commenters urged DOE to whether, if DOE were to adopt this when it can be used to speed up the adopt industry standards without proposal, there are existing test rulemaking process, reduce unnecessary modification. For example, Sub Zero procedures that should be modified to time and expense for all parties, reduce stated that industry is best positioned to conform to the existing industry test the likelihood of contentious hearings develop tests that accurately, fairly, and method. and litigation, and lead to results that consistently measure energy, and maximize the satisfaction of all parties. J. Direct Final Rules modifications to industry test (National Consumer Law Center, procedures are costly, unnecessary, and The Energy Independence Security January 9, 2018 Public Meeting duplicative. (Sub Zero, No. 43 at p. 3) Act of 2007 (‘‘EISA 2007’’) (Pub. L. 110– Transcript at pp. 22) Similarly, the Joint Commenters stated 140) amended EPCA, in relevant part, to The APPA expressed its opinion that that DOE modifications to industry grant DOE authority to issue a ‘‘direct DOE should not issue DFRs outside of standards frequently have little impact final rule’’ (i.e. DFR) to establish energy negotiated rulemakings. (APPA, No. 36 on test results, but significantly increase conservation standards. As amended, at p. 2) The NPCC supports the the testing burden on manufacturers. EPCA establishes requirements for when continued use of DFRs coupled with the (Joint Commenters, No. 51 at p. 21) The DOE uses this type of rulemaking ASRAC negotiated rulemaking process. Joint Commenters also stated that DOE proceeding for the issuance of certain (NPCC, No. 35 at pp. 7, 10) Southern should only modify industry standards actions. Specifically, DOE may issue a Company stated that it is unrealistic to in narrow circumstances, supported by DFR adopting energy conservation expect that an energy or water standard clear and convincing evidence. (Id.) standards for a covered product or which is not part of a negotiated Other commenters supported the equipment upon receipt of a joint rulemaking would be adopted using this adoption of industry standards under proposal from a group of ‘‘interested process. (Southern Company, No. 70 at certain conditions. For instance, Nor- persons that are fairly representative of p. 3). NEMA suggested that the DFR and Lake stated that industry standards relevant points of view,’’ provided DOE the negotiated rulemaking process should only be adopted without determines the energy conservation should be treated as two separate modification if there is unanimous standards recommended in the joint processes. (NEMA, January 9, 2018 agreement among DOE, manufacturers, proposal conform with the requirements Public Meeting Transcript at pp. 78–79) and other stakeholders. (Nor-Lake, No. of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) or section In response to these comments, DOE 68 at p. 3) 342(a)(6)(B) as applicable. (42 U.S.C. notes that DFRs are intended to be a Finally, some commenters opposed 6295(p)(4)(A)) process that is distinct from that adding language to the Process Rule that In the December 2017 RFI, DOE outlined under the Negotiated would require DOE to adopt industry requested feedback as to whether it Rulemaking Act, although in the recent standards without modification. For should amend the Process Rule to past, the Department has sometimes example, the CA IOUs stated that include provisions related to the use of conflated the two. The Negotiated industry standards may serve as a useful DFRs. 82 FR 59992, 59993 (Dec. 18, Rulemaking Act clearly contemplates starting point for a DOE test procedure, 2017). Most responders supported both that the outcome of the negotiation but they are not typically developed the use of the DFR process in process will be a proposed rule. See 5 with DOE’s energy efficiency metrics developing rules and addressing the U.S.C. 563. In contrast, the purpose of and CCE requirements in mind. And, as DFR provision in the Process Rule. A the DFR provision in EPCA is to allow such, DOE should not amend the more detailed discussion of these DFR- the Secretary to adopt a final rule Process rule to specify the use of related comments follows, along with without first utilizing the normal notice industry standards without DOE’s response. and comment process. Thus, although modification. (CA IOUs, No. 65 at p. 5) Some commenters supported DFRs as negotiated rules and direct final rules Similarly, NPCC stated that adopting an alternative to negotiated rulemaking, are both valuable tools, they represent industry standards without while others stated conversely that two distinct administrative processes. modifications would rarely satisfy EPCA DFRs should only be issued in the Going forward, DOE intends to treat requirements. Correspondingly, NPCC context of negotiated rulemaking, led by them as the two separate processes that stated that DOE should not amend the an Appliance Standards and they are, and consequently, DOE Process Rule to specify the use of Rulemaking Federal Advisory proposes to codify this distinction in the industry standards without Committee (‘‘ASRAC’’) subcommittee. revised Process Rule. modification. (NPCC, No. 35 at pp. 8, The CEC stated that DFRs should A number of commenters stated that 16) remain available as an option for DOE should clarify the DFR provision in In recognition of the costs discussed finalizing standards developed in either the Process Rule. (See e.g., Rheem, by commenters that are imposed by ASRAC negotiations or in non-ASRAC January 9, 2018 Public Meeting DOE’s adoption of changes to industry negotiations. (CEC, No. 53 at p. 2) Transcript at pp. 76–77) The ALA test methods, DOE proposes to amend Lennox supported the use of DFRs and recommended that DOE set forth the the Process Rule to require adoption, suggested that identifying DFRs as an specific conditions DOE would need in without modification, of industry alternative to consensus rulemaking order to consider a joint proposal under standards as test procedures for covered outlined in the current Process Rule the DFR authority in EPCA. (ALA, No. products and equipment unless such would be helpful. (Lennox, No. 62 at p. 55 at p. 2) The CEC stated that in its standards would be unduly burdensome 3) EEI stated that DFRs that have not amended Process Rule, DOE should to conduct or would not produce test been the result of negotiated provide additional guidance—but not results that reflect the energy efficiency, rulemakings should be part of the final strict prescriptive criteria—describing energy use, and estimated operating Process Rule. However, EEI stressed that the minimum parameters a consensus costs of that equipment during a DOE should have a preference for proposal must meet in order to be a representative average use cycle. DOE conducting notice and comment candidate for a DFR. (CEC, No. 53 at p.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3928 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

2) In response, DOE agrees with these 1. DOE’s Authority Under the DFR 2. Interested Persons Fairly comments and is providing clarification Provision Representative of Relevant Points of in this proposed rule about its DFR View authority and the conditions a The DFR provision is found in EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 6295(p), the heading and In the December 2017 RFI, DOE submitted joint proposal must meet in requested comment on when a joint introduction of which state: ‘‘Procedure order for DOE to consider publication, statement with recommendations for prescribing new or amended as explained in further detail related to an energy or water standards. Any new or amended energy subsequently. conservation standard would be deemed conservation standard shall be Two commenters expressed concerns to have been submitted by ‘‘interested prescribed in accordance with the about potential negative outcomes that persons that are fairly representative of following procedure.’’ Given this might result from potential changes to relevant points of view,’’ thereby description, DOE believes that 42 U.S.C. the current DFR process. NEEP stated permitting use of the DFR mechanism. 6295(p)(4) must be understood as that adding unnecessary provisions to 82 FR 59992, 59993–59994. A number procedural; that is, the provision is not the Process Rule could result in a more of commenters provided feedback on a substantive grant of rulemaking cumbersome procedure and a less this issue. authority but rather outlines a process effective DFR outcome. (NEEP, No. 77 at Several commenters recommended DOE must follow when issuing a DFR. p. 2) NPCC conceded that the DFR that DOE should do its best to be as Supporting this view is the fact that procedures can always be improved, but inclusive as possible in identifying subparagraphs (p)(1) and (p)(2) are it urged caution so as not to lose any of fairly representative points of view, but merely procedural provisions. That is, the value that is gained from the DFR they recognized that fairly process. NPCC stated that the subparagraphs (p)(1) and (p)(2) outline representative does not mean ‘‘all.’’ For procedures as developed are generally the process the Secretary must follow to example, the Joint Commenters stated effective, efficient, and transparent; they propose and finalize a standard using that ‘‘fairly’’ cannot practically mean also offer great opportunity for the ‘‘normal’’ rulemaking approach. ‘‘every point of view;’’ otherwise, there involvement by, and generally have the However, neither of those would be no need to seek public support of, industry, States, efficiency subparagraphs is an independent grant comment on the proposed standard as advocates, and others. (NPCC, No. 35 at of rulemaking authority. Both are required by EPCA in 42 U.S.C. pp. 7, 10) In response, DOE notes that meaningless unless a separate provision 6295(p)(4)(B). According to the Joint in providing clarification as to its of EPCA authorizes issuance of a rule to Commenters, the Secretary can make an expectations for DFR submittals, it aims establish a new or amend an existing initial determination of how ‘‘fairly’’ the to improve, rather than hinder, the DFR energy conservation standard. Thus, group represents the relevant points of process. subparagraphs (p)(1) and (p)(2) could view based on the identity of the not be interpreted as granting DOE persons submitting the Joint Statement, Some commenters offered their separate and independent standard and can reassess that initial concerns about the use of DFRs. For issuing authority. When read in context determination after the public comment example, Spire argued that DFRs should with the rest of the subsection, 42 U.S.C. period has expired. (Joint Commenters, only be utilized in non-controversial 6295(p)(4) likewise must be read as No. 51 at pp. 17–18) efficiency rules where prior notice and procedural, i.e., not a separate and The ALA stated that the DOE should comment procedures serve no useful independent grant of rulemaking develop a more substantive definition of purpose. (Spire, January 9, 2018 Public authority. Under this interpretation, ‘‘fairly representative’’ in the Process Meeting Transcript at pp. 70–72) The Rule, but the ALA also suggested that NPGA stated that DOE should not rely DOE must rely on authority provided by other sections of EPCA. because each product and market is on DFRs because they fail to uphold the unique, the definition should be spirit of open dialogue with the public As the DFR provision is not a separate flexible. The ALA further stated that any called for under EPCA and the APA. grant of authority, any standard issued joint proposal should include, at a (NPGA, No. 59 at p. 2) In response, DOE must comply with the provisions of the minimum, representative stakeholders notes that the purpose of addressing the EPCA subsection under which the rule from industry/manufacturers, along DFR provision in this proposed rule is was authorized. For example, if the DFR with energy-efficiency advocates and to, in part, ensure open dialogue with were a recommendation that DOE States. (ALA, No. 55 at p. 2) Southern stakeholders and to limit controversy. amend the standards for metal halide Company commented that the group The Department does not agree that the lamp fixtures under 42 U.S.C. should also include, distributors, DFR mechanism is somehow unsuitable 6295(hh)(3)(A), which requires that not utilities, consumer groups, and any for complex or controversial cases; on later than January 1, 2019, the Secretary other groups that might be relevant for the contrary, the DFR may be beneficial shall publish a final rule to determine that specific rulemaking. (Southern in those instances due to early and whether the standards then in effect for Company, No. 70 at p. 3) The CEC stated broad stakeholder involvement. metal halide lamp fixtures should be that it may be appropriate to identify In light of the comments described amended, the standards must comply constituents whose points of view above, as part of this proposed rule, with 42 U.S.C. 6295(hh)(3)(B), which should always be included in order for DOE is: (1) Clarifying its authority under requires that any amended standards a proposal to be considered the DFR provision found at 42 U.S.C. apply to products manufactured after representative but that an extreme 6295(p)(4); (2) providing guidance as to January 1, 2022, along with all other definition of ‘‘fairly representative,’’ DOE’s interpretation of ‘‘fairly applicable parts of EPCA. DOE will not such as consideration of ‘‘all’’ relevant representative,’’ and (3) explaining accept or issue as a DFR a submitted points of view would create an DOE’s obligations upon receipt of an joint proposal that does not comply insurmountable hurdle. (CEC, No. 53 at adverse comment. In this way, DOE with all pertinent parts of EPCA, p. 3) In contrast, Spire asserted that the hopes to improve the transparency, including those product specific term should be interpreted to mean ‘‘all consistency, and inclusiveness of its requirements included in the provision known relevant points of view.’’ (Spire, existing DFR process. that authorizes issuance of the standard. No. 57 at pp. 9–10) Spire, NEEP and EEI

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3929

argued that the outcome of the member of a group that submits a joint ‘‘adverse comments’’ that may provide residential furnaces DFR rulemaking statement to be issued as a DFR. the Secretary with a reasonable basis for made clear that there must be an In order to assist DOE in making this withdrawing the DFR, leading to further intentionally inclusive group case-by-case determination, upon rulemaking under the accompanying negotiating a DFR. (NEEP, No. 77 at p. receipt of a joint statement NOPR. 82 FR 59992, 59994. 2; Spire, No. 57 at pp. 9–10; EEI, January recommending energy conservation Currently, to determine whether a 9, 2018 Public Meeting Transcript at p. standards, DOE will publish in the comment is sufficiently ‘‘adverse’’ so as 64) EEI added its concern about how Federal Register that statement, as to provide a reasonable basis for stakeholders who are not included in submitted to DOE, in order to obtain withdrawal of the direct final rule, DOE the DFR process do not see the rule feedback as to whether the joint weighs the substance of any adverse until it is published in the Federal statement was submitted by a group that comment received against the Register, and as a result, they are is fairly representative of relevant points anticipated benefits of the consensus excluded from any preliminary input. of view. The comment period would agreement and the likelihood that EEI suggested that a possible solution occur during the time DOE analyzes the further consideration of the comment would be for DOE to announce the submission for other legal and analytical would change the result of the negotiations and welcome other parties issues and considers preparation of a rulemaking (referred to as the to join in the process. (EEI, January 9, rulemaking document. (DOE notes that ‘‘balancing test’’). This approach was 2018 Public Meeting Transcript at p. 64) such preliminary comment period outlined in recent DOE rulemakings, The American Gas Association (‘‘AGA’’) would not diminish or eliminate the such as DOE’s final rule for energy stated that the DFR should only be used statutory comment period(s) associated conservation standards for dishwashers. where a consensus has been developed with publication of a subsequent DFR 77 FR 59712, 59714 (Oct. 1, 2012). among all affected parties. (AGA, and/or NOPR.) Therefore, if any A number of commenters supported January 9, 2018 Public Meeting substantive concerns are raised about DOE’s current balancing test. (See e.g., Transcript, at pp. 36) parties not included during the Southern Company, No. 70 at 3; NPCC, A few commenters argued against negotiation of the consensus agreement, No. 35 at 11; CA IOUs, No. 65 at p. 4) changing the existing definition of DOE can make the appropriate decision Some of these commenters further noted ‘‘fairly representative.’’ (See e.g., as to whether the rule can move forward that in order to result in the withdrawal Lennox, No. 35 at p. 3) The NPCC as a DFR. If DOE determines that the of a DFR, adverse comments should be asserted that any joint proposal rule does not meet the requirements for substantive, accompanied by supporting developed under the Negotiated publication as a direct final rule, DOE data, and further consideration of the Rulemaking Act meets the definition of will consider whether any further issues raised through the normal notice ‘‘fairly representative.’’ NPCC further rulemaking activity is appropriate, and comment process could materially stated that if a DFR is not developed consistent with the procedures for the affect the outcome of the particular DFR. under the Negotiated Rulemaking Act, regular rulemaking process. (Lennox No. 35 at p. 4) The Joint then DOE should consult with ASRAC DOE appreciates the comments Commenters agreed that the to determine if a recommendation was received in response to the RFI and determination to withdraw a DFR submitted by interested persons that are considered in the development of this should be based on substance and fairly representative of relevant points proposal. DOE continues to seek quality, not the quantity of the adverse of view. (NPCC, No. 35 at p. 12) comment on what it means for a comments. (Joint Commenters, No. 51 at The NPGA stated its opposition to statement to be submitted by interested pp. 16–17) The CA IOUs stated that DFRs and asserted that it would not be persons that are ‘‘fairly representative of DOE should maintain the flexibility to beneficial for DOE to define ‘‘fairly relevant points of view.’’ DOE continues modify its analysis or decision so that representative.’’ NPGA further stated to seek comment on what constitutes a such comments do not become a tactic that in trying to define this term, DOE relevant point of view for purposes of to delay the rulemaking. Both Lennox would either intentionally or using the EPCA authority in 42 U.S.C. and the CA IOUs argued that if the inadvertently exclude certain 6295(p)(4) to issue a DFR. More negative commenters had the stakeholders from the DFR rulemaking generally, DOE seeks further comment opportunity to provide such comments process. (NPGA, No. 59 at p. 2) on the strengths and weaknesses of earlier in the rulemaking process, DOE In response to these comments, DOE using the DFR process to promulgate should not be required to modify the agrees that the rulemaking process must energy conservation standards. analysis or decision. (CA IOUs, No. 65 be as inclusive as possible, even though at p. 4; Lennox No. 35 at p. 4) it cannot reasonably be expected to 3. Adverse Comments While the Joint Commenters encompass every possible viewpoint. Simultaneous with the issuance of a supported the concept of the balancing DOE notes that at a minimum, ‘‘fairly DFR, DOE must also issue a notice of test, they noted that the determining representative of relevant points of proposed rulemaking (‘‘NOPR’’) factor is not the anticipated benefits of view’’ must include larger concerns and containing the same energy the consensus agreement against which small businesses in the regulated conservation standards as in the DFR. these adverse comments must be industry/manufacturer community, Following publication of the DFR, DOE measured, but whether the adverse energy advocates, energy utilities, as must solicit public comment for a comments merit concluding that the appropriate, consumers, and States. period of at least 110 days; then, not Joint Statement is not in accordance However, DOE also believes that it will later than120 days after issuance of the with 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) or 42 U.S.C. be necessary to evaluate the meaning of DFR, the Secretary must determine 6313(a)(6)(B) of EPCA. (Joint ‘‘fairly representative’’ on a case-by-case whether any adverse comments ‘‘may Commenters, No. 51 at p. 17) basis, subject to the circumstances of a provide a reasonable basis for Both Spire and GW expressed concern particular rulemaking, to determine withdrawing the direct final rule,’’ that the balancing test excludes the additional parties that must be part of a based on the rulemaking record. (42 opinions of some stakeholders directly joint statement in order to be ‘‘fairly U.S.C. 6295(p)(4)(B),(C)(i)) In the affected by a DFR because DOE does not representative of relevant points of December 2017 RFI, DOE solicited sufficiently take into account adverse view.’’ DOE notes that it cannot be a comment on the nature and extent of comments. (GW, No. 48 at p. 4; Spire,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3930 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

No. 57 at pp. 9–10) GW pointed out that K. Negotiated Rulemaking a manner consistent with the Negotiated DOE has rarely, if ever, deviated from a Rulemaking Act (‘‘NRA’’). (5 U.S.C. 1. Utilizing the Negotiated Rulemaking DFR, even when it received adverse 561–570a) Specifically, DOE asked Process, Including the Establishment of whether the Process Rule should comments. (GW, No. 48 at p. 5) Spire the Appliance Standards and further raised specific criticisms in the provide for the use of a convener or Rulemaking Federal Advisory facilitator for each negotiated context of prior rulemakings with Committee (ASRAC) respect to the treatment of adverse rulemaking. DOE also asked about comments. (Spire, No. 57 at pp. 9–10) Negotiated rulemaking is a process by measures to ensure that a negotiated EEI stated that the DFR process is which an agency attempts to develop a rulemaking consider all reasonable consensus proposal for regulation in alternatives, including the option of not worrisome because parties that were not consultation with interested parties, amending/issuing standards or involved in negotiation do not know thereby addressing salient comments alternatives that would affect different what issues were raised or addressed from stakeholders before issuing a stakeholders differently. Finally, DOE during negotiations, and can only proposed rule.11 Consequently, when requested comments on the use of a supply input once the DFR has been done properly, negotiated rulemaking direct final rule mechanism at the submitted. EEI further argued that can yield better decisions, while conclusion to a negotiated rulemaking. quantity, as well as quality and conserving time and resources of both 82 FR 59992, 59995. substance of comments, should be taken the agency and interested parties. DOE received a number of comments into account. (EEI, January 9, 2018 Negotiated rulemaking is a topic not from interested stakeholders regarding Public Meeting Transcript at p. 87) directly addressed by the current DOE’s use of negotiated rulemaking, ABMA suggested that DOE should Process Rule. However, the Process Rule most of whom supported inclusion of mirror EPA’s treatment of adverse does recognize the value and encourage such mechanism in the Process Rule comments to a DFR, whereby a single submission of joint stakeholder (either explicitly or implicitly through positive statements regarding negotiated adverse comment is sufficient to send recommendations. rulemaking). Commenters addressed the rule to notice and comment To facilitate potential negotiated rulemakings, DOE established the negotiated rulemaking generally and rulemaking. (ABMA, No. 71 at p. 2) Appliance Standards and Rulemaking also specifically regarding its Spire stated that if an interested party Federal Advisory Committee (i.e. implementation in the DOE context. goes through the trouble of commenting, ASRAC) so as to comply with the then that comment should be 2. Inclusion of Negotiated Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Act in the Process Rule considered relevant, and the rule should (‘‘FACA’’), Public Law 92–463 (1972) undergo notice and comment. (Spire, (codified at 5 U.S.C. App. 2). As noted above, the majority of January 9, 2018 Public Meeting As part of the DOE process, working commenters supported DOE’s use of Transcript at p. 117) groups have been established as negotiated rulemakings in appropriate In response, given the concerns subcommittees of ASRAC, from time to cases and either explicitly called for, or voiced no objection to, its inclusion in expressed regarding DFRs, DOE plans to time, for specific products, and one the Process Rule. (Bradford White, No. move away from the previously member from the ASRAC committee attends and participates in the meetings 42 at p. 1; HARDI, No. 56 at p. 3; announced balancing test. As suggested Lennox, No. 62 at p. 5; NPCC, No. 35 by commenters, DOE will look not at the of a specific working group. Ultimately, the working group reports to ASRAC, at pp. 7, 12–13; Nor-Lake, No. 68 at p. quantity of comments received but 4; Spire, No. 57 at p. 13; Acuity Brands, rather at the substance of the adverse and ASRAC itself votes on whether to make a recommendation to DOE to No. 46 at p. 3; EEI, No. 72 at p. 3; comment, though one comment may ABMA, No. 71 at p. 2; NEMA, January present an argument that could lead adopt a consensus agreement. The negotiated rulemaking process 9, 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at DOE to conclude that it is an adverse allows real-time adjustments to the pp. 78–79; AGA, January 9, 2018 Public comment providing a basis for analyses as the working group is Meeting Transcript, at p. 36; NPCC, withdrawal of the DFR. Moreover, in considering them. Furthermore, it January 9, 2018 Public Meeting contrast to previous policy, DOE may allows parties with differing viewpoints Transcript, at pp. 57–58; Southern take into account, as adverse, comments and objectives to negotiate face-to-face Company, January 9, 2018 Public even if the issue was brought up regarding the terms of a potential Meeting Transcript, at p. 123; Lennox, previously during DOE-initiated standard. Additionally, it encourages January 9, 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at pp. 124, 133–134; Daikin, discussions (e.g. publication of a manufacturers in a more direct manner January 9, 2018 Public Meeting framework or RFI document) that to provide data for the analyses, thereby Transcript, at p. 124; AHRI, January 9, preceded submission of a joint helping to better account for 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at p. statement, if the Department concludes manufacturer concerns. 125; AHAM, January 9, 2018 Public that the comment merits further In the December 2017 RFI, DOE asked Meeting Transcript, at p. 126; NEMA, consideration. In short, if DOE a number of questions related to January 9, 2018 Public Meeting determines that one or more substantive negotiated rulemaking, including Transcript, at p. 127) A number of whether the Process Rule should be comments objecting to the final rule commenters stated that negotiated amended to provide for the use of provides a sufficient reason to withdraw rulemaking should be the preferred negotiated rulemaking in appropriate the DFR, DOE will do so, and instead option. (Lennox, No. 62 at p. 5; NPCC, cases. DOE opened up the issue broadly proceed with the published NOPR No. 35 at pp. 7, 12–13; ABMA, No. 71 to seek comments on matters related to (which could include withdrawal of that at p. 2; Daikin, January 9, 2018 Public negotiated rulemaking, including how NOPR, as appropriate). Meeting Transcript, at 124; AHRI, DOE can improve its current process in January 9, 2018 Public Meeting 11 This process is conducted in accordance with Transcript, at p. 125; AHAM, January 9, the requirements of the Negotiated Rulemaking Act 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at p. (‘‘NRA’’), Public Law 104–320 (5 U.S.C. 561–570). 126; NEMA, January 9, 2018 Public

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3931

Meeting Transcript, at p. 127) However, reached among core stakeholders has the potential to streamline the commenters generally recognized that (including manufacturers of the product rulemaking process. (Nor-Lake, No. 68 negotiated rulemaking may not be subject to regulation, States, and at p. 4) AHRI stated that negotiated appropriate in each and every case, efficiency advocates). (Lennox, No. 62 at rulemaking promotes greater suggesting that its use should be p. 5; Lennox, January 9, 2018 Public transparency (in terms of both data and encouraged, but not required. (NPCC, Meeting Transcript, at p. 124) NEMA assumptions) and more stakeholder No. 35 at pp. 7, 12–13; CA IOUs, No. 65 added that consideration should be engagement. (AHRI, January 9, 2018 at p. 5; AHRI, January 9, 2018 Public given to amending the Process Rule so Public Meeting Transcript, at pp. 125– Meeting Transcript, at p. 125) Some as to incorporate the potential for a 126; NEMA, January 9, 2018 Public commenters clarified that negotiated statutorily-compliant DFR proposal Meeting Transcript, at p. 139) The CEC rulemaking should not become the norm emerging from the ASRAC negotiated stated that negotiated rulemakings are a or be used in every case. (Southern rulemaking process. (NEMA, January 9, valuable process for appropriate Company, January 9, 2018 Public 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at p. products, because they allow for more Meeting Transcript, at p. 123; Lennox, 80) The Plumbing Heating Cooling direct engagement between interested January 9, 2018 Public Meeting Contractors Association (‘‘PHCC’’) and parties, more rapid feedback from Transcript, at p. 124) Echoing this the CEC also stated that DFRs could be participants, and often proceed in a sentiment, Spire cautioned that not all the natural outcome of a successful more expeditious manner than a notice rules can be negotiated, given that it is negotiated rulemaking, thereby allowing and comment rulemaking. (CEC, No. 53 a very labor-intensive process which DOE to proceed expeditiously to a final at p. 5) Acuity Brands suggested that requires the right representation. (Spire, rule. (PHCC, No. 63 at pp. 1–2; CEC, No. like DFRs, negotiated rulemakings have January 9, 2018 Public Meeting 53 at p. 4) The Joint Commenters the potential to reduce regulatory Transcript, at pp. 128–130) similarly pointed to DFRs as an burdens, but they have the added After carefully considering the important aspect of negotiated benefit of including a broader set of comments, DOE has tentatively decided rulemaking, and it stated that if the stakeholders (including the DOE) from that negotiated rulemaking can be Process Rule is amended to address the start of the process. (Acuity Brands, beneficial in the context of the DFRs, it should acknowledge DFRs in No. 46 at p. 3) The CA IOUs and NCLC Appliance Standards Program in the context of both ASRAC working and the Consumer Federation of appropriate circumstances, and groups and other parties engaged in America (‘‘CFA’’) stated that negotiated accordingly, the Department proposes to informal negotiations. (Joint rulemakings can help streamline DOE include a section on negotiated Commenters, No. 51 at p. 14; Whirlpool, rulemaking process in certain rulemaking in the updated Process Rule. No. 76, was a signatory to the Joint circumstances, thereby saving time and DOE agrees that the appropriateness of Commenters submission and indicated resources and allowing consumers to a negotiated rulemaking for any given its support on these issues.) realize benefits sooner. (CA IOUs, No. rulemaking should be determined on a DOE agrees with the commenters that 65 at p. 4; NCLC and CFA, No. 52 at p. case-by-case basis. When approached by the ASRAC has provided a workable 4) NCLC and CFA also commented that one or more stakeholders or on its own and effective forum for conducting a successful negotiated rulemaking initiative, DOE will use a convener to negotiated rulemakings, with working which reflects the interests of relevant ascertain, in consultation with relevant groups making a recommendation to stakeholders can reduce the likelihood stakeholders, whether review for a given ASRAC and ASRAC in turn making a of contentious hearings and litigation. product or equipment type would be recommendation to DOE for its ultimate (NCLC and CFA, No. 52 at p. 4) conducive to negotiated rulemaking, decision. As stated previously, DOE with the agency evaluating the plans to consider the use of negotiated Even among those commenters who convener’s recommendation before rulemaking in appropriate cases. supported DOE’s use of negotiated reaching a decision on such matter. However, in a break from its previous rulemaking and its inclusion in the A number of commenters expressed practice, DOE intends to separate DFRs Process Rule, there were some general support for continuing the and negotiated rulemakings, with the cautionary statements to ensure its current negotiated rulemaking process latter leading to a notice of proposed proper application. ABMA and AGA through the ASRAC. (HARDI, No. 56 at rulemaking in all cases. The NRA cautioned that DOE must be certain that p. 3; Lennox, No. 62 at p. 5; NPCC, No. contemplates that the committee will all stakeholders covering the full 35 at pp. 7, 12–13; NEMA, January 9, transmit to the agency a report breadth of the marketplace are included 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at pp. containing a proposed rule (or more in the process (ABMA, No. 71 at p. 2; 78–79) According to the NPCC, the applicable in DOE’s use of the process, AGA, January 9, 2018 Public Meeting ASRAC process has generally resulted a term sheet specifying the potential Transcript, at p. 36), and Schneider in successful and relatively uncontested standard levels to be incorporated into Electric added that DOE should engage rules because the appropriate parties a proposed rule). Accordingly, DOE is in a dialogue with industry before have participated, there is transparency, modifying its process for negotiated starting a rulemaking. (Schneider and the parties have had a chance to rulemaking so as to be more fully Electric, No. 69 at pp. 2–3) Spire interact with both DOE and its technical consistent with the statute. (See the DFR emphasized the need for ensuring that consultants who are performing the section of this proposal for a more negotiated rulemakings are conducted necessary supporting analytical work. complete discussion of direct final transparently and impartially and that (NPCC, January 9, 2018 Public Meeting rules.) ‘‘short shrift’’ is not given to any valid Transcript, at pp. 57–58) Lennox Commenters also saw a number of stakeholder—particularly those who suggested that DOE should explore the benefits associated with negotiated provide ‘‘substantive and legitimate feasibility of negotiated rulemaking for rulemaking. Daikin opined that documentation to support their all major rulemakings (especially ones negotiated rulemakings result in comments.’’ It also urged that ASRAC with some degree of complexity), substantively better rules. (Daikin, ‘‘should remain an advisory committee including DOE outreach to determine January 9, 2018 Public Meeting to EERE only’’ and should be required whether there is a reasonable likelihood Transcript, at pp. 124–125) Nor-Lake to meet the Process Rule and any data that the requisite consensus can be commented that negotiated rulemaking quality and FACA requirements. (Spire,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3932 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

No. 57 at p. 13) EEI recommended that of negotiated rulemaking in the Process group (including end-use consumers), DOE allow extra time for stakeholders Rule, the first for practical so DOE is proposing to incorporate that are not part of the negotiation considerations and the second on more provisions in the Process Rule to ensure committee to provide input at substantive grounds. NEEP stated its their opportunity for public comment committee meetings in order to allow view that given the case-by-case nature and to bring their concerns before the for potentially adversely impacted of a negotiated rule (a tool that DOE has committee for discussion. However, parties to air concerns as part of the used when there is a high likelihood of DOE would stress that any proposed committee process. It also reaching stakeholder consensus), NEEP rule emerging from a negotiated recommended that DOE create specific sees no benefit in explicitly adding rulemaking would still provide an provisions allowing end-use consumers negotiated rulemaking guidance to the opportunity for public comment on the to participate in negotiated rulemakings Process Rule. It stated that adding published document, and DOE would for products being regulated for the first unnecessary provisions through be required to respond to public time, especially to get their perspective addition to the Process Rule could result comments, as appropriate, so all on which types of efficiency metrics can in a more cumbersome and less effective interested parties retain the ability to be most useful for actual end-users. negotiated rulemaking outcome. (NEEP, play an active role in the rulemaking (EEI, No. 72 at p. 3) Finally, EEI No. 77 at p. 2) NPGA argued that process. In response to Spire, DOE is commented that first-time regulated negotiated rulemakings may limit the committed to thoroughly considering all products might be more amenable to number of stakeholders who can views and data brought before it, as well traditional, notice-and-comment participate, may constrain review and as to comply with all applicable rulemaking, particularly given the development to meet arbitrary statutory requirements. As to Spire’s resource-intensive nature of negotiated deadlines, and may cause an comments about first-time regulated rulemakings (e.g., potential for antagonistic rather than cooperative products being more amenable to significant travel). (EEI, January 9, 2018 nature among the groups involved. traditional notice-and-comment Public Meeting Transcript, at p. 130) Thus, NPGA suggested that negotiated rulemaking, rather than negotiated Other commenters were more rulemakings do not provide for the same rulemaking, DOE reiterates that this is a ambivalent about the use of negotiated open dialogue and input available determination best made on a case-by- rulemaking and/or the need to directly through the traditional rulemaking case basis in the context of a given address it in the Process Rule. GW route. (NPGA, No. 59 at p. 2) rulemaking. It is DOE’s expectation that stated that although negotiated DOE agrees with those commenters use of a convenor will help address each rulemaking can be an effective tool for who see potential benefits to the use of of these issues. That is, a neutral, expeditious rulemaking, it has negotiated rulemaking in appropriate independent convenor can identify procedural and analytical drawbacks the cases, and the Department has issues that any negotiation would need Department should consider before tentatively decided that it makes sense to address, assess the full breadth of codifying it into the Process Rule. On to clarify its approach to this procedural interested parties who should be this point, GW argued that negotiated mechanism in the Process Rule. included in any negotiated rulemaking rulemakings lead to decisions being Negotiated rulemaking has the potential to address those issues and make a made based on consensus rather than to increase transparency, to foster judgment as to whether there is the net welfare optimization. Second, stakeholder/DOE engagement, and to potential for a group of individuals interested parties may reach a policy streamline the rulemaking process, negotiating in good faith to reach a conclusion well before a benefit-cost thereby conserving the time and consensus agreement given the issues analysis can suggest an approach that resources of all interested parties. presented. would maximize net societal benefits. Thorough consideration of the Third, there is a risk that comments underlying issues and recommending DOE understands the concerns of GW submitted by parties not included in the potential standards at a consensus level that negotiated rulemaking should not negotiation may receive less than due may also reduce litigation risk. DOE lead to a rushed process where consideration because the policy sees no reason why explicitly stakeholder opinions, public input, and approach has already been decided. addressing negotiated rulemaking in the analytical data are not fully considered Fourth, the Department should be alert Process Rule should alter the manner in and addressed. In part to mitigate such to circumstances in which jointly which that rulemaking will occur when concerns, DOE is proposing to separate recommended standards harm such rulemaking approach is deemed DFRs from the negotiated rulemaking competition or prefer one manufacturer appropriate or reduce any flexibility process in the revised Process Rule. In at the expense of others—which permissible under the statute. this way, the outcome of any negotiated ultimately harms consumers. (GW, No. In response to ABMA, AGA, and rulemaking would be a proposed rule, 48 at pp. 5, 13) Schneider Electric, DOE seeks broad which would be subject to a comment Similarly, the Joint Commenters representation of interested stakeholders period, as required under EPCA and the stated that they did not see the need to for negotiated rulemakings as part of the Administrative Procedure Act. DOE amend the Process Rule to clarify how ASRAC working groups, including must then respond to comments negotiated rulemaking fits into the representatives of individual received, including those regarding its overall procedure, but it likewise did manufacturers and their trade data and analyses, in the final rule; in not oppose memorializing the status associations. In addition, DOE makes the event a comment raises a significant quo. The CA IOUs urged that if DOE meetings of the ASRAC working groups issue that previously had not been decides to amend the Process Rule to open to the public, so there are identified or properly considered, DOE address negotiated rulemakings, the additional opportunities for input from may need to publish a supplemental agency should not make negotiated other interested parties, including notice of proposed rulemaking to rulemaking mandatory, and it should public comment during those sessions. modify its approach and seek further retain flexibility within the negotiations. However, DOE takes EEI’s point as to public comment. In this way, DOE (CA IOUs, No. 65 at p. 5) the need, as a matter of fairness, to fully endeavors to obtain the benefits of Finally, there were at least two air the concerns of stakeholders who are negotiated rulemaking, while making commenters who opposed the inclusion not part of the committee or working sure to maintain broad opportunity for

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3933

participation among working group initiate a negotiated rulemaking only modifications to its test procedures. members and the interested public and where there is a reasonable likelihood of (AHRI, January 9, 2018 Public Meeting full consideration of relevant data and success. Consequently, as discussed Transcript, at p. 145) However, one information. DOE believes that this previously, DOE plans to make a commenter (Spire) recommended a reasoning also addresses the similar determination whether to conduct a more structured process, under which concerns of NPGA. Finally, DOE notes negotiated rulemaking on a case-by-case DOE would publish a notice in the that a proposed appliance standards basis in the context of a given Federal Register explaining that it is rule’s impacts on competition is one of rulemaking, based on a report produced considering negotiated rulemaking and the topics that must be specifically by a third-party, neutral convenor. provide at least a 30-day comment addressed by the U.S. Department of According to the Joint Commenters, period, prior to commencing such Justice (‘‘DOJ’’) in any such rulemaking, the following factors should militate in rulemaking; Spire added that the notice as required under 42 U.S.C. favor of a negotiated rulemaking: (1) should also: (1) Identify the range of 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(VI) and (ii), and Stakeholders commented in favor of boundaries of the covered products at subsequently by DOE, regardless of negotiated rulemaking in response to issue, including competing technologies whether the rule is developed through the initial rulemaking notice; (2) The and energy sources (e.g., gas and negotiated rulemaking, a joint proposal rulemaking analysis or underlying electricity); (2) request comments on under DOE’s DFR authority, or technologies in question are complex, whether DOE should or should not traditional notice-and-comment and DOE can benefit from external proceed with negotiated rulemaking; rulemaking. expertise and/or real-time changes to and (3) solicit comments concerning the the analysis based on stakeholder range of interests to be represented in 3. Suggestions Regarding feedback, information, and data; (3) The the negotiations and nominations of Implementation of Negotiated rulemaking involves standards that have individuals to serve on the negotiating Rulemakings already been amended one or more committee. (Spire, No. 57 at pp. 13–14) Commenters seemed to generally times; (4) Stakeholders from differing In response to these comments, DOE agree that negotiated rulemaking may points of view are willing to participate; is open to broad input from not be appropriate for all DOE and (5) DOE believes that the parties stakeholders, including affected rulemaking actions, and in some may be able to reach an agreement. If industry as well as interested members instances, traditional notice-and- DOE determines that a negotiated of the public, regarding the comment rulemaking may remain the rulemaking is viable, DOE should make appropriateness of negotiated preferred approach. For example, the a recommendation to the ASRAC or rulemaking for any given type of CA IOUs commented that negotiated support an interested party’s consumer product or commercial rulemaking may not be useful where recommendation to the ASRAC that the equipment. Questions regarding the product categories cover a broad range committee form a working group to boundaries of coverage, competing of product classes and manufacturers negotiate a term sheet that will be technologies and energy sources, and where it may not be feasible to submitted to DOE as a consensus appropriateness of negotiated identify all appropriate industry recommendation. (Joint Commenters, rulemaking, the range of interests to be representatives, thereby making such No. 51 at p. 13) represented, and nominations for process difficult. (CA IOUs, No. 65 at p. DOE agrees with the Joint serving on an ASRAC working group are 4) Southern Company stated that Commenters that it would be beneficial all topics worthy of discussion prior to because negotiated rulemakings require to include relevant criteria in the engaging in a negotiated rulemaking. In substantial time commitments from Process Rule to improve the response to AHRI’s comment on the use stakeholders, they should be reserved transparency of DOE’s decision-making of negotiated rulemaking for test for larger, higher impact rulemakings process for determining when a procedures, DOE agrees that such where the Department and major negotiated rulemaking may be mechanism may be suitable in certain stakeholders agree that a negotiated appropriate. The points raised by the situations (determined on a case-by-case rulemaking is appropriate; in contrast, Joint Commenters would likely be basis), but in those cases where DOE for most rulemakings, the commenter helpful in that regard and, accordingly, anticipates adoption of an industry argued that the traditional process of merit inclusion in a proposed list of consensus standard with either no or notice and comment is more criteria. DOE welcomes comment on the limited modifications, the need for a appropriate. (Southern Company aforementioned criteria and any negotiated rulemaking may not arise. Services, No. 70 at p. 4) The CEC stated additional factors that may serve as For each of these reasons, DOE is that it does not object to a brief appropriate criteria for determining proposing that it will engage the consideration of each product’s when negotiated rulemaking may be services of an independent, neutral potential for negotiated rulemaking but appropriate. convenor, as contemplated in the NRA, asserted that it is inappropriate to In terms of how DOE should decide to assess these subjects through research require the use, or even the evaluation, when a given rulemaking is conducive and discussions with potentially of a negotiated rulemaking for all to negotiated rulemaking, a number of interested parties. The convenor would products. (CEC, No. 53 at p.5) commenters urged DOE to consult with then make a recommendation to the DOE agrees with the commenters that stakeholders, especially industry. Department regarding the potential for negotiated rulemaking may not be (Bradford White, No. 42 at p. 1; use of negotiated rulemaking given the appropriate in every case, particularly Schneider Electric, No. 69 at pp. 2–3) facts, issues and parties at interest. where there is not identification or The CA IOUs suggested that DOE When a negotiated rulemaking is participation of a significant number of should work with stakeholders to determined to be appropriate, several interested stakeholders. DOE further outline the characteristics of standards commenters recommended that DOE acknowledges that negotiated and test procedures that would be continue to use its ASRAC process and rulemaking typically requires a appropriate for negotiated rulemaking. procedures, which have generally significant input of time and resources (CA IOUs, No. 65 at p. 4) AHRI also provided a workable approach. (ALA, on the part of both DOE and other raised the possibility of using negotiated No. 55 at p. 2; HARDI, No. 56 at p. 3; interested parties, so it is important to rulemaking when DOE makes Regal Beloit, No. 64 at p. 1) In addition

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3934 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

to expressing support for conducting DFRs, DOE should consider a may wish to offer input to the negotiated rulemaking through the commenter’s specific qualifications and negotiated rulemaking. ASRAC, the Joint Commenters urged areas of expertise (or lack thereof), In the spirit of fostering further public DOE to incorporate the ASRAC process require sources of data or other engagement, DOE is proposing to adopt and procedures into the Process Rule. validation of input, and trigger APPA’s suggestion to schedule a According to the Joint Commenters, preemption at the start of the process. dedicated portion of each ASRAC even though the 1996 Process Rule was (Acuity Brands, No. 46 at p. 3) APPA working group meeting to receive input drafted prior to the ASRAC being added that stakeholders that are not part and data from non-members. Such convened, the underlying principles of the negotiation committee should be period would not truncate the public’s and policies from the original Process provided more time to provide input at existing ability to provide relevant Rule are embodied in the ASRAC committee meetings. (APPA, No. 36 at comments at appropriate points in the process including, a breadth of p. 3) NPCC stated that having the DOE ongoing negotiations. However, by participation from interested parties, contractors who do the analysis in the setting aside a scheduled block of time, DOE would hope to raise the level of effective and efficient proceedings, and room during a negotiated rulemaking is detail and substantive input from support from agency staff, all of which an advantage, and overall, the process interested stakeholders who are not are intended to result in a balanced and builds trust and communication. (NPCC, informed recommendation to the voting members of the working group. January 9, 2018 Public Meeting Department. When updating the Process While DOE strongly supports comments Transcript, at p. 138) Rule, the Joint Commenters argued that accompanied by data, it does not agree DOE should acknowledge both the In terms of forming an ASRAC with Acuity Brands that there should be ASRAC negotiated rulemaking process, working group for an individual a litmus test for comment based upon as well as informal negotiations that rulemaking, DOE is routinely academic credentials or professional/ result in consensus recommendations. confronted with the task of striking an technical experience. In DOE’s view, a (Joint Commenters, No. 51 at pp. 11–12) appropriate balance between inclusion non-expert is capable of providing DOE agrees with the commenters who of all relevant points of view and meaningful insight or raising legitimate have found the ASRAC process to be a keeping the membership to a concerns, even if further inquiry is then useful and workable approach, even in manageable size. As meetings of the required on the part of the agency. those instances where consensus could ASRAC working groups are open to the Likewise, DOE does not support nor can not ultimately be reached. DOE is very public, there is always the opportunity it necessarily legally impose preemption appreciative of the work ASRAC has for input from interested parties who are at the start of a negotiated rulemaking; done to date and sees great benefit in not members of the working group itself. instead, DOE will continue to consider continuing the ASRAC process. Given DOE sees the most important objective preemption as expressed in EPCA. DOE that the ASRAC has been used to be a thorough airing of the issues agrees with NPCC that there is value in successfully for a number of years with surrounding the subject product/ having DOE contractors present at the refinements along the way, DOE has equipment, regardless of the source or negotiated rulemaking sessions to tentatively concluded that it may be status of that source (i.e., member or answer questions regarding related appropriate to include reference to the non-member of the working group). technical analyses, a practice which ASRAC process in the Process Rule in Thus, DOE envisions the negotiated DOE intends to continue. In a final the context of negotiated rulemaking. rulemaking process to be a collaborative thought on this topic, DOE notes that DOE believes that there may be benefits one, as opposed to an adversarial one. under its proposed revisions to the in terms of transparency and Because the working group is intended Process Rule, every successful consistency associated with formalizing not only to raise issues but also to negotiated rulemaking would result in a the negotiated rulemaking process as resolve them, it is important to have notice of proposed rulemaking, so at that point, all interested parties would part of the Process Rule. representation from technical experts There were also various comments have an equal opportunity to comment who have experience with the products/ related to participation in the negotiated on DOE’s proposal, and DOE would be equipment under consideration. rulemaking process, some of which required to address comments in Moreover, given that a consensus specifically referred to the ASRAC proceeding to a final rule. process. For example, the CA IOUs recommendation requires unanimity Commenters generally supported use recommended that negotiated (unless the working group itself votes to of an experienced convener or facilitator rulemaking participants should be fairly require something less than unanimity), for each negotiated rulemaking, an balanced, with a greater number of non- DOE views parity of representation individual who can help guide the industry stakeholders drawn from between industry groups and non- process by ensuring that all procedures consumer groups, utility companies, industry groups as unnecessary. are followed and that all participants and energy efficiency advocacy Furthermore, DOE expects that non- have an equal opportunity to contribute organizations. (CA IOUs, No. 65 at p. 4) members of the working group will to the dialogue. (Bradford White, No. 42 The Public Power Association caucus with like-minded members to at p. 1; Lennox, No. 62 at p. 7; PHCC, commented that for products that have make sure that their views are addressed No. 63 at pp. 1–2; Spire, No. 57 at pp. not previously been regulated, there by the committee. Absent that, non- 13–14; Acuity Brands, No. 46 at p. 3; should be a process to allow end-use members are free to raise issues CEC, No. 53 at p. 5; NEMA, January 9, consumers who purchase, operate, and themselves during opportunities for 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at p. maintain products to be part of the public comment at the ASRAC working 139) NEMA recommended that DOE negotiation process, and to have direct group meetings. In response to APPA, should retain a professional facilitator, input on the efficiency metric used to DOE welcomes participation in the who is both neutral and independent, to evaluate such products. (Public Power negotiated rulemaking process by end- meet with interested parties. (NEMA, Association, No. 36 at p. 3) Acuity users of the subject product or January 9, 2018 Public Meeting Brands stated that when weighing equipment; industry trade associations Transcript, at p. 139) Spire stated that comments and data during a negotiated or manufacturers may be well a neutral facilitator should be utilized at rulemaking, similar to its comments on positioned to identify end-users who the option of the negotiating committee,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3935

but such person should not be a to conduct a rulemaking. The convener balanced way that can reach an stakeholder representative or DOE staff would have early interaction with agreement addressing relevant issues. member. (Spire, No. 57 at pp. 13–14) stakeholders, who could help shape If negotiations move forward and a Acuity Brands added that while a how the rulemaking process unfolds. consensus agreement is ultimately facilitator possessing some level of DOE also plans to continue its current reached, Spire argued that DOE should familiarity with energy conservation practice of having a neutral and publish a notice in the Federal Register standards may be helpful, a facilitator independent facilitator present at all (with a minimum 30-day comment with a high level of technical expertise ASRAC working group meetings. In period) explaining the consensus (e.g., staff from national labs) may be an DOE’s experience, facilitators have agreement, requesting public comments inappropriate choice, due to the played a beneficial role in the on additional issues to be addressed, potential to interject bias into the overwhelming majority of the agency’s and ascertaining whether DOE should negotiations. (Acuity Brands, No. 46 at past negotiated rulemakings. The move forward with the consensus p. 3) Lennox commented that while it Department agrees that the facilitator agreement under its direct final rule has generally found experienced should not be a stakeholder authority or by issuing a notice of facilitators to be helpful, the NRA representative, a member of DOE’s staff, proposed rulemaking. Finally, Spire already contains provisions regarding a DOE consultant, or a technical expert commented that all negotiated rules facilitators (e.g., 5 U.S.C. 566(c),(d)). in the subject matter (due to the should undergo technological feasibility Accordingly, Lennox does not see a potential to interject bias). DOE may and economic justification analyses compelling need to amend the Process elect to have the convener serve as consistent with those applied to other Rule in detail regarding the use of facilitator, particularly given the covered products with similar market facilitators, although DOE could knowledge acquired at the earlier stages presence and potential, but for which incorporate provisions along the lines of of inquiry. Consistent with 5 U.S.C. the negotiated rulemaking path is not those statutory requirements. (Lennox, 566(c), DOE will nominate a facilitator undertaken. Spire remarked that No. 62 at p. 7) The Joint Commenters for the negotiations of the committee, regardless of the use of negotiated expressed a similar sentiment, stating subject to the approval of the committee rulemaking, EPCA requirements for that while the use of a facilitator is by consensus. Given the useful role meeting the test of technological generally helpful, the Joint Commenters facilitators have played in past feasibility and economic justification have not identified the failure to assign negotiated rulemakings and the remain a requirement for minimum a facilitator to be a problem that requires similarly useful role that conveners efficiency standards and need to receive addressing in the amended Process could play in the future, DOE sees no full analytical consideration. (Spire, No. Rule. (Joint Commenters, No. 51 at p. reason not to explicitly include 57 at pp. 13–14) 13) provisions for their use in the revised In response, DOE notes that it has Other commenters (NPCC, ABB) Process Rule. tentatively decided to modify its suggested that use of a facilitator may Whenever DOE conducts rulemaking, approach such that any negotiated not be essential in the context of a including negotiated rulemaking, the rulemaking would result in a NOPR. negotiated rulemaking. Instead, these Department attempts to ensure broad Once the NOPR is published, interested commenters argued that while typically stakeholder involvements and input, as parties will be presented with DOE’s useful, sometimes the facilitator can get well as ample opportunity for public proposal and supporting analyses, and in the way of making progress when comment. DOE provides notice in the as part of the NOPR, DOE will explain faced with complex technical issues. Federal Register of its intent to form an and document why its negotiated (NPCC, January 9, 2018 Public Meeting ASRAC working group (including a rulemaking proposal meets the statutory Transcript, at p. 144; ABB, January 9, request for nominations to serve on the requirements for a significant savings of 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at pp. committee), announcement of the energy, technological feasibility and 144–145) EEI stated that the Process selection of working group members economic justification, just the same as Rule should provide for the use of a (including their affiliation), and with any other notice-and-comment facilitator or convener as a discretionary announcement of public meeting and rulemaking. In addition, the NOPR will matter. (EEI, January 9, 2018 Public the subject matter to be addressed. Such provide a minimum comment period of Meeting Public Meeting Transcript, at documents routinely note the products/ 60 days, at which time commenters may pp. 149–150) equipment at issue and the responsible raise any issue they have with DOE’s In contemplating potential revisions DOE contact. Consistent with 5 U.S.C. proposal. to its Process Rule, DOE has decided to 565(b), DOE ‘‘shall limit membership on A number of commenters cautioned incorporate new mechanisms and a negotiated rulemaking committee to DOE to make sure to maintain the procedures that the agency has been 25 members, unless the agency head flexibility associated with its current using subsequent to the adoption of the determines that a greater number of negotiated rulemaking process, which original Process Rule—such as members is necessary for the many see as a valuable feature. negotiated rulemaking. In evaluating its functioning of the committee or to Specifically, the CEC stated that key to current approaches, DOE is also seeking achieve balanced membership.’’ DOE the success of negotiated rulemakings is to identify further improvements that notes that in addition to formal the flexibility to fit the process to each can be made and included in an membership on the ASRAC working individual product being considered, so updated Process Rule. Along these lines, group, the agency’s negotiated any revisions to the Process Rule to DOE is proposing to use a neutral, third- rulemakings also provide the incorporate negotiated rulemaking party convener to gauge the suitability opportunity for substantial public should maintain this flexibility and not of negotiated rulemaking in a given comment and input, thereby helping to be prescriptive (e.g., professional case, consistent with the NRA (5 U.S.C. ensure that all relevant interests are facilitation should be an option and 566(b)). represented. Again, it is DOE’s composition of working groups should DOE envisions the convener expectation that use of a neutral, be a guideline). In contrast, the CEC providing an important evaluation and independent convenor will help ensure stated that DOE could define screening function, which can assist that the negotiating committee will ‘‘consensus’’ and apply that to all DOE in making its decision of how best encompass the necessary parties in a negotiated rulemakings instead of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3936 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

having the definition of consensus be rulemaking and thoroughly address the as part of its negotiated rulemaking determined in each negotiated underlying issues, while keeping in process. rulemaking. (CEC, No. 53 at p. 5) EEI mind any applicable statutory or DOE continues to seek comment on added that the Process Rule should be judicial deadlines. Regarding the term any and all issues related to the use of flexible as to the time allotted for ‘‘consensus,’’ section 562(2) of the NRA negotiated rulemaking in the completion of a negotiated rulemaking. defines that term to mean unanimous development of energy conservation (EEI, January 9, 2018 Public Meeting concurrence among the interests standards, including how DOE can Transcript, at pp. 141–142) In terms of represented on a negotiated rulemaking improve its current use of the process as flexibility to consider and recommend committee unless such committee envisioned by the NRA. DOE reasonable alternatives in the context of agrees to another definition. Thus, acknowledges the concern that relevant a negotiated rulemaking, Daikin defining consensus is committed to the parties or points of view must be appeared to support that concept discretion of the ASRAC committee by represented during the negotiations to (Daikin, January 9, 2018 Public Meeting law, so DOE cannot establish a ensure the most appropriate outcome Transcript, at pp. 153–154), whereas the standardized measure of consensus for and associated burden and distribution CEC disfavored a requirement for the all negotiated rulemakings. Regarding of costs. In particular, DOE seeks Process Rule to specify which the ability of the negotiated rulemaking comment on its proposal to amend the alternatives can be considered for fear of committee to consider all reasonable Process Rule to provide for the use of a restricting or delaying the negotiated alternatives, DOE notes that convenor or facilitator for each rulemaking process (CEC, January 9, consideration of available alternatives is negotiated rulemaking. DOE also 2018 Public Meeting Transcript, at pp. a routine part of negotiated rulemakings continues to request comment on 158–159). The Joint Commenters and requires no special provisions in amendments to the Process Rule that disfavors updating the Process Rule to the Process Rule. would ensure that all reasonable specify the need to consider all NPCC urged DOE, as part of the alternatives are explored in that process, reasonable alternatives, because the negotiated rulemaking process, to including the option of not amending or current state of negotiated rulemaking continue and enhance pre-rule access to issuing a standard and alternatives that already provides for that and nothing DOE’s technical staff, which NPCC finds will affect different stakeholders prevents the parties to a negotiation improves the efficacy and validity of the differently. DOE also requests further from raising all possible options during data collection process, improves comment on the use of the DFR the course of discussions. (Joint communications with manufacturers, mechanism at the conclusion of a Commenters, No. 51 at p. 14) builds confidence in the underlying negotiated rulemaking. In response, DOE sees value in data and analytics, and fosters greater providing flexibility to interested and L. Other Revisions and Issues understanding and acceptance of knowledgeable stakeholders to negotiate analytical results. (NPCC, No. 35 at pp. 1. DOE’s Analytical Methodologies, potential standard levels that take into 5–6, 13) In a related comment on the Generally account real world concerns regarding technical aspects of a negotiated manufacturing processes, DOE received a variety of comments rulemaking, the CEC stated that to implementation challenges, and regarding its analytical methodologies. support that process, DOE should associated costs. The Department is Some commenters offered detailed commit to: (1) Ensuring that adequate open to allowing ASRAC working suggestions on how DOE might improve groups to tailor the negotiated product data and technical consultation on specific aspects of its current set of rulemaking process to the specific are made available to the negotiated methodologies. These issues generally product/equipment at issue. However, rulemaking working group, and (2) fell into certain discrete areas—the peer DOE emphasizes that any potential ensuring that negotiations are scheduled review process, proprietary data, and standard upon which an ASRAC such that participants can fully engage. DOE’s analytical methodologies. The working group reaches consensus must (CEC, No. 53 at p. 6) suggestions were both detailed and comply with all of the provisions of DOE agrees that for a negotiated specific. However, the general EPCA under which the rule was rulemaking to be successful, ASRAC consensus from the commenters authorized. DOE will not accept working group members require access suggested that there was room for DOE recommended standard levels or issue a to relevant data and analyses, as well as to improve its analytical methods. NOPR based upon negotiated support from DOE’s technical staff. DOE In considering the numerous rulemaking that does not comply with has committed to providing technical comments it received regarding its all pertinent parts of EPCA. support for consensus development in analyses, DOE believes it needs In response to the CEC’s concern section 8 of the current Process Rule. additional time to make a determination about the facilitator somehow The use of a convener should provide on proceeding and whether any changes diminishing the group’s flexibility, DOE interested parties with further to the Process Rule are necessary to does not view this to be a problem, opportunity for engagement and to share address the methodological issues because it is not the role of the relevant thoughts and information raised. In order to both assess what facilitator to drive any particular regarding the topic of the negotiated changes to the analytical methodologies outcome; rather, the facilitator is there rulemaking prior to the beginning of are needed, and, potentially, what to assist the committee members in such a proceeding. Furthermore, DOE changes to the Process Rule might be achieving their own consensus, if understands that to achieve the optimal appropriate, DOE is committing to possible. Similarly with the result, all committee members should be conducting an expert independent peer composition of ASRAC working groups, present and fully contributing to review consistent with OMB’s DOE is maintaining its discretion to negotiating rulemaking sessions, so the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer select members best suited to analyzing agency strives to schedule meetings as Review 12 of its assumptions, models, potential standards for the product/ to maximize participation (preferable and methodologies to ensure that its equipment in question. DOE agrees that through in-person attendance but approach is designed to provide sufficient time should be allocated to through remote access when necessary). properly conduct the negotiated DOE intends to continue these practices 12 70 FR 2664 (Jan. 14, 2005).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3937

projections that are sufficiently rigorous individual rulemaking activity, there choice models/modeling, emissions for their intended use. Additionally, in may also be an opportunity for time and analysis, approaches to estimating an effort to ensure that the analytical resource savings in those instances indirect employment effects, fuel models and approaches that DOE where it is readily apparent that a new switching analysis, marginal regularly uses are as up-to-date and standards rulemaking is unlikely to manufacturer markup, effects on accurate as possible, DOE will yield significant energy savings under product performance, subgroup undertake a recurring peer review of EPCA. For those rulemakings which do analysis, and how to undertake a DOE’s analytical methods at least once move forward, there could be further welfare analysis as part of DOE’s every 10 years. savings of time and other resources to regulatory analysis. The charge to the While applying this approach may the extent that there is a diminished peer reviewers will emphasize that, increase the overall commitment of time level of controversy surrounding DOE’s overall, DOE is interested in the and resources both by DOE and rulemaking analyses. sensitivity of the results to the interested parties wishing to participate DOE last peer reviewed its analytical assumptions made, thus the uncertainty as part of this peer review process, in approaches in 2005. At that time, DOE inherent in the final model that it DOE’s view, making this investment supplied seven reviewers with three adopts. Procedurally, DOE is also should yield a number of potentially rulemaking analyses concerning interested in comments regarding the beneficial dividends with respect to commercial unitary air conditioners and Department’s handling and use of each standards (or determination) heat pumps, distribution transformers, proprietary data. rulemaking that DOE conducts when and residential furnaces and boilers. using this process—primarily in the These analyses were publicly available Two peer review approaches that DOE form of more accurate economic in the technical support documents at is considering for this round of peer forecasting and projections of energy the time and had been posted in July review are outlined in Table L1.1 below. savings. Because these benefits would 2004 as part of the ANOPR process for The first approach, labeled ‘‘Analytical apply across a wide variety of DOE’s the respective product groups. Selected Overview’’, would differ from the peer rulemakings and impact both consumer peer reviewers were energy experts review process in 2005 by drawing from products and commercial equipment, in whose backgrounds were primarily in portions of existing regulatory analyses DOE’s view, conducting a peer review engineering.13 to illustrate the analytical focus areas in the immediate future and on a DOE has identified 12 potential focus that DOE has identified. The second specified periodic basis thereafter areas for the review to which it is approach would more closely mirror the would help improve the overall currently committing, which are 2005 peer review by tasking reviewers rulemaking process and ensure the outlined in Table L1.1 below. DOE with reviewing the entirety of 2–3 credibility and validity of the results of plans to task participants with existing regulatory analyses. Both that process. While DOE recognizes that reviewing the appropriate time approaches would attempt to include the changes that the peer review process horizon(s) for its analysis, estimation of analyses that include aspects of fuel may bring could increase the amount of baseline product efficiency, forecasting switching, commercial products, and time that DOE must commit to any of future product prices, consumer white goods.

TABLE L1.1—PROPOSED PEER REVIEW STRUCTURE AND FOCUS AREAS

Peer review structure Peer review materials Analytical focus areas

Analytical overview ...... DOE would illustrate the analytical focus areas using examples from • Analytical time horizon. specific product rulemakings. • Baseline efficiency estimates. Product examples would include illustrations that touch on fuel • Consumer choice model. switching, commercial products, and white goods. • Emissions analysis. • Fuel switching analysis. • Indirect employment effects. • Marginal manufacturer markup. • Product price forecasts. • Product performance. • Subgroup analysis. • Use of proprietary data. • Welfare analysis and deadweight loss. Rule Case Studies ...... DOE would assign 2–3 docketed technical support documents for existing standards to illustrate focus areas. Selected TSDs would be recent (2014–2016) and include fuel switching, commercial products, and white goods.

This review is intended to evaluate raise concerns for the peer reviewers’ In addition, DOE may seek comment on analytical methods employed by DOE consideration. Consistent with the its findings. rather than to evaluate the efficacy of requirements of OMB’s Information DOE seeks comment on these DOE’s programs themselves. DOE Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, DOE proposed approaches, including further intends to make the peer review will make the results of the peer review comment on the areas of focus that DOE available to the public, including an and its responses available to the public. has identified. DOE also seeks opportunity for public commenters to suggestions regarding what specific

13 https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2013/ 12/f5/peer_review_report021507.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3938 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

changes to its analytical methodologies currently replacing). DOE seeks public regulations on producers of would be needed to improve on its comment on its proposal to refine the manufactured housing as a part of its current approach. To the extent that ‘‘walk-down’’ approach to require cost-benefit analyses. (MHI, No. 67 at p. certain specific changes are needed for determinations of economic justification 2) Similarly, Nor-Lake stated that DOE particular product or equipment sectors, to consider comparisons of should coordinate its efforts with other DOE seeks detailed information on economically relevant factors across government agencies to avoid those aspects as well. Any potential trial standard levels, consistent with conflicting or overlapping mandates. changes to the Process Rule that might both economic theory and the actual (Nor-Lake, No. 68 at p. 3) Schneider be appropriate based on the results of purchasing behavior of rational Electric asserted that DOE should the peer review and any methodological consumers. engage industry early enough in the update would be addressed in a 2. Cumulative Regulatory Burden process to ensure that standards under subsequent proceeding to amend the consideration are also reflective of its Process Rule. DOE received a number of written commitment to ENERGY STAR—a comments related to the issue of One methodological issue upon voluntary program geared towards addressing cumulative regulatory which DOE seeks comment in this encouraging the purchase of energy- burden in conjunction with the agency’s document is the ‘‘walk-down’’ approach efficient products and equipment that is energy conservation standards to assessing different potential overseen by the Environmental rulemakings. Commenters generally Protection Agency but that relies on standards. Using this approach, DOE suggested that the agency should starts from the most stringent choice to technical expertise and input from DOE. account for this burden more (Schneider Electric, No. 69 at p. 2) determine both economic justification comprehensively in light of the and technological feasibility by substantial burdens already faced by The Joint Commenters similarly ‘‘walking-down’’ through the available manufacturers from multiple regulatory argued that a modernized Process Rule choices by stringency until arriving at requirements. For example, Sub-Zero should meaningfully consider the first choice that meets all of the stated that in light of the large number cumulative regulatory burden in DOE’s statutory criteria. Economic theory of regulatory requirements involving rulemaking analyses. They asserted that suggests that the most logical way to energy consumption and related the Process Rule should include determine if a particular option is environmental restrictions applying to a cumulative regulatory burden analysis ‘‘economically justified’’ is to compare variety of different appliance types, it as a factor in DOE’s decision on a it to the full range of available choices, must still continue to introduce new proposed and final energy conservation rather than just one baseline. Applying products and features to stay in standard, but it should not be a stand- economic theory, DOE is proposing at business. The cumulative burden alone analysis with no real impact. 10 CFR part 430 Appendix A, sec. presented by these requirements is, in Instead, in their view, DOE should (7)(e)(2)(G) to require the Secretary to its view, almost insurmountable. Sub- consider that burden as part of its determine whether a candidate/trial Zero asserted that the timing of different analysis that manufacturers must standard level would be economically regulations from various government comply with both a variety of domestic justified when compared to the full agencies for different products is a and international regulations. They range of other feasible trial standard significant factor that can increase the added that a true cumulative regulatory levels. In making this determination, the burden on manufacturers. While Sub- burden analysis should not only Secretary is to consider whether an Zero acknowledged that DOE claims to consider the number of rulemakings to economically rational consumer would take these factors into account when which appliance manufacturers are choose a product meeting the candidate/ determining the economic and subject, but also the timing and trial standard level over products competitive impacts from a given technical and economic relationship of meeting the other feasible trial standard rulemaking, the company asserted that those rulemakings. The Joint levels after considering all relevant the agency underestimates the overall Commenters urged DOE to consider factors, including but not limited to, impact—particularly for smaller manufacturers’ relative and cumulative energy savings, efficacy, product manufacturers such as Sub-Zero. (Sub- research and development, testing, and features, and life-cycle costs. If an Zero, No. 43 at p. 2) certification burdens, which can be economically rational consumer would Other industry commenters held significantly higher when regulations not choose the candidate trial standard similar views. The Heating, Air- from different agencies take effect in level after considering these factors, it conditioning & Refrigeration close temporal proximity to each other. would be rejected as economically Distributors International (‘‘HARDI’’) This burden, they argued, can be unjustified. This approach recognizes stated that the Process Rule should especially difficult for industries that that the ‘‘economic justification’’ of any account for cumulative regulatory have access to only a small number of particular option depends on a broader burden. (HARDI, No. 56 at pp. 3–4) accredited labs, creating a bottleneck comparison of economic attributes Lennox argued that DOE should develop problem as industry is forced to comply relative to other available options, rather transparent and more robust guidance with several largely unrelated than relative to just one baseline, on the process for including cumulative requirements at the same time. They particularly one that is likely to be of regulatory costs on manufacturers into stated further that both time and little relevance to a consumer when its economic analysis, with supporting resources are needed to evaluate and choosing which product(s) are analysis made available to stakeholders, respond to DOE’s proposed test economically justified for her purchase. to ensure that the mandated cost-benefit procedures and energy conservation Rather she is likely to be focused on the analysis reasonably reflects real-world standards, and when these rulemakings set of actually available products at the costs. (Lennox, No. 62 at p. 12) Within occur simultaneously, the cumulative time of purchase rather than some the context of its particular industry, burden on industry increases hypothetical baseline representing the MHI urged DOE to work with the dramatically. They also argued that the set of products that would have been Department of Housing and Urban same burden applies when compliance available in the absence of the standard Development (‘‘HUD’’) to consider the dates are clumped together for all of (including perhaps the model she is cumulative regulatory impact of such these products. The Joint Commenters

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3939

suggested that DOE should consider rulemaking process that it ultimately NPGA commented on the importance voluntary, non-regulatory options in its adopts. A number of commenters of DOE conducting a retrospective analysis but cautioned that the weighed in with suggestions and review and evaluation of current energy Department should not assume that varying viewpoints on this issue. conservation standards prior to labeling is a less burdensome approach; Some commenters supported the use initiating a rulemaking for amended even without energy conservation of a retrospective review. AHRI standards. It argued that the agency requirements, labeling and other forms suggested that a retrospective review should refrain from amending its energy of providing information can require the could be part of the initial assessment conservation standards on an arbitrary same amount of testing and can have when DOE is deciding whether to schedule (e.g., every 5 years, every 8 similar compliance risks. (Joint proceed to another round of rulemaking years), but instead, DOE should assess Commenters, No. 51 at pp. 2, 23–25) and that it should be required every the performance of the current standard, Lutron and Whirlpool signed on to the time. (AHRI, January 9, 2018 Public as well as the market penetration of Joint Commenters’ submission. (Lutron, Meeting Transcript at pp. 175–176) more efficient standards, to determine No. 50 at p. 2 and Whirlpool, No. 76 at NPCC supported the use of retrospective whether a new rulemaking is in fact p. 1) review, but it did not believe it would necessary. (NPGA, No. 59 at p. 3) In contrast, the CEC supported DOE’s be useful or informative to carry out While the Joint Commenters conceded consideration of cumulative regulatory such an analysis on every standard or that the actual impact and energy burden in DOE’s manufacturer impact any current standard prior to savings attributable to a current analysis. It stated that this burden commencing work on the development standard are highly relevant for future should be considered when determining of revised standards. Looking back, the rulemakings, they did not support the the mandatory compliance date of an commenter asserted that prior creation of a separate process for energy conservation standard and retrospective reviews found that DOE performing retrospective review of stressed that considering the cumulative overestimated the costs of meeting current standards. They stated that such regulatory burden faced by regulated standards. Going forward, NPCC added a review would essentially be another entities should not be a factor in the life- that if DOE undertakes a retrospective rulemaking and would significantly cycle cost analysis. (CEC, No. 53 at p. review, it should determine the scope draw out the regulatory process by 7) Within this context, the CEC also and submit that scope for public requiring the collection of data which supported vetting manufacturer comment. (NPCC, No. 35 at p. 15) would impose an additional burden on stakeholders. In their view, the interview questions with the GW expressed support for the use of appropriate trade organization to imposition of a regular, mandatory retrospective review, and it improve the consistency and retrospective review process would add recommended that DOE should follow effectiveness of the interviews. (CEC, burden, cost, and delay to the GW’s suggested framework, which was No. 53 at p. 7) rulemaking process and would serve no contained in a supplemental attachment DOE acknowledges that its past real benefit. They added that to its submission. GW argued that treatment of the cumulative regulatory commenters can always raise views on revisiting regulatory inputs is key to burdens faced by regulated entities may the impact of current standards, and effective retrospective review. It have lacked the comprehensiveness DOE can respond to these issues asserted that these types of reviews sought by some of the industry without the need to dedicate its limited commenters. However, DOE has could help DOE in verifying the resources to obtaining the necessary attempted to address these burdens in a accuracy of its forecasted assumptions data to support a retrospective review consistent manner to ensure that it on consumer behavior and energy on its own. Instead, the Joint accounts for them in each of DOE’s prices, which both illustrate the costs Commenters recommended the energy conservation standards and benefits of previous appliance adoption of an inquiry at an early stage rulemakings. To improve its standards and help improve future of a DOE regulatory action examining assessments of the potential burdens forecast analyses by providing more whether anything has changed since a (i.e., costs) faced by industry in accurate inputs. (GW, No. 48 at pp. 8, previous DOE appliance efficiency implementing potential standards, DOE 13–14) standards final rule was adopted. (Joint commits to improving its analysis. As Nor-Lake suggested that DOE should Commenters, No. 51 at pp. 10–11) part of this effort, DOE will attempt to solicit feedback from stakeholders, Lutron and Whirlpool supported the account for these potential costs through either in the form of an RFI or Joint Commenters’ view by signing on to its modeling approaches. And as otherwise, as to the retrospective the Joint Comment. (See Lutron, No. 50 always, DOE remains open to impacts of the standard that is at p. 2 and Whirlpool, No. 76 at p. 1) constructive feedback on particular scheduled to be revised. In its view, this Other commenters flatly opposed the steps it should take (consistent with its information would guide DOE in use of a separate retrospective analysis. legal obligations) that would help establishing its priorities and in The American Lighting Association improve its evaluation of the cumulative determining whether it should (‘‘ALA’’) opposed this approach and regulatory burdens faced by regulated promulgate an amended standard. (Nor- asserted that DOE should instead engage entities within the energy conservation Lake, No. 68 at p. 2) stakeholders by asking what, if any, new standards context. NAFEM stated that at the pre- developments have occurred since the rulemaking stage, DOE’s first step previous rulemaking proceeding. (ALA, 3. Should DOE conduct retrospective should be to evaluate whether under the No. 55 at p. 2) HARDI also opposed the reviews of the energy savings and costs current standard, the anticipated energy creation of a separate retrospective of energy conservation standards? efficiency gains have been achieved and review process, suggesting instead that DOE solicited feedback during the assess what the actual associated costs such a process could occur concurrently public meeting regarding whether (and to consumers and manufacturers were. with the standards rulemaking process how) it should conduct a retrospective NAFEM argued that this step would be to help reduce both the regulatory review of the energy savings and costs one of the most important ways for DOE timetable and associated product for its current standards and associated to reduce regulatory burdens. (NAFEM, development costs. (HARDI, No. 56 at costs and benefits as part of any pre- No. 47 at pp. 2–3) pp. 2–3) Lennox similarly asserted that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3940 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

requiring a retrospective review for all retrospective analysis. (CEC, No. 53 at p. 4. Certification, Compliance, and rulemakings would unnecessarily 4) Enforcement (CCE)-Related Issues burden DOE and manufacturers alike. It A few commenters were undecided or DOE received a variety of comments argued that EPCA already requires an expressed misgivings about the regarding its certification, compliance, extensive economic justification test appropriateness of conducting a and enforcement (CCE) process. In (e.g., 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)), so a retrospective review. Given the statutory summary, these comments offered retrospective review of market impacts timelines, one commenter expressed the suggestions on how DOE might improve some six years or more before a opinion that there may not be time for the effectiveness of the agency’s CCE- rulemaking is not necessarily relevant to a retrospective review. (EEI, January 9, related efforts and steps that could be determining whether a standard under 2018 Public Meeting Transcript at pp. taken to streamline the rulemaking consideration is economically justified. 174–175) Other commenters (Lennox, process involving CCE matters. As part of this economic justification January 9, 2018 Public Meeting DOE has given serious consideration analysis for a particular product, rather to the various CCE-related issues raised than leaping to a full and burdensome Transcript, at p. 176; Southern by the commenters. However, the retrospective review, Lennox argued Company, January 9, 2018 Public comments raise issues with DOE that DOE ‘‘should make common sense Meeting Transcript at pp. 176–177) regulations other than the Process Rule. inquiries such as what, if anything, has expressed reservations about investing changed since a previous DOE the extensive time and effort in a In light of the nature of these issues and appliance efficiency standards final rule retrospective review without first others that DOE is addressing in this for that product was adopted.’’ (Lennox, having a clear understanding of what to proposal, DOE is opting to evaluate this No. 62 at p. 8) examine. Bradford White urged DOE to topic further. NEEP stated that it sees no benefit in conduct an analysis of its current In 2010–2011 when DOE changed its performing a retrospective review of standards as part of the ANOPR process, certification, compliance, and current standards and associated costs but it did not suggest that a enforcement requirements for all and benefits as part of a pre-rule retrospective analysis should occur products in a single rulemaking, DOE process. It argued that the market separately from this process. (Bradford learned that process was unwieldy, analysis being conducted to inform a White, No. 42 at p. 2) particularly given the level of interest from various parties and volume of new standard will already include the In response, DOE acknowledges that a comments received. 76 FR 38287 (June impacts of earlier standards, as they broad and comprehensive retrospective 30, 2011).14 In light of that, DOE’s plan have influenced the market. In its view, review of DOE’s current and past energy is to address changes to the certification, as DOE maps out any given market to conservation standards could provide compliance, and enforcement inform a rule, the costs and benefits significant data for DOE to consider as regulations, and related provisions in 10 from current standards will become part of future standards rulemakings. CFR parts 430 and 431, in separate clear as will any other market influences While DOE recognizes the potential rulemakings with separate public (e.g., utility programs, technological benefits of conducting this type of innovations, and economies of scale meetings to help manage comments and retrospective review on a periodic basis, to allow DOE to consider industry- being reached). NEEP added that DOE’s it also recognizes that it faces limits on understanding of the real-world impact specific issues in a more focused format. its own resources to conduct the broad DOE may ultimately adopt different of appliance standards is important in and comprehensive analyses that would understanding the success of the provisions for different products based be needed to collect and analyze this program, but it is not needed as an on comments and would make information. As indicated by the variety explicit goal of data collection before a appropriate changes to regulatory text to of positions detailed in the comments rule begins. (NEEP, No. 77 at p. 3) be more general or product-specific in a The CA IOUs stated that retrospective submitted in response to the RFI, final rule. reviews should not be compulsory, interested parties also recognize the IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory because there is often not enough considerable efforts and resources that Review publicly available information to allow would need to be committed to for a comprehensive review in time for conducting these reviews on a regular A. Review Under Executive Orders DOE to meet its statutory obligations for basis. Accordingly, DOE is continuing to 12866 and 13563 evaluate the prospect of conducting completing updated rulemakings. (CA This proposed regulatory action, if IOUs, No. 65 at p. 5) However, the CA these types of reviews, including on a longer-term (e.g., 10-year) basis but has adopted, would be a significant IOUs did endorse the idea of DOE regulatory action under section 3(f) of conducting some retrospective reviews not, as of yet, reached a final decision Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory to ensure that the predictions of its as to how to proceed. DOE does note Planning and Review,’’ 58 FR 51735 analytical models are accurate, and that the early assessment processes (Oct. 4, 1993). Accordingly, this based upon these reviews, DOE should proposed in this proceeding to amend proposed regulatory action was subject adjust the models accordingly where the Process Rule do incorporate an to review under the Executive Order by inaccuracies are found. (CA IOUs, No. element of retrospective review. That is, the Office of Information and Regulatory 65 at pp. 7–8) Similarly, the CEC did not by beginning a potential proceeding to Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of object to DOE performing a retrospective amend existing energy conservation Management and Budget (OMB). analysis of current standards, but it standards or test procedures for a argued that it should not be a mandatory product by asking if anything has B. Review Under Executive Order 13771 requirement for all rulemakings. CEC changed since issuance of the last and 13777 recommended that DOE should instead standard or test procedure, DOE will be On January 30, 2017, the President conduct a retrospective analysis outside seeking input in what effectively issued Executive Order (E.O.) 13771, of any specific rulemaking. It also noted amounts to a retrospective review of the impact and effectiveness of its most that DOE must meet its statutory 14 Docket Number EERE–2010–BT–CE–0014, obligations to review standards and test recent regulatory action for the product https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2010- procedures, regardless of any at issue. BT-CE-0014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3941

‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling procedures and policies on February 19, E. Review Under the National Regulatory Costs.’’ 82 FR 9339 (Jan. 30, 2003, to ensure that the potential Environmental Policy Act of 1969 2017). That Order states that the policy impacts of its rules on small entities are In this document, DOE proposes to of the Executive Branch is to be prudent properly considered during the DOE revise its Process Rule, which outlines and financially responsible in the rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE the procedures DOE will follow in expenditure of funds, from both public has made its procedures and policies conducting rulemakings for new or and private sources. More specifically, available on the Office of the General amended energy conservation standards the Order provides that it is essential to Counsel’s website at: http://energy.gov/ and test procedures for covered manage the costs associated with the gc/office-general-counsel. consumer products and commercial/ governmental imposition of Because this proposed rule would not industrial equipment. DOE has requirements necessitating private directly regulate small entities but determined that this rule falls into a expenditures of funds required to instead only imposes procedural class of actions that are categorically comply with Federal regulations. In requirements on DOE itself, DOE excluded from review under the addition, on February 24, 2017, the certifies that this proposed rule would National Environmental Policy Act of President issued Executive Order 13777, not have a significant economic impact 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and DOE’s ‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory Reform on a substantial number of small implementing regulations at 10 CFR part Agenda.’’ 82 FR 12285 (March 1, 2017). entities, and, therefore, no regulatory 1021. Specifically, this proposed rule is The Order requires the head of each flexibility analysis is required. Mid-Tex strictly procedural and is covered by the agency to designate an agency official as Elec. Co-Op, Inc. v. F.E.R.C., 773 F.2d Categorical Exclusion in 10 CFR part its Regulatory Reform Officer (RRO). 327 (1985). 1021, subpart D, paragraph A6. Each RRO is tasked with overseeing the Accordingly, neither an environmental implementation of regulatory reform D. Review Under the Paperwork assessment nor an environmental initiatives and policies to ensure that Reduction Act of 1995 individual agencies effectively carry out impact statement is required. regulatory reforms, consistent with Manufacturers of covered products/ F. Review Under Executive Order 13132 equipment must certify to DOE that applicable law. Further, E.O. 13777 Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ requires the establishment of a their products comply with any 64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999), imposes regulatory task force at each agency. The applicable energy conservation certain requirements on Federal regulatory task force is required to make standards. In certifying compliance, agencies formulating and implementing recommendations to the agency head manufacturers must test their products policies or regulations that preempt regarding the repeal, replacement, or according to the DOE test procedures for State law or that have Federalism modification of existing regulations, such products/equipment, including implications. The Executive Order consistent with applicable law. any amendments adopted for those test To implement these Executive Orders, procedures, on the date that compliance requires agencies to examine the the Department, among other actions, is required. DOE has established constitutional and statutory authority issued a request for information (RFI) regulations for the certification and supporting any action that would limit seeking public comment on how best to recordkeeping requirements for all the policymaking discretion of the achieve meaningful burden reduction covered consumer products and States and to carefully assess the while continuing to achieve the commercial equipment. 76 FR 12422 necessity for such actions. The Department’s regulatory objectives. 82 (March 7, 2011); 80 FR 5099 (Jan. 30, Executive Order also requires agencies FR 24582 (May, 30, 2017). In response 2015). The collection-of-information to have an accountable process to to this RFI, the Department received requirement for certification and ensure meaningful and timely input by numerous and extensive comments recordkeeping is subject to review and State and local officials in the pertaining to DOE’s Process Rule. approval by OMB under the Paperwork development of regulatory policies that Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement have Federalism implications. On C. Review Under the Regulatory March 14, 2000, DOE published a Flexibility Act has been approved by OMB under OMB control number 1910–1400. Public statement of policy describing the The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 reporting burden for the certification is intergovernmental consultation process U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the estimated to average 30 hours per it will follow in the development of Small Business Regulatory Enforcement response, including the time for such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has Fairness Act of 1996) requires reviewing instructions, searching examined this proposed rule and has preparation of an initial regulatory existing data sources, gathering and tentatively determined that it would not flexibility analysis (IRFA) for any rule maintaining the data needed, and have a substantial direct effect on the that by law must be proposed for public completing and reviewing the collection States, on the relationship between the comment and a final regulatory of information. national government and the States, or flexibility analysis (FRFA) for any such on the distribution of power and rule that an agency adopts as a final Notwithstanding any other provision responsibilities among the various rule, unless the agency certifies that the of the law, no person is required to levels of government. It will primarily rule, if promulgated, will not have a respond to, nor shall any person be affect the procedure by which DOE significant economic impact on a subject to a penalty for failure to comply develops proposed rules to revise substantial number of small entities. A with, a collection of information subject energy conservation standards and test regulatory flexibility analysis examines to the requirements of the PRA, unless procedures. EPCA governs and the impact of the rule on small entities that collection of information displays a prescribes Federal preemption of State and considers alternative ways of currently valid OMB Control Number. regulations that are the subject of DOE’s reducing negative effects. Also, as Specifically, this proposed rule, regulations adopted pursuant to the required by Executive Order 13272, addressing clarifications to the Process statute. In such cases, States can ‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities Rule itself, does not contain any petition DOE for exemption from such in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 collection of information requirement preemption to the extent, and based on (August 16, 2002), DOE published that would trigger the PRA. criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3942 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

6297(d)) Therefore, Executive Order to permit timely input by elected at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and 13132 requires no further action. officers of State, local, and Tribal DOE’s guidelines were published at 67 governments on a proposed ‘‘significant FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has G. Review Under Executive Order 12988 intergovernmental mandate,’’ and reviewed this proposed rule under the Regarding the review of existing requires an agency plan for giving notice OMB and DOE guidelines and has regulations and the promulgation of and opportunity for timely input to tentatively concluded that it is new regulations, section 3(a) of potentially affected small governments consistent with the applicable policies Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice before establishing any requirements in those guidelines. Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), that might significantly or uniquely L. Review Under Executive Order 13211 imposes on Federal agencies the general affect them. On March 18, 1997, DOE duty to adhere to the following published a statement of policy on its Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting process for intergovernmental Concerning Regulations That errors and ambiguity; (2) write consultation under UMRA. 62 FR Significantly Affect Energy Supply, regulations to minimize litigation; (3) 12820. (This policy is also available at Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May provide a clear legal standard for http://www.energy.gov/gc/office- 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to affected conduct rather than a general general-counsel under ‘‘Guidance & prepare and submit to OIRA at OMB, a standard; and (4) promote simplification Opinions’’ (Rulemaking)) DOE Statement of Energy Effects for any and burden reduction. Regarding the examined the proposed rule according proposed significant energy action. A review required by section 3(a), section to UMRA and its statement of policy ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as 3(b) of Executive Order 12988 and has tentatively determined that the any action by an agency that specifically requires that Executive rule contains neither an promulgates or is expected to lead to agencies make every reasonable effort to intergovernmental mandate, nor a promulgation of a final rule, and that: ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly mandate that may result in the (1) Is a significant regulatory action specifies the preemptive effect, if any; expenditure by State, local, and Tribal under Executive Order 12866, or any (2) clearly specifies any effect on governments, in the aggregate, or by the successor order; and (2) is likely to have existing Federal law or regulation; (3) private sector, of $100 million or more a significant adverse effect on the provides a clear legal standard for in any year. Accordingly, no further supply, distribution, or use of energy; or affected conduct while promoting assessment or analysis is required under (3) is designated by the Administrator of simplification and burden reduction; (4) UMRA. OIRA as a significant energy action. For specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) any proposed significant energy action, adequately defines key terms; and (6) I. Review Under the Treasury and the agency must give a detailed addresses other important issues General Government Appropriations statement of any adverse effects on affecting clarity and general Act, 1999 energy supply, distribution, or use draftsmanship under any guidelines Section 654 of the Treasury and should the proposal be implemented, issued by the Attorney General. Section General Government Appropriations and of reasonable alternatives to the 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires action and their expected benefits on Executive agencies to review regulations Federal agencies to issue a Family energy supply, distribution, and use. in light of applicable standards in Policymaking Assessment for any rule DOE has tentatively concluded that sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine that may affect family well-being. This the regulatory action in this document, whether they are met or it is proposed rule would not have any which proposes clarifications to the unreasonable to meet one or more of impact on the autonomy or integrity of Process Rule that guides the Department them. DOE has completed the required the family as an institution. in proposing energy conservation review and tentatively determined that, Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it standards is not a significant energy to the extent permitted by law, the is not necessary to prepare a Family action because it would not have a proposed rule meets the relevant Policymaking Assessment. significant adverse effect on the supply, standards of Executive Order 12988. distribution, or use of energy, nor has it J. Review Under Executive Order 12630 been designated as a significant energy H. Review Under the Unfunded Pursuant to Executive Order 12630, action by the Administrator of OIRA. Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ‘‘Governmental Actions and Interference Therefore, it is not a significant energy Title II of the Unfunded Mandates with Constitutionally Protected Property action, and, accordingly, DOE has not Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), prepared a Statement of Energy Effects each Federal agency to assess the effects DOE has determined that this proposed for this proposed rule. of Federal regulatory actions on State, rule would not result in any takings that M. Review Consistent With OMB’s local, and Tribal governments and the might require compensation under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec. Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Review 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a Constitution. proposed regulatory action likely to On December 16, 2004, OMB, in result in a rule that may cause the K. Review Under the Treasury and consultation with the Office of Science expenditure by State, local, and Tribal General Government Appropriations and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued governments, in the aggregate, or by the Act, 2001 its Final Information Quality Bulletin private sector of $100 million or more Section 515 of the Treasury and for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR in any one year (adjusted annually for General Government Appropriations 2664 (Jan. 14, 2005). The Bulletin inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides establishes that certain scientific a Federal agency to publish a written for Federal agencies to review most information shall be peer reviewed by statement that estimates the resulting disseminations of information to the qualified specialists before it is costs, benefits, and other effects on the public under information quality disseminated by the Federal national economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) guidelines established by each agency Government, including influential The UMRA also requires a Federal pursuant to general guidelines issued by scientific information related to agency agency to develop an effective process OMB. OMB’s guidelines were published regulatory actions. The purpose of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3943

bulletin is to enhance the quality and these devices into the building will be telephone number to enable DOE staff to credibility of the Government’s required to obtain a property pass. make follow-up contact, if needed. scientific information. Under the Visitors should avoid bringing these C. Conduct of the Public Meeting Bulletin, the energy conservation devices, or allow an extra 45 minutes to standards rulemaking analyses are check in. Please report to the visitor’s DOE will designate a DOE official to ‘‘influential scientific information,’’ desk to have devices checked before preside at the public meeting and may which the Bulletin defines as ‘‘scientific proceeding through security. also use a professional facilitator to aid information the agency reasonably can Due to the REAL ID Act implemented discussion. The meeting will not be a determine will have or does have a clear by the Department of Homeland judicial or evidentiary-type public and substantial impact on important Security (DHS), there have been recent hearing, but DOE will conduct it in public policies or private sector changes regarding identification (ID) accordance with section 336 of EPCA. decisions.’’ Id. at 2667. requirements for individuals wishing to (42 U.S.C. 6306) A court reporter will be In response to OMB’s Bulletin, DOE enter Federal buildings from specific present to record the proceedings and conducted formal in-progress peer States and U.S. territories. As a result, prepare a transcript. DOE reserves the reviews of the energy conservation driver’s licenses from several States and right to schedule the order of standards development process and one territory will not be accepted for presentations and to establish the analyses and has prepared a Peer building entry, and instead, one of the procedures governing the conduct of the Review Report pertaining to the energy alternate forms of ID listed below will public meeting. There shall not be conservation standards rulemaking be required. DHS has determined that discussion of proprietary information, analyses. Generation of this report regular driver’s licenses (and ID cards) costs or prices, market share, or other involved a rigorous, formal, and from the following jurisdictions are not commercial matters regulated by U.S. documented evaluation using objective acceptable for entry into DOE facilities: anti-trust laws. After the public meeting, criteria and qualified and independent Alaska, American Samoa, Arizona, interested parties may submit further reviewers to make a judgment as to the Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, comments on the proceedings, as well technical/scientific/business merit, the Minnesota, New York, Oklahoma, and as on any aspect of the rulemaking, until actual or anticipated results, and the Washington. Acceptable alternate forms the end of the comment period. productivity and management of Photo-ID include: U.S. Passport or The public meeting will be conducted effectiveness of programs and/or Passport Card; an Enhanced Driver’s in an informal, conference style. DOE projects. The ‘‘Energy Conservation License or Enhanced ID-Card issued by will present summaries of comments Standards Rulemaking Peer Review the States of Minnesota, New York, or received before the public meeting, Report,’’ dated February 2007, has been Washington (Enhanced licenses issued allow time for prepared general disseminated and is available at the by these States are clearly marked statements by participants, and following website: http://www1.eere. Enhanced or Enhanced Driver’s encourage all interested parties to share energy.gov/buildings/appliance_ License); a military ID or other Federal their views on issues affecting this standards/peer_review.html. Because government-issued Photo-ID card. rulemaking. Each participant will be available data, models, and In addition, you can attend the public allowed to make a general statement technological understanding have meeting via webinar. Webinar (within time limits determined by DOE), changed since 2007, DOE is committing registration information, participant before the discussion of specific topics. in this proceeding to engage in a new instructions, and information about the DOE will allow, as time permits, other peer review of its analytical capabilities available to webinar participants to comment briefly on any methodologies. participants will be published on DOE’s general statements. V. Public Participation website at: https://www.energy.gov/eere/ At the end of all prepared statements buildings/regulatory-processes, under on a topic, DOE will permit participants A. Attendance at the Public Meeting the heading Process Rule. Participants to clarify their statements briefly and The time, date, and location of the are responsible for ensuring their comment on statements made by others. public meeting are listed in the DATES systems are compatible with the Participants should be prepared to and ADDRESSES sections at the beginning webinar software. answer questions by DOE and by other of this document. If you plan to attend participants concerning these issues. B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared DOE representatives may also ask the public meeting, please notify Ms. General Statements for Distribution Regina Washington at (202) 586–1214 or questions of participants concerning by email: Regina.Washington@ Any person who has plans to present other matters relevant to this ee.doe.gov. a prepared general statement may rulemaking. The official conducting the Please note that foreign nationals request that copies of his or her public meeting will accept additional visiting DOE Headquarters are subject to statement be made available at the comments or questions from those advance security screening procedures public meeting. Such persons may attending, as time permits. The which require advance notice prior to submit requests, along with an advance presiding official will announce any attendance at the public meeting. If a electronic copy of their statement in further procedural rules or modification foreign national wishes to participate in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or of the above procedures that may be the public meeting, please inform DOE Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file needed for the proper conduct of the of this fact as soon as possible by format, to the appropriate address public meeting. contacting Ms. Regina Washington at shown in the ADDRESSES section at the A transcript of the public meeting will (202) 586–1214 or Regina.Washington@ beginning of this document. The request be included in the docket, which can be ee.doe.gov so that the necessary and advance copy of statements must be viewed as described in the Docket procedures can be completed. received at least one week before the section at the beginning of this notice DOE requires visitors to have laptops public meeting and may be emailed, and will be accessible on the DOE and other devices, such as tablets, hand-delivered, or sent by mail. DOE website. In addition, any person may checked upon entry into the Forrestal prefers to receive requests and advance buy a copy of the transcript from the Building. Any person wishing to bring copies via email. Please include a transcribing reporter.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3944 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

D. Submission of Comments tracking number that http:// information as confidential include: (1) DOE will accept comments, data, and www.regulations.gov provides after you A description of the items; (2) whether information regarding this proposed have successfully uploaded your and why such items are customarily rule before or after the public meeting, comment. treated as confidential within the Submitting comments via email, hand but no later than the date provided in industry; (3) whether the information is delivery/courier, or postal mail. the DATES section at the beginning of generally known by or available from Comments and documents submitted this proposed rule. Interested parties other sources; (4) whether the via email, hand delivery/courier, or may submit comments, data, and other information has previously been made postal mail also will be posted to http:// information using any of the methods available to others without obligation www.regulations.gov. If you do not want described in the ADDRESSES section at concerning its confidentiality; (5) an your personal contact information to be the beginning of this document. explanation of the competitive injury to publicly viewable, do not include it in Submitting comments via http:// the submitting person that would result your comment or any accompanying www.regulations.gov. The http:// from public disclosure; (6) when such documents. Instead, provide your www.regulations.gov web page will information might lose its confidential contact information in a cover letter. require you to provide your name and character due to the passage of time; and Include your first and last names, email (7) why disclosure of the information contact information. Your contact address, telephone number, and information will be viewable to DOE would be contrary to the public interest. optional mailing address. The cover It is DOE’s policy that all comments Building Technologies staff only. Your letter will not be publicly viewable as contact information will not be publicly may be included in the public docket, long as it does not include any without change and as received, viewable except for your first and last comments. names, organization name (if any), and including any personal information Include contact information each time provided in the comments (except submitter representative name (if any). you submit comments, data, documents, If your comment is not processed information deemed to be exempt from and other information to DOE. If you public disclosure). properly because of technical submit via postal mail or hand delivery/ difficulties, DOE will use this courier, please provide all items on a VI. Approval of the Office of the information to contact you. If DOE CD, if feasible, in which case it is not Secretary cannot read your comment due to necessary to submit printed copies. No The Secretary of Energy has approved technical difficulties and cannot contact telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. publication of this notice of proposed you for clarification, DOE may not be Comments, data, and other rulemaking. able to consider your comment. information submitted to DOE However, your contact information electronically should be provided in List of Subjects will be publicly viewable if you include PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 10 CFR Part 430 it in the comment itself or in any Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file documents attached to your comment. format. Provide documents that are not Administrative practice and Any information that you do not want secured, that are written in English, and procedure, Confidential business to be publicly viewable should not be that are free of any defects or viruses. information, Energy conservation, included in your comment, nor in any Documents should not contain special Household appliances, Imports, document attached to your comment. characters or any form of encryption Incorporation by reference, Otherwise, persons viewing comments and, if possible, they should carry the Intergovernmental relations, Small will see only first and last names, electronic signature of the author. businesses, Test procedures. organization names, correspondence Campaign form letters. Please submit 10 CFR Part 431 containing comments, and any campaign form letters by the originating Administrative practice and documents submitted with the organization in batches of between 50 to procedure, Confidential business comments. 500 form letters per PDF or as one form information, Incorporation by reference, Do not submit to http:// letter with a list of supporters’ names Reporting and recordkeeping www.regulations.gov information for compiled into one or more PDFs. This requirements, Test procedures. which disclosure is restricted by statute, reduces comment processing and such as trade secrets and commercial or posting time. Signed in Washington, DC, on January 28, financial information (hereinafter Confidential Business Information. 2019. referred to as Confidential Business Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person Daniel R. Simmons, Information (CBI)). Comments submitting information that he or she Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and submitted through http:// believes to be confidential and exempt Renewable Energy. www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed by law from public disclosure should For the reasons stated in the as CBI. Comments received through the submit via email, postal mail, or hand preamble, DOE is proposing to amend website will waive any CBI claims for delivery/courier two well-marked parts 430 and 431 of title 10 of the Code the information submitted. For copies: One copy of the document of Federal Regulations as set forth information on submitting CBI, see the marked ‘‘confidential’’ including all the below: Confidential Business Information information believed to be confidential, section below. and one copy of the document marked PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION DOE processes submissions made ‘‘non-confidential’’ with the information PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER through http://www.regulations.gov believed to be confidential deleted. PRODUCTS before posting. Normally, comments Submit these documents via email or on ■ 1. The authority citation for part 430 will be posted within a few days of a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own continues to read as follows: being submitted. However, if large determination about the confidential volumes of comments are being status of the information and treat it Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309; 28 U.S.C. processed simultaneously, your according to its determination. 2461 note. comment may not be viewable for up to Factors of interest to DOE when ■ 2. Appendix A to subpart C of part several weeks. Please keep the comment evaluating requests to treat submitted 430 is revised to read as follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3945

Appendix A to Subpart C of Part 430— these prioritization decisions so that all encourage development of consensus Procedures, Interpretations, and interested parties have a common proposals for new or revised standards Policies for Consideration of New or expectation about the timing of different because standards with such broad-based rulemaking activities. Further, DOE will offer Revised Energy Conservation Standards support are likely to balance effectively the the opportunity to provide input on the various interests affected by such standards. and Test Procedures for Consumer prioritization of rulemakings through a Products and Certain Commercial/ request for comment as DOE begins 2. Scope Industrial Equipment preparation of its Regulatory Agenda each The procedures, interpretations, and spring. policies described in this appendix apply to 1. Objectives (c) Eliminate problematic design options rulemakings concerning new or revised 2. Scope early in the process. The Department seeks to Federal energy conservation standards and 3. Mandatory Application of the Process Rule eliminate from consideration, early in the test procedures, and related rule documents 4. Setting Priorities for Rulemaking Activity process, any design options that present (i.e., coverage determinations) for consumer 5. Coverage Determination Rulemakings unacceptable problems with respect to products in Part A and commercial and 6. Process for Developing Energy manufacturability, consumer utility, or industrial equipment under Part A–1 of the Conservation Standards safety, so that the detailed analysis can focus Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), 7. Policies on Selection of Standards only on viable design options. Under the as amended, except covered ASHRAE 8. Test Procedures procedures in this appendix, DOE will equipment in Part A–1 are governed by 9. ASHRAE Equipment eliminate from consideration design options section 9 in this appendix. 10. Direct Final Rules if it concludes that manufacture, installation 11. Negotiated Rulemaking Process or service of the design will be impractical, 3. Mandatory Application of the Process 12. Principles for Distinguishing Between or that the design option will have a material Rule Effective and Compliance Dates adverse impact on the utility of the product, The rulemaking procedures established in 13. Principles for the Conduct of the or if the design option will have a material this appendix are binding on DOE. Engineering Analysis adverse impact on safety or health. DOE will 14. Principles for the Analysis of Impacts on also eliminate from consideration proprietary 4. Setting Priorities for Rulemaking Activity Manufacturers design options that represent a unique (a) In establishing its priorities for 15. Principles for the Analysis of Impacts on pathway to achieving a given efficiency level. undertaking energy conservation standards Consumers This screening will be done at the outset of and test procedure rulemakings, DOE will 16. Consideration of Non-Regulatory a rulemaking. consider the following factors, consistent Approaches (d) Fully consider non-regulatory with applicable legal obligations: 17. Cross-cutting Analytical Assumptions approaches. The Department seeks to (1) Potential energy savings; 1. Objectives understand the effects of market forces and (2) Potential social and private, including voluntary programs on encouraging the environmental or energy security, benefits; This appendix establishes procedures, purchase of energy efficient products so that (3) Applicable deadlines for rulemakings; interpretations, and policies that DOE will the incremental impacts of a new or revised (4) Incremental DOE resources required to follow in the consideration and promulgation standard can be accurately assessed and the complete the rulemaking process; of new or revised appliance energy Department can make informed decisions (5) Other relevant regulatory actions conservation standards and test procedures about where standards and voluntary affecting the products/equipment; under the Energy Policy and Conservation programs can be used most effectively. DOE (6) Stakeholder recommendations; Act (EPCA). This appendix applies to both will continue to support voluntary efforts by (7) Evidence of energy efficiency gains in covered consumer products and covered manufacturers, retailers, utilities, and others the market absent new or revised standards; commercial/industrial equipment. The to increase product/equipment efficiency. (8) Status of required changes to test Department’s objectives in establishing these (e) Conduct thorough analysis of impacts. procedures; and procedures include: In addition to understanding the aggregate (9) Other relevant factors. (a) Provide for early input from social and private costs and benefits of (b) DOE will offer the opportunity to stakeholders. The Department seeks to standards, the Department seeks to provide input on prioritization of provide opportunities for public input early understand the distribution of those costs rulemakings through a request for comment in the rulemaking process so that the and benefits among consumers, as DOE begins preparation of its Regulatory initiation and direction of rulemakings is manufacturers, and others, as well as the Agenda each spring. informed by comment from interested uncertainty associated with these analyses of parties. Under the procedures established by costs and benefits, so that any adverse 5. Coverage Determination Rulemakings this appendix, DOE will seek early input impacts on subgroups and uncertainty (a) DOE has discretion to conduct from interested parties in determining concerning any adverse impacts can be fully proceedings to determine whether additional whether establishing new or amending considered in selecting a standard. Pursuant consumer products and commercial/ existing energy conservation standards will to this appendix, the analyses will consider industrial equipment should be covered result in significant savings of energy and is the variability of impacts on significant under EPCA if certain statutory criteria are economically justified and technologically groups of manufacturers and consumers in met. (42 U.S.C. 6292 and 6295(l) for feasible. In the context of test procedure addition to aggregate social and private costs consumer products; 42 U.S.C. 6312 for rulemakings, DOE will seek early input from and benefits, report the range of uncertainty commercial/industrial equipment) interested parties in determining whether— associated with these impacts, and take into (b) If DOE determines to initiate the (1) Establishing a new or amending an account cumulative impacts of regulation on coverage determination process, it will first existing test procedure will better measure manufacturers. The Department will also publish a notice of proposed determination, the energy efficiency, energy use, water use conduct appropriate analyses to assess the providing an opportunity for public comment (as specified in EPCA), or estimated annual impact that new or amended test procedures of not less than 60 days, in which DOE will operating cost of a covered product/ will have on manufacturers and consumers. explain how such products/equipment that it equipment during a representative average (f) Use transparent and robust analytical seeks to designate as ‘‘covered’’ meet the use cycle or period of use (for consumer methods. The Department seeks to use statutory criteria for coverage and why such products); and qualitative and quantitative analytical coverage is ‘‘necessary or appropriate’’ to (2) Will not be unduly burdensome to methods that are fully documented for the carry out the purposes of EPCA. In the case conduct. public and that produce results that can be of commercial equipment, DOE will follow (b) Increase predictability of the explained and reproduced, so that the the same process, except that the Department rulemaking timetable. The Department seeks analytical underpinnings for policy decisions must demonstrate that coverage of the to make informed, strategic decisions about on standards are as sound and well-accepted equipment type is ‘‘necessary’’ to carry out how to deploy its resources on the range of as possible. the purposes of EPCA. possible standards and test procedure (g) Support efforts to build consensus on (c) DOE will publish its final decision on development activities, and to announce standards. The Department seeks to coverage as a separate notice, an action that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3946 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

will be completed prior to the initiation of Availability (NODA) could be issued, as (c) Design options. (1) General. Once the any test procedure or energy conservation appropriate, in addition to these preliminary- Department has initiated a rulemaking for a standards rulemaking (i.e., DOE will not stage documents. specific product/equipment but before issue any RFIs, NODAs, or any other (3) In those instances where the early publishing a proposed rule to establish or mechanism to gather information for the assessment either suggested that a new or amend standards, DOE will identify the purpose of initiating a rulemaking to amended energy conservation standard might product/equipment categories and design establish a test procedure or energy be justified or in which the information was options to be analyzed in detail, as well as conservation standard for the proposed inconclusive on this point, and DOE those design options to be eliminated from covered product/equipment prior to undertakes the preliminary stages of a further consideration. During the pre- finalization of the coverage determination.). rulemaking to establish or amend an energy proposal stages of the rulemaking, interested If DOE determines that coverage is conservation standard, DOE may still parties may be consulted to provide warranted, DOE will proceed with its typical ultimately determine that such a standard is information on key issues through a variety rulemaking process for both test procedures not economically justified, technologically of rulemaking documents. The preliminary and standards. Specifically, DOE will finalize feasible or would not result in a significant stages of a rulemaking to issue or amend an coverage for a product/equipment at least 180 savings of energy. Therefore, DOE will energy conservation standard that DOE will days prior to publication of a proposed rule examine the potential costs and benefits and undertake will be a framework document and to establish a test procedure. And, DOE will energy savings potential of a new or amended preliminary analysis, or an advance notice of complete the test procedure rulemaking at energy conservation standard at the proposed rulemaking (ANOPR). Requests for least 180 days prior to publication of a preliminary stage of the rulemaking. Information (RFI) and Notice of Data proposed energy conservation standard. (b) Significant Savings of Energy. (1) In Availability (NODA) could also be issued, as (d) If, during the substantive rulemaking evaluating the prospects of proposing a new appropriate. proceedings to establish test procedures or or amended standard—or in determining that (2) Identification and screening of design energy conservation standards after no new or amended standard is needed— options. During the pre-NOPR phase of the completing a coverage determination, DOE DOE will first look to the projected energy rulemaking process, the Department will finds it necessary and appropriate to expand savings that are likely to result. DOE will develop a list of design options for or reduce the scope of coverage, a new determine as a preliminary matter whether consideration. Initially, the candidate design coverage determination process will be the rulemaking has the potential to result in options will encompass all those initiated and finalized prior to moving ‘‘significant energy savings.’’ If the technologies considered to be technologically forward with the test procedure or standards rulemaking passes the significant energy feasible. Following the development of this rulemaking. savings threshold, DOE will then compare initial list of design options, DOE will review these projected savings against the each design option based on the factors 6. Process for Developing Energy technological feasibility of and likely costs described in paragraph (c)(3) of this section Conservation Standards necessary to meet the new or amended and the policies stated in section 7. The This section describes the process to be standards needed to achieve these energy reasons for eliminating or retaining any used in developing energy conservation savings. design option at this stage of the process will standards for covered products and (2) Under its significant energy savings be fully documented and published as part equipment other than those covered analysis, DOE will examine both the total of the NOPR and as appropriate for a given equipment subject to ASHRAE/IES Standard amount of projected energy savings and the rule, in the pre-NOPR documents. The 90.1. relative percentage increase in efficiency or technologically feasible design options that (a) Early Assessment. (1) As the first step decrease in energy usage that could be are not eliminated in this screening will be in any proceeding to consider establishing or obtained from establishing or amending considered further in the Engineering amending any energy conservation standard, energy conservation standards for a given Analysis described in paragraph (d) of this DOE will publish a notice in the Federal covered product or equipment. Under the section. Register announcing that DOE is considering first step of this approach, the projected (3) Factors for screening of design options. initiating a rulemaking proceeding. As part of energy savings from a potential maximum The factors for screening design options that notice, DOE will request submission of technologically feasible (‘‘max-tech’’) include: related comments, including data and standard will be evaluated against a (i) Technological feasibility. Technologies information on whether DOE should proceed threshold of 0.5 quads of energy saved over incorporated in commercial products or in with the rulemaking, including whether any a 30-year period. working prototypes will be considered new or amended rule would be economically (3) If the projected max-tech energy savings technologically feasible. justified, technologically feasible, or would does not meet or exceed this threshold, those (ii) Practicability to manufacture, install result in a significant savings of energy. If max-tech savings would then be compared to and service. If mass production of a DOE receives sufficient information the total energy usage of the covered product technology under consideration for use in suggesting that it could justify a or equipment to calculate a potential commercially-available products (or determination that no new or amended percentage improvement in energy efficiency equipment) and reliable installation and standard would meet the applicable statutory or reduction in energy usage. servicing of the technology could be achieved criteria, DOE would engage in notice and (4) If this comparison does not yield an on the scale necessary to serve the relevant comment rulemaking to make that energy savings improvement of at least 10 market at the time of the effective date of the determination. If DOE receives sufficient percent, the analysis will end, and DOE will standard, then that technology will be information suggesting it could justify a new propose to determine that no significant considered practicable to manufacture, or amended standard or the information energy savings would likely result from install and service. received is inconclusive with regard to the setting new or amended standards. (iii) Adverse Impacts on Product Utility or statutory criteria, DOE would undertake the (5) If either one of the thresholds described Product Availability. preliminary stages of a rulemaking to issue or in paragraphs (b)(3) or (b)(4) of this section (iv) Adverse Impacts on Health or Safety. amend an energy conservation standard, as is reached, DOE will conduct analyses to (v) Unique-Pathway Proprietary discussed further in paragraph (a)(2) of this ascertain whether a standard can be Technologies. If a design option utilizes section. prescribed that produces the maximum proprietary technology that represents a (2) If the Department determines it is improvement in energy efficiency that is both unique pathway to achieving a given appropriate to proceed with a rulemaking, technologically feasible and economically efficiency level, that technology will not be the preliminary stages of a rulemaking to justified and still constitutes significant considered further. issue or amend an energy conservation energy savings (using the same criteria of (d) Engineering analysis of design options standard that DOE will undertake will be a either 0.5 quad of aggregate energy savings or and selection of candidate standard levels. Framework Document and Preliminary a 10-percent improvement in energy After design options are identified and Analysis, or an Advance Notice of Proposed efficiency or decrease in energy use) at the screened, DOE will perform the engineering Rulemaking (ANOPR). Requests for level determined to be economically analysis and the benefit/cost analysis and Information (RFI) and Notices of Data justified. select the candidate standard levels based on

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3947

these analyses. The results of the analyses stage, if DOE has determined preliminarily on employment by appliance manufacturers, will be published in a Technical Support that a candidate standard level is likely to relevant service industries, energy suppliers, Document (TSD) to accompany the produce the maximum improvement in suppliers of complementary and substitution appropriate rulemaking documents. energy efficiency that is both technologically products, and the economy in general. (1) Identification of engineering analytical feasible and economically justified or (vi) Impacts on the environment. The methods and tools. DOE will select the constitute significant energy savings, analysis of environmental impacts will specific engineering analysis tools (or economic analyses of the impacts of the include estimated impacts on emissions of multiple tools, if necessary to address candidate standard levels will be conducted. carbon and relevant criteria pollutants, and uncertainty) to be used in the analysis of the The Department will propose new or impacts on pollution control costs. design options identified as a result of the amended standards based on the results of (vii) Impacts of non-regulatory approaches. screening analysis. the impact analysis. The analysis of energy savings and consumer (2) Engineering and life-cycle cost analysis (1) Identification of issues for analysis. The impacts will incorporate an assessment of the of design options. DOE and its contractor will Department, in consideration of comments impacts of market forces and existing perform engineering and life-cycle cost received, will identify issues that will be voluntary programs in promoting product/ analyses of the design options. examined in the impacts analysis. equipment efficiency, usage, and related (3) Review by stakeholders. Interested (2) Identification of analytical methods and characteristics in the absence of updated parties will have the opportunity to review tools. DOE will select the specific economic efficiency standards. the results of the engineering and life-cycle analysis tools (or multiple tools if necessary (viii) New information relating to the cost analyses. If appropriate, a public to address uncertainty) to be used in the factors used for screening design options. workshop will be conducted to review these analysis of the candidate standard levels. (g) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking—(1) results. The analyses will be revised as (3) Analysis of impacts. DOE will conduct Documentation of decisions on proposed appropriate on the basis of this input. the analysis of the impacts of candidate standard selection. The Department will (4) New information relating to the factors standard levels. publish a NOPR in the Federal Register that used for screening design options. If further (4) Factors to be considered in selecting a proposes standard levels and explains the information or analysis leads to a proposed standard. The factors to be basis for the selection of those proposed determination that a design option, or a considered in selection of a proposed levels, and will post on its website a draft combination of design options, has standard include: TSD documenting the analysis of impacts. unacceptable impacts, that design option or (i) Impacts on manufacturers. The analysis The draft TSD will also be posted in the combination of design options will not be of private manufacturer impacts will include: appropriate docket on http:// included in a candidate standard level. Estimated impacts on cash flow; assessment www.regulations.gov. As required by 42 (5) Selection of candidate standard levels. of impacts on manufacturers of specific U.S.C. 6295(p)(1) of EPCA, the NOPR also Based on the results of the engineering and categories of products/equipment and small will describe the maximum improvement in life-cycle cost analysis of design options and manufacturers; assessment of impacts on energy efficiency or maximum reduction in the policies stated in paragraph (c) of this manufacturers of multiple product-specific energy use that is technologically feasible and, if the proposed standards would not section, DOE will select the candidate Federal regulatory requirements, including achieve these levels, the reasons for standard levels for further analysis. efficiency standards for other products and proposing different standards. (e) Pre-NOPR Stage—(1) Documentation of regulations of other agencies; and impacts on (2) Public comment and hearing. There decisions on candidate standard selection. manufacturing capacity, plant closures, and will be not less than 75 days for public (i) If the early assessment and screening loss of capital investment. comment on the NOPR, with at least one analysis indicates that continued (ii) Private Impacts on consumers. The public hearing or workshop. (42 U.S.C. development of a standard is appropriate, the analysis of consumer impacts will include: 6295(p)(2) and 6306) Department will publish either: Estimated private energy savings impacts on (3) Revisions to impact analyses and (A) A notice accompanying a framework consumers based on national average energy selection of final standard. Based on the prices and energy usage; assessments of document and, subsequently, a preliminary public comments received, DOE will review analysis or; impacts on subgroups of consumers based on the proposed standard and impact analyses, (B) An ANOPR. The notice document will major regional differences in usage or energy and make modifications as necessary. If be published in the Federal Register, with prices and significant variations in major changes to the analyses are required at accompanying documents referenced and installation costs or performance; sensitivity this stage, DOE will publish a Supplemental posted in the appropriate docket. analyses using high and low discount rates Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNOPR), (ii) If DOE determines at any point in the reflecting both private transactions and social when required. DOE may also publish a pre-NOPR stage that no candidate standard discount rates and high and low energy price NODA or RFI, where appropriate. level is likely to produce the maximum forecasts; consideration of changes to product (h) Final Rule. The Department will improvement in energy efficiency that is both utility, changes to purchase rate of products, publish a Final Rule in the Federal Register technologically feasible and economically and other impacts of likely concern to all or that promulgates standard levels, responds to justified or constitute significant energy some consumers, based to the extent public comments received on the NOPR, and savings, that conclusion will be announced practicable on direct input from consumers; explains how the selection of those standards in the Federal Register with an opportunity estimated life-cycle cost with sensitivity meets the statutory requirement that any new for public comment provided to stakeholders. analysis; consideration of the increased first or amended energy conservation standard In such cases, the Department will proceed cost to consumers and the time required for produces the maximum improvement in with a rulemaking that proposes not to adopt energy cost savings to pay back these first energy efficiency that is both technologically new or amended standards. costs; and loss of utility. feasible and economically justified and (2) Public comment and hearing. The Other analyses of social and distributional constitutes significant energy savings, length of the public comment period for pre- effects include: accompanied by a final TSD. NOPR rulemaking documents will vary (iii) Impacts on competition, including depending upon the circumstances of the industry concentration analysis. 7. Policies on Selection of Standards particular rulemaking, but will not be less (iv) Impacts on utilities. The analysis of (a) Purpose. (1) Section 5 describes the than 75 calendar days. For such documents, utility impacts will include estimated process that will be used to consider new or DOE will determine whether a public hearing marginal impacts on electric and gas utility revised energy efficiency standards and lists is appropriate. costs and revenues. a number of factors and analyses that will be (3) Revisions based on comments. Based on (v) National energy, economic, and considered at specified points in the process. consideration of the comments received, any employment impacts. The analysis of Department policies concerning the selection necessary changes to the engineering analysis national energy, economic, and employment of new or revised standards, and decisions or the candidate standard levels will be impacts will include: Estimated energy preliminary thereto, are described in this made. savings by fuel type; estimated net present section. These policies are intended to (f) Analysis of impacts and selection of value of benefits to all consumers; and elaborate on the statutory criteria provided in proposed standard level. After the pre-NOPR estimates of the direct and indirect impacts 42 U.S.C. 6295 of EPCA.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3948 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

(2) The procedures described in this (i) The range of candidate standard levels would be the direct cause of plant closures, section are intended to assist the Department will typically include: significant losses in domestic manufacturer in making the determinations required by (A) The most energy-efficient combination employment, or significant losses of capital EPCA and do not preclude DOE’s of design options; investment by domestic manufacturers. consideration of any other information (B) The combination of design options with (C) The Department will determine consistent with the relevant statutory criteria. the lowest life-cycle cost; and whether a candidate/trial standard level The Department will consider pertinent (C) A combination of design options with would have a significant adverse impact on information in determining whether a new or a payback period of not more than three the environment or energy security. revised standard is consistent with the years. (D) The Department will determine statutory criteria. (ii) Candidate standard levels that whether a candidate/trial standard level (b) Screening design options. These factors incorporate noteworthy technologies or fill in would not result in significant energy will be considered as follows in determining large gaps between efficiency levels of other conservation relative to non-regulatory whether a design option will receive any candidate standard levels also may be approaches. further consideration: selected. (E) The Department will determine (1) Technological feasibility. Technologies (d) Pre-NOPR Stage. New information whether a candidate/trial standard level is that are not incorporated in commercial provided in public comments on any pre- not practicable to manufacture or has a products or in commercially-viable, existing NOPR documents will be considered to negative impact on consumer utility or prototypes will not be considered further. determine whether any changes to the safety. (2) Practicability to manufacture, install candidate standard levels are needed before (F) The Department will determine and service. If it is determined that mass proceeding to the analysis of impacts. whether a candidate/trial standard level is production of a technology in commercial (e) Selection of proposed standard. Based not consistent with the policies relating to products and reliable installation and on the results of the analysis of impacts, DOE consumer costs in paragraph (c)(1) of this servicing of the technology could not be will select a standard level to be proposed for section. achieved on the scale necessary to serve the public comment in the NOPR. As required (G) The Department will determine relevant market at the time of the compliance under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A), any new or whether a candidate/trial standard level date of the standard, then that technology revised standard must be designed to achieve would be economically justified when will not be considered further. the maximum improvement in energy compared to the set of other feasible trial (3) Impacts on product utility. If a efficiency that is determined to be standard levels. In making this technology is determined to have significant technologically feasible and economically determination, the Department will consider adverse impact on the utility of the product/ justified. whether an economically rational consumer equipment to subgroups of consumers, or (1) Statutory policies. The fundamental would choose a product meeting the result in the unavailability of any covered policies concerning the selection of standards product type with performance include: candidate/trial standard level over products characteristics (including reliability), (i) A candidate/trial standard level will not meeting the other feasible trial standard features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that be proposed or promulgated if the levels after considering all relevant factors, are substantially the same as products Department determines that it is not including but not limited to, energy savings, generally available in the U.S. at the time, it technologically feasible and economically efficacy, product features, and life-cycle will not be considered further. justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A) and costs. (4) Safety of technologies. If it is (o)(3)(B)) For a standard level to be (H) The Department will determine determined that a technology will have economically justified, the Secretary must whether a candidate/trial standard level will significant adverse impacts on health or determine that the benefits of the standard have significant adverse impacts on a safety, it will not be considered further. exceed its burdens. (42 U.S.C. significant subgroup of consumers (including (5) Unique-pathway proprietary 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)) A standard level is subject to low-income consumers). technologies. If a technology has proprietary a rebuttable presumption that it is (I) The Department of Energy and the protection and represents a unique pathway economically justified if the payback period Department of Justice will determine whether to achieving a given efficiency level, it will is three years or less. (42 U.S.C. a candidate/trial standard level would have not be considered further, due to the 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii)) significant anticompetitive effects. potential for monopolistic concerns. (ii) If the Department determines that a (ii) DOE will, consistent with paragraph (f) (c) Identification of candidate standard standard level is likely to result in the of this section, account for the views levels. Based on the results of the engineering unavailability of any covered product/ expressed by the Department of Justice and cost/benefit analyses of design options, equipment type with performance regarding a given proposal’s effects on DOE will identify the candidate standard characteristics (including reliability), competition. levels for further analysis. Candidate features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that (f) Selection of a final standard. New standard levels will be selected as follows: are substantially the same as products information provided in the public (1) Costs and savings of design options. generally available in the U.S. at the time, comments on the NOPR and any analysis by Design options that have payback periods that standard level will not be proposed. (42 the Department of Justice concerning impacts that exceed the median life of the product or U.S.C. 6295(o)(4)) on competition of the proposed standard will which result in life-cycle cost increases (iii) If the Department determines that a be considered to determine whether issuance relative to the base case, using typical fuel standard level would not result in significant of a new or amended energy conservation costs, usage, and private discount rates, will conservation of energy, that standard level standard produces the maximum not be used as the basis for candidate will not be proposed. (42 U.S.C. improvement in energy efficiency that is both standard levels. 6295(o)(3)(B)) technologically feasible and economically (2) Further information on factors used for (2) Considerations in assessing economic justified and still constitutes significant screening design options. If further justification. energy savings or whether any change to the information or analysis leads to a (i) The following considerations will guide proposed standard level is needed before determination that a design option, or a the application of the economic justification proceeding to the final rule. The same combination of design options, has criterion in selecting a proposed standard: policies used to select the proposed standard unacceptable impacts under the policies (A) The Department will determine level, as described in this section, will be stated in this Appendix, that design option whether a candidate/trial standard level used to guide the selection of the final or combination of design options will not be would result in a negative return on standard level or a determination that no new included in a candidate standard level. investment for the industry, would or amended standard is justified. (3) Selection of candidate standard levels. significantly reduce the value of the industry, Candidate standard levels, which will be or would cause significant adverse impacts to 8. Test Procedures identified in the pre-NOPR documents and a significant subgroup of manufacturers (a) General. As with the early assessment on which impact analyses will be conducted, (including small manufacturing businesses). process for energy conservation standards, will be based on the remaining design (B) The Department will determine DOE believes that early stakeholder input is options. whether a candidate/trial standard level also very important during test procedure

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3949

rulemakings. DOE will follow an early 9. ASHRAE Equipment in making this determination, prior to assessment process similar to that described (a) EPCA provides that ASHRAE publishing a proposed rule to adopt more- in the preceding sections discussing DOE’s equipment are subject to unique statutory stringent standards or a different test consideration of new or amended energy requirements and their own set of timelines. procedure. conservation standards. Consequently, DOE More specifically, pursuant to EPCA’s (c) DOE’s review in adopting amendments will publish a notice in the Federal Register statutory scheme for covered ASHRAE based on an action by ASHRAE to amend whenever DOE is considering initiation of a equipment, DOE is required to consider Standard 90.1 is strictly limited to the rulemaking for new or revised test amending the existing Federal energy specific standards or test procedure procedures. In that notice, DOE will request conservation standards and test procedures amendment for the specific equipment for submission of comments, including data and for certain enumerated types of commercial which ASHRAE has made a change (i.e., information on whether an amended test and industrial equipment (generally, determined down to the equipment class procedure rule would: commercial water heaters, commercial level). DOE believes that ASHRAE not acting (1) More accurately measure energy packaged boilers, commercial air- to amend Standard 90.1 is tantamount to a efficiency, energy use, water use (as specified conditioning and heating equipment, and decision that the existing standard remain in in EPCA), or estimated annual operating cost packaged terminal air conditioners and heat place. Thus, when undertaking a review as of a covered product during a representative pumps) when ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is required by 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C), DOE average use cycle or period of use; and amended with respect to standards and test would need to find clear and convincing (2) Not be unduly burdensome to conduct. procedures applicable to such equipment. evidence, as defined in this section, to issue DOE will review comments submitted and, Not later than 180 days after the amendment a standard more stringent than the existing subject to statutory obligations, determine of the standard, the Secretary will publish in standard for the product. whether it agrees with the submitted the Federal Register for public comment an 10. Direct Final Rules information. If DOE determines that a new or analysis of the energy savings potential of amended test procedure is not justified at amended energy efficiency standards. For (a) A direct final rule (DFR), as that time, it will not pursue the rulemaking each type of equipment, EPCA directs that if contemplated in 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4), is a and will publish a notice in the Federal ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended, not later procedural mechanism separate from the Register to that effect. If DOE receives than 18 months after the date of publication negotiated rulemaking process outlined sufficient information suggesting a new or of the amendment to ASHRAE Standard 90.1, under the Negotiated Rulemaking Act (5 amended test procedure could more DOE must adopt amended energy U.S.C. 563). DOE may issue a DFR adopting accurately measure energy efficiency, energy conservation standards at the new efficiency energy conservation standards for a covered use, water use (as specified in EPCA), or level in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 as the product provided that: estimated annual operating cost of a covered uniform national standard for such (1) DOE receives a joint proposal from a product during a representative average use equipment, or amend the test procedure group of ‘‘interested persons that are fairly cycle or period of use and not be unduly referenced in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 for the representative of relevant points of view,’’ burdensome to conduct or the information equipment at issue to be consistent with the which does not include DOE as a member of received is inconclusive with regard to these applicable industry test procedure, the group. At a minimum, to be ‘‘fairly points, DOE would undertake the respectively, unless— representative of relevant points of view’’ the preliminary stages of a rulemaking to issue or (1) DOE determines by rule, and supported group submitting a joint statement must amend the test procedure, as discussed by clear and convincing evidence, that a include larger concerns and small businesses further in the paragraphs that follow in this more-stringent standard would result in in the regulated industry/manufacturer section. significant additional conservation of energy community, energy advocates, energy (b) Identifying the need to modify test and is technologically feasible and utilities, as appropriate, consumers, and procedures. DOE will identify any necessary economically justified; or States. However, it will be necessary to modifications to established test procedures (2) The test procedure would not meet the evaluate the meaning of ‘‘fairly prior to initiating the standards development requirements for such test procedures representative’’ on a case-by-case basis, process. It will consider all stakeholder specified in EPCA. In such case, DOE must subject to the circumstances of a particular comments with respect to needed test adopt the more stringent standard not later rulemaking, to determine whether additional procedure modifications. If DOE determines than 30 months after the date of publication parties must be part of a joint statement in that it is appropriate to continue the test of the amendment to the ASHRAE/IES order to be ‘‘fairly representative of relevant procedure rulemaking after the early Standard 90.1 for the product. points of view.’’ assessment process, it would provide further (b) For ASHRAE equipment, DOE will (2) This paragraph (a)(2) describes the steps opportunities for early public input through adopt the revised ASHRAE levels or the DOE will follow with respect to a DFR. Federal Register documents, including industry test procedure, as contemplated by (i) DOE must determine the energy NODAs and/or RFIs. EPCA, except in very limited circumstances. conservation standard recommended in the (c) Adoption of Industry Test Methods. With respect to DOE’s consideration of joint proposal is in accordance with the DOE will adopt industry test standards as standards more-stringent than the ASHRAE requirements of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) or section DOE test procedures for covered products levels or changes to the industry test 342(a)(6)(B) as applicable. Because the DFR and equipment, unless such methodology procedure, DOE will do so only if it can meet provision is procedural, and not a separate would be unduly burdensome to conduct or a very high bar to demonstrate the ‘‘clear and grant of rulemaking authority, any standard would not produce test results that reflect the convincing evidence’’ threshold. Specifically, issued under the DFR process must comply energy efficiency, energy use, water use (as clear and convincing evidence would exist fully with the provisions of the EPCA specified in EPCA) or estimated operating only where the facts and data made available subsection under which the rule is costs of that equipment during a to DOE regarding a particular ASHRAE authorized. DOE will not accept or issue as representative average use cycle. amendment demonstrates that there is no a DFR a submitted joint proposal that does (d) Issuing final test procedure substantial doubt that the more stringent not comply with all applicable EPCA modification. Test procedure rulemakings standard would result in a significant requirements. establishing methodologies used to evaluate additional amount of energy savings over the (ii) Upon receipt of a joint statement proposed energy conservation standards will relevant ASHRAE level, is technologically recommending energy conservation be finalized at least 180 days prior to feasible and economically justified, or, in the standards, DOE will publish in the Federal publication of a NOPR proposing new or case of test procedures, that the industry test Register that statement, as submitted to DOE, amended energy conservation standards. procedure does not meet the EPCA in order to obtain feedback as to whether the (e) Effective Date of Test Procedures. If requirements. DOE will make this joint statement was submitted by a group that required only for the evaluation and issuance determination only after seeking data and is fairly representative of relevant points of of updated efficiency standards, use of the information from interested parties and the view. If DOE determines that the DFR was modified test procedures typically will not be public to help inform the Agency’s views. not submitted by a group that is fairly required until the implementation date of DOE will seek from interested stakeholders representative of relevant points of view, updated standards. and the public data and information to assist DOE will not move forward with a DFR and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3950 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

will consider whether any further rulemaking independent convenor will identify issues upon a negotiated rulemaking that does not activity is appropriate. If the Secretary that any negotiation would need to address, comply with all applicable EPCA determines that a DFR cannot be issued assess the full breadth of interested parties requirements, including those product- or based on the statement, the Secretary shall who should be included in any negotiated equipment-specific requirements included in publish a notice of the determination, rulemaking to address those issues, and make the provision that authorizes issuance of the together with an explanation of the reasons a judgment as to whether there is the standard. for the determination. potential for a group of individuals (iii) Simultaneous with the issuance of a negotiating in good faith to reach a consensus 12. Principles for Distinguishing Between DFR, DOE must also publish a NOPR agreement given the issues presented. DOE Effective and Compliance Dates containing the same energy conservation will have a neutral and independent (a) It is critical to recognize that for any standards as in the DFR. Following facilitator, who is not a DOE employee or given rule, the effective and compliance publication of the DFR, DOE must solicit consultant, present at all ASRAC working dates for either DOE test procedures or DOE public comment for a period of at least 110 group meetings. energy conservation standards are typically days; then, not later than 120 days after (3) DOE will base its decision to proceed not identical. These terms should not be used issuance of the DFR, the Secretary must with a potential negotiated rulemaking on the interchangeably. determine whether any adverse comments report of the convenor. The following (b) Effective date. The effective date is the ‘‘may provide a reasonable basis for additional factors militate in favor of a date a rule is legally operative after being withdrawing the direct final rule,’’ based on negotiated rulemaking: published in the Federal Register. the rulemaking record. If DOE determines (i) Stakeholders commented in favor of (c) Compliance date. (1) For test that one or more substantive comments negotiated rulemaking in response to the procedures, the compliance date is the objecting to the DFR provides a sufficient initial rulemaking notice; specific date when manufacturers are reason to withdraw the DFR, DOE will do so, (ii) The rulemaking analysis or underlying required to use the new or amended test and will instead proceed with the published technologies in question are complex, and procedure requirements to make NOPR (unless the information provided DOE can benefit from external expertise and/ representations concerning the energy suggests that withdrawal of that NOPR would or real-time changes to the analysis based on efficiency or use of a product, including likewise be appropriate). In making this stakeholder feedback, information, and data; certification that the covered product/ determination, DOE may consider comments (iii) The current standards have already equipment meets an applicable energy as adverse, even if the issue was brought up been amended one or more times; conservation standard. previously during DOE-initiated discussions (iv) Stakeholders from differing points of (2) For energy conservation standards, the (e.g. publication of a framework or RFI view are willing to participate; and compliance date is the specific date upon document), if the Department concludes that (v) DOE determines that the parties may be which manufacturers are required to meet the the comments merit further consideration. able to reach an agreement. new or amended standards for applicable (4) DOE will provide notice in the Federal covered products/equipment that are 11. Negotiated Rulemaking Process Register of its intent to form an ASRAC distributed in interstate commerce. (a)(1) In those instances where negotiated working group (including a request for rulemaking is determined to be appropriate, nominations to serve on the committee), 13. Principles for the Conduct of the DOE will comply with the requirements of announcement of the selection of working Engineering Analysis the Negotiated Rulemaking Act (NRA) (5 group members (including their affiliation), (a) The purpose of the engineering analysis U.S.C. 561–570) and the requirements of the and announcement of public meetings and is to develop the relationship between Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 the subject matter to be addressed. efficiency and cost of the subject product/ U.S.C. App. 2). To facilitate potential (b) DOE’s role in the negotiated rulemaking equipment. The Department will use the negotiated rulemakings, and to comply with process is to participate as a member of a most appropriate means available to the requirements of the NRA and the FACA, group attempting to develop a consensus determine the efficiency/cost relationship, DOE established the Appliance Standards proposal for energy conservation standards including an overall system approach or and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee for a particular product/equipment and to engineering modeling to predict the (ASRAC). Working groups can be established provide technical/analytical advice to the improvement in efficiency that can be as subcommittees of ASRAC, from time to negotiating parties and legal input where expected from individual design options as time, and for specific products/equipment, needed to support the development of a discussed in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this with one member representative from the potential consensus recommendation in the section. From this efficiency/cost ASRAC committee attending and form of a term sheet. relationship, measures such as payback, life- participating in the meetings of a specific (c) A negotiated rulemaking may be used cycle cost, and energy savings can be working group. (Consistent with 5 U.S.C. to develop energy conservation standards, developed. The Department will identify 565(b), committee membership is limited to test procedures, product coverage, and other issues that will be examined in the 25 members, unless the agency determines categories of rulemaking activities. engineering analysis and the types of that more members are necessary for the (d) A dedicated portion of each ASRAC specialized expertise that may be required. functioning of the committee or to achieve working group meeting will be set aside to DOE will select appropriate contractors, balanced membership.) Ultimately, the receive input and data from non-members of subcontractors, and expert consultants, as working group reports to ASRAC, and the ASRAC working group. This additional necessary, to perform the engineering ASRAC itself votes on whether to make a opportunity for input does nothing to analysis and the impact analysis. Also, the recommendation to DOE to adopt a diminish stakeholders’ ability to provide Department will consider data, information, consensus agreement developed through the comments and ask relevant questions during and analyses received from interested parties negotiated rulemaking. the course of the working group’s ongoing for use in the analysis wherever feasible. (2) DOE will use the negotiated rulemaking deliberations at the public meeting. (b) The engineering analysis begins with process, on a case-by-case basis and, in (e) If DOE determines to proceed with a the list of design options developed in appropriate circumstances, in an attempt to rulemaking at the conclusion of negotiations, consultation with the interested parties as a develop a consensus proposal before issuing DOE will publish a proposed rule. DOE will result of the screening process. The a proposed rule. When approached by one or consider the approved term sheet in Department will establish the likely cost and more stakeholders or on its own initiative, developing such proposed rule. A negotiated performance improvement of each design DOE will use a convener to ascertain, in rulemaking in which DOE participates under option. Ranges and uncertainties of cost and consultation with relevant stakeholders, the ASRAC process will not result in the performance will be established, although whether the development of the subject issuance of a DFR. Further, any potential efforts will be made to minimize matter of a potential rulemaking proceeding term sheet upon which an ASRAC working uncertainties by using measures such as test would be conducive to negotiated group reaches consensus must comply with data or component or material supplier rulemaking, with the agency evaluating the all of the provisions of EPCA under which information where available. Estimated convener’s recommendation before reaching the rule is authorized. DOE cannot accept uncertainties will be carried forward in a decision on such matter. A neutral, recommendations or issue a NOPR based subsequent analyses. The use of quantitative

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3951

models will be supplemented by qualitative investment/conversion costs for the full manufacturer impacts of a particular assessments as appropriate. range of product/equipment models. standard, and establishing compliance dates (c) The next step includes identifying, (2) Range of uncertainties in estimates of for a new or revised standard that, consistent modifying, or developing any engineering average cost, considering alternative designs with any statutory requirements, are models necessary to predict the efficiency and technologies which may vary cost appropriately coordinated with other impact of any one or combination of design impacts and changes in costs of material, regulatory actions to mitigate any cumulative options on the product/equipment. A base labor, and other inputs which may vary costs. burden. case configuration or starting point will be (3) Variable cost impacts on particular (2) If the Department determines that a established, as well as the order and types of manufacturers, considering factors proposed standard would impose a combination/blending of the design options such as atypical sunk costs or characteristics significant impact on product or equipment to be evaluated. DOE will then perform the of specific models which may increase or manufacturers within approximately three engineering analysis and develop the cost- decrease costs. years of the compliance date of another DOE efficiency curve for the product/equipment. (e) Impacts on product/equipment sales, standard that imposes significant impacts on The cost efficiency curve and any necessary features, prices, and cost recovery. In order the same manufacturers (or divisions thereof, models will be available to stakeholders to make manufacturer cash-flow calculations, as appropriate), the Department will, in during the pre-NOPR stage of the rulemaking. it is necessary to predict the number of addition to evaluating the impact on products/equipment sold and their sale price. manufacturers of the proposed standard, 14. Principles for the Analysis of Impacts on This requires an assessment of the likely assess the joint impacts of both standards on Manufacturers impacts of price changes on the number of manufacturers. (a) Purpose. The purpose of the products/equipment sold and on typical (3) If the Department is directed to manufacturer analysis is to identify the likely features of models sold. Past analyses have establish or revise standards for products/ private impacts of efficiency standards on relied on price and shipment data generated equipment that are components of other manufacturers. The Department will analyze by economic models. The Department will products/equipment subject to standards, the the impact of standards on manufacturers develop additional estimates of prices and Department will consider the interaction with substantial input from manufacturers shipments by drawing on multiple sources of between such standards in setting and other interested parties. This section data and experience including: Actual rulemaking priorities and assessing describes the principles that will be used in shipment and pricing experience; data from manufacturer impacts of a particular conducting future manufacturing impact manufacturers, retailers, and other market standard. The Department will assess, as part analyses. experts; financial models, and sensitivity of the engineering and impact analyses, the (b) Issue identification. In the impact analyses. The possible impacts of candidate/ cost of components subject to efficiency analysis stage (section 5(d)), the Department trial standard levels on consumer choices standards. will identify issues that will require greater among competing fuels will be explicitly (h) Summary of quantitative and consideration in the detailed manufacturer considered where relevant. qualitative assessments. The summary of impact analysis. Possible issues may include (f) Measures of impact. The manufacturer quantitative and qualitative assessments will identification of specific types or groups of impact analysis will estimate the impacts of contain a description and discussion of manufacturers and concerns over access to candidate/trial standard levels on the net uncertainties. Alternative estimates of technology. Specialized contractor expertise, cash flow of manufacturers. Computations impacts, resulting from the different potential empirical data requirements, and analytical will be performed for the industry as a whole scenarios developed throughout the analysis, tools required to perform the manufacturer and for typical and atypical manufacturers. will be explicitly presented in the final impact analysis also would be identified at The exact nature and the process by which analysis results. this stage. the analysis will be conducted will be (1) Key modeling and analytical tools. In (c) Industry characterization. Prior to determined by DOE, with input from its assessment of the likely impacts of initiating detailed impact studies, the interested parties, as appropriate. Impacts to standards on manufacturers, the Department Department will seek input on the present be analyzed include: will use models that are clear and and past industry structure and market (1) Industry net present value, with understandable, feature accessible characteristics. Input on the following issues sensitivity analyses based on uncertainty of calculations, and have clearly explained will be sought: costs, sales prices, and sales volumes; assumptions. As a starting point, the (1) Manufacturers and their current and (2) Cash flows, by year; and Department will use the Government historical relative market shares; (3) Other measures of impact, such as Regulatory Impact Model (GRIM). The (2) Manufacturer characteristics, such as revenue, net income, and return on equity, as Department will also support the whether manufacturers make a full line of appropriate. development of economic models for price models or serve a niche market; DOE also notes that the characteristics of and volume forecasting. Research required to (3) Trends in the number of manufacturers; a typical manufacturers worthy of special update key economic data will be (4) Financial situation of manufacturers; consideration will be determined in considered. (5) Trends in product/equipment consultation with manufacturers and other (2) Reserved. characteristics and retail markets including interested parties and may include: manufacturer market shares and market Manufacturers incurring higher or lower than 15. Principles for the Analysis of Impacts on concentration; and average costs; and manufacturers Consumers (6) Identification of other relevant experiencing greater or fewer adverse (a) Early consideration of impacts on regulatory actions and a description of the impacts on sales. Alternative scenarios based consumer utility. The Department will nature and timing of any likely impacts. on other methods of estimating cost or sales consider at the earliest stages of the (d) Cost impacts on manufacturers. The impacts also will be performed, as needed. development of a standard whether costs of labor, material, engineering, tooling, (g) Cumulative Impacts of Other Federal particular design options will lessen the and capital are difficult to estimate, Regulatory Actions. (1) The Department will utility of the covered products/equipment to manufacturer-specific, and usually recognize and seek to mitigate the the consumer. See paragraph (c) of section 6. proprietary. The Department will seek input overlapping effects on manufacturers of new (b) Impacts on product/equipment from interested parties on the treatment of or revised DOE standards and other availability. The Department will determine, cost issues. Manufacturers will be regulatory actions affecting the same based on consideration of information encouraged to offer suggestions as to possible products or equipment. DOE will analyze submitted during the standard development sources of data and appropriate data and consider the impact on manufacturers of process, whether a proposed standard is collection methodologies. Costing issues to multiple product/equipment-specific likely to result in the unavailability of any be addressed include: regulatory actions. These factors will be covered product/equipment type with (1) Estimates of total private cost impacts, considered in setting rulemaking priorities, performance characteristics (including including product/equipment-specific costs conducting the early assessment as to reliability), features, sizes, capacities, and (based on cost impacts estimated for the whether DOE should proceed with a volumes that are substantially the same as engineering analysis) and front-end standards rulemaking, assessing products/equipment generally available in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 3952 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules

the U.S. at the time. DOE will not promulgate will be used in assessing the likely manufacturer impacts, DOE typically uses a a standard if it concludes that it would result incremental impacts of establishing or range of real discount rates which are in such unavailability. revising standards, in assessing—where representative of the real rates of return (c) Department of Justice review. As possible—appropriate compliance dates for experienced by typical U.S. manufacturers required by law, the Department will solicit new or revised standards, and in considering affected by the program. the views of the Department of Justice on any DOE support of non-regulatory initiatives. (g) Social Discount Rates. Social discount lessening of competition likely to result from 17. Cross-Cutting Analytical Assumptions rates as specified in OMB Circular A–4 will the imposition of a proposed standard and be used in assessing social effects such as will give the views provided full In selecting values for certain cross-cutting costs and benefits. consideration in assessing economic analytical assumptions, DOE expects to (h) Environmental impacts. (1) DOE justification of a proposed standard. In continue relying upon the following sources addition, DOE may consult with the and general principles: calculates emission reductions of carbon Department of Justice at earlier stages in the (a) Underlying economic assumptions. The dioxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, standards development process to seek its appliance standards analyses will generally methane, nitrous oxides, and mercury likely preliminary views on competitive impacts. use the same economic growth and to be avoided by candidate/trial standard (d) Variation in consumer impacts. The development assumptions that underlie the levels based on an emissions analysis that Department will use regional analysis and most current Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) includes the two components described in sensitivity analysis tools, as appropriate, to published by the Energy Information paragraphs (h)(2) and (h)(3) of this section. evaluate the potential distribution of impacts Administration (EIA). (2) The first component estimates the effect of candidate/trial standard levels among (b) Analytic time length. The appliance of potential candidate/trial standard levels on different subgroups of consumers. The standards analyses will use two time power sector and site combustion emissions Department will consider impacts on lengths—30 years and another time length of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur significant segments of consumers in that is specific to the standard being dioxide, mercury, methane, and nitrous determining standards levels. Where there considered such as the useful lifetime of the oxide. DOE develops the power sector are significant negative impacts on product under consideration. As a sensitivity emissions analysis using a methodology identifiable subgroups, DOE will consider the case, the analyses will also use a 9-year based on DOE’s latest Annual Energy efficacy of voluntary approaches as a means regulatory time line in analyzing the effects Outlook. For site combustion of natural gas to achieve potential energy savings. of the standard. or petroleum fuels, the combustion emissions (e) Payback period and first cost. (1) In the (c) Energy price and demand trends. of carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides are Analyses of the likely impact of appliance assessment of consumer impacts of estimated using emission intensity factors standards on typical users will generally standards, the Department will consider Life- from the Environmental Protection Agency. Cycle Cost, Payback Period, and Cost of adopt the mid-range energy price and (3) The second component of DOE’s Conserved Energy to evaluate the savings in demand scenario of the EIA’s most current emissions analysis estimates the effect of operating expenses relative to increases in AEO. The sensitivity of such estimated potential candidate/trial standard levels on purchase price. The Department also impacts to possible variations in future performs sensitivity and scenario analyses energy prices are likely to be examined using emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, when appropriate. The results of these the EIA’s high and low energy price sulfur dioxide, mercury, methane, and analyses will be carried throughout the scenarios. nitrous oxide due to ‘‘upstream activities’’ in analysis and the ensuing uncertainty (d) Product/equipment-specific energy- the fuel production chain. These upstream described. efficiency trends, without updated standards. activities include the emissions related to (2) If, in the analysis of consumer impacts, Product/equipment-specific energy-efficiency extracting, processing, and transporting fuels the Department determines that a candidate/ trends will be based on a combination of the to the site of combustion as detailed in DOE’s trial standard level would result in a efficiency trends forecast by the EIA’s Fuel-Fuel-Cycle Statement of Policy (76 FR substantial increase in product/equipment residential and commercial demand model of 51281 (August 18, 2011)). DOE will consider first costs to consumers or would not pay the National Energy Modeling System the effects of the candidate/trial standard back such additional first costs through (NEMS) and product-specific assessments by levels on these emissions after assessing the energy cost savings in less than three years, DOE and its contractors with input from seven factors required to demonstrate Department will assess the likely impacts of interested parties. economic justification under EPCA. such a standard on low-income households, (e) Price forecasting. DOE will endeavor to Consistent with Executive Order 13783, product/equipment sales and fuel switching, use robust price forecasting techniques in dated March 28, 2017, when monetizing the projecting future prices of products. as appropriate. value of changes in reductions in CO2 and (f) Private Discount rates. For residential nitrous oxides emissions resulting from its 16. Consideration of Non-Regulatory and commercial consumers, ranges of three energy conservation standards regulations, Approaches different real discount rates will be used. For including with respect to the consideration of The Department recognizes that non- residential consumers, the mid-range regulatory efforts by manufacturers, utilities, discount rate will represent DOE’s domestic versus international impacts and and other interested parties can result in approximation of the average financing cost the consideration of appropriate discount substantial efficiency improvements. The (or opportunity costs of reduced savings) rates, DOE ensures, to the extent permitted Department intends to consider the likely experienced by typical consumers. by law, that any such estimates are consistent effects of non-regulatory initiatives on Sensitivity analyses will be performed using with the guidance contained in OMB Circular product/equipment energy use, consumer discount rates reflecting the costs more likely A–4 of September 17, 2003 (Regulatory utility and life-cycle costs, manufacturers, to be experienced by residential consumers Analysis). competition, utilities, and the environment, with little or no savings and credit card as well as the distribution of these impacts financing and consumers with substantial PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY among different regions, consumers, savings. For commercial users, a mid-range PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN manufacturers, and utilities. DOE will discount rate reflecting DOE’s approximation COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL attempt to base its assessment on the actual of the average real rate of return on EQUIPMENT impacts of such initiatives to date, but also commercial investment will be used, with will consider information presented sensitivity analyses being performed using ■ 3. The authority citation for part 431 regarding the impacts that any existing values indicative of the range of real rates of continues to read as follows: initiative might have in the future. Such return likely to be experienced by typical information is likely to include a commercial businesses. For national net Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C. demonstration of the strong commitment of present value calculations, DOE would use 2461 note. manufacturers, distribution channels, the Administration’s approximation of the utilities, or others to such non-regulatory average real rate of return on private ■ 4. Section 431.4 is added to subpart A efficiency improvements. This information investment in the U.S. economy. For to read as follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules 3953

§ 431.4 Procedures, interpretations, and revised energy conservation standards procedures considered for adoption policies for consideration of new or revised and test procedures set forth in under this part. energy conservation standards and test appendix A to subpart C of part 430 of procedures for commercial/industrial [FR Doc. 2019–01854 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am] equipment. this chapter shall apply to the BILLING CODE 6450–01–P consideration of new or revised energy The procedures, interpretations, and conservation standards and test policies for consideration of new or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\13FEP3.SGM 13FEP3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Vol. 84 Wednesday, No. 30 February 13, 2019

Part IV

The President

Memorandum of December 21, 2018—Delegation of Functions and Authorities Under Section 1238 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 Memorandum of December 21, 2018—Delegation of Functions and Authorities Under Section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 Memorandum of January 8, 2019—Decision on the United States Consulate General in Jerusalem Memorandum of January 15, 2019—Delegation of Functions and Authorities Under the Hizballah International Financing Prevention Act of 2015, as Amended, and the Hizballah International Financing Prevention Amendments Act of 2018 Proclamation 9843—Death of John David Dingell, Jr.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\13FEO0.SGM 13FEO0 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRESDOC VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\13FEO0.SGM 13FEO0 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRESDOC 3957

Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 84, No. 30

Wednesday, February 13, 2019

Title 3— Memorandum of December 21, 2018

The President Delegation of Functions and Authorities Under Section 1238 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018

Memorandum for the Secretary of State [and] the Secretary of Homeland Security

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I hereby: (1) delegate to the Secretary of State the functions and authorities vested in the President by sections 1238(a)(1)(A)–(B) of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (Public Law 115–254); and (2) delegate to the Secretary of Homeland Security the functions and authori- ties vested in the President by sections 1238(a)(1)(C)–(H) of the FAA Reau- thorization Act of 2018. The delegations in this memorandum shall apply to any provisions of any future public law that are the same or substantially the same as the provisions referenced in this memorandum. The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security may redelegate within their departments the functions and authorities delegated by this memorandum to the extent authorized by law. The Secretary of State is authorized and directed to publish this memo- randum in the Federal Register.

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, December 21, 2018

[FR Doc. 2019–02455 Filed 2–12–19; 11:15 am] Billing code 4710–10–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\13FEO0.SGM 13FEO0 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRESDOC Trump.EPS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Presidential Documents 3959 Presidential Documents

Memorandum of December 21, 2018

Delegation of Functions and Authorities Under Section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019

Memorandum for the Secretary of State[,] the Secretary of Defense[, and] the Secretary of Energy

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I hereby: (a) delegate to the Secretary of State, in coordination with departments and agencies through the National Security Presidential Memorandum–4 process, the functions and authorities vested in the President by sections 1245(a)(1) and 1245(a)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232); and (b) delegate to the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with departments and agencies through the National Security Presidential Memorandum–4 process, the functions and authorities vested in the President by section 1245(a)(3) of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2019. The delegations in this memorandum shall apply to any provisions of any future public law that are the same or substantially the same as the provisions referenced in this memorandum. The Secretary of State is authorized and directed to publish this memo- randum in the Federal Register.

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, December 21, 2018

[FR Doc. 2019–02456 Filed 2–12–19; 11:15 am] Billing code 4710–10–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:03 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\13FEO1.SGM 13FEO1 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRESDOC2 Trump.EPS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Presidential Documents 3961 Presidential Documents

Memorandum of January 8, 2019

Decision on the United States Consulate General in Jerusalem

Memorandum for the Secretary of State

Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and after carefully considering the rec- ommendation of the Secretary of State, I hereby authorize you to take the steps necessary to close the United States Consulate General in Jerusalem and to merge its functions into the United States Embassy to Israel.

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, January 8, 2019

[FR Doc. 2019–02461 Filed 2–12–19; 11:15 am] Billing code 3295–F9–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\13FEO2.SGM 13FEO2 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRESDOC3 Trump.EPS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Presidential Documents 3963 Presidential Documents

Memorandum of January 15, 2019

Delegation of Functions and Authorities Under the Hizballah International Financing Prevention Act of 2015, as Amended, and the Hizballah International Financing Prevention Amendments Act of 2018

Memorandum for the Secretary of State[,] the Secretary of the Treasury[, and] the Director of National Intelligence

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I hereby: (a) delegate to the Secretary of State the functions and authorities vested in the President by sections 101(b)(2), 101(c), 102(b), 103(b–c), and 201(c) of the Hizballah International Financing Prevention Act of 2015 (Public Law 114–102) (HIFPA), as amended by the Hizballah International Financing Prevention Amendments Act of 2018 (Public Law 115–272) (HIFPAA); (b) delegate to the Secretary of the Treasury the functions and authorities vested in the President by sections 101(a), 101(b)(1), 102(a), 102(c), 103(a), 201(a–b), 204(b), and 302 of HIFPA, as amended by HIFPAA, as well as section 301 of HIFPAA; and (c) delegate to the Director of National Intelligence the functions and authorities vested in the President by sections 202 and 204(a, c–d) of HIFPA, as amended by HIFPAA. The functions and authorities delegated by this memorandum shall be exer- cised in coordination with departments and agencies through the National Security Presidential Memorandum–4 process.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:43 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\13FEO3.SGM 13FEO3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRESDOC4 3964 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Presidential Documents

This memorandum rescinds and replaces any prior delegations of authority to the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of State, and the Director of National Intelligence under the HIFPA. Any reference in this memorandum to HIFPA or HIFPAA shall be deemed to be a reference to any future Act that is the same or substantially the same as such provision. The Secretary of State is authorized and directed to publish this memo- randum in the Federal Register.

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, January 15, 2019

[FR Doc. 2019–02467 Filed 2–12–19; 11:15 am] Billing code 4710–10–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:43 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\13FEO3.SGM 13FEO3 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRESDOC4 Trump.EPS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Presidential Documents 3965 Presidential Documents

Proclamation 9843 of February 8, 2019

Death of John David Dingell, Jr.

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation As a mark of respect for the memory and longstanding service of former Representative John David Dingell, Jr., of Michigan—the longest-serving Mem- ber of Congress in our Nation’s history—I hereby order, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, that the flag of the United States shall be flown at half-staff at the White House and upon all public buildings and grounds, at all military posts and naval stations, and on all naval vessels of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia and throughout the United States and its Territories and possessions until sunset, February 9, 2019. I also direct that the flag shall be flown at half-staff for the same period at all United States embassies, legations, consular offices, and other facilities abroad, including all military facilities and naval vessels and stations. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this eighth day of February, in the year of our Lord two thousand nineteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty- third.

[FR Doc. 2019–02478 Filed 2–12–19; 11:15 am] Billing code 3295–F9–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:43 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\13FED0.SGM 13FED0 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRESDOC5 Trump.EPS i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 30 Wednesday, February 13, 2019

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING FEBRUARY

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. 52...... 2069 Presidential Documents 3 CFR 100...... 2069 Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 Executive Orders: 430...... 3120, 3910 The United States Government Manual 741–6000 13788 (Amended by 431...... 1652, 3910 13858) ...... 2039 Other Services 13858...... 2039 11 CFR Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741–6020 9843...... 3965 Proposed Rules: Privacy Act Compilation 741–6050 Proclamations: 100...... 2070 9840...... 2043 110...... 3344 9841...... 2045 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 112...... 2071 9842 (See Proc. 12 CFR World Wide Web 9822) ...... 3665 9843...... 3965 263...... 2051 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications Administrative Orders 303...... 2705 is located at: www.govinfo.gov. Memorandums: 327...... 1346 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public Memorandum of 337...... 1346 Inspection List and electronic text are located at: December 21, 348...... 2705 622...... 1354 www.federalregister.gov. 2018 ...... 3957 Memorandum of 652...... 2706 E-mail December 21, 700...... 1601 2018 ...... 3959 701...... 1601 FEDREGTOC (Daily Federal Register Table of Contents Electronic 702...... 1601 Mailing List) is an open e-mail service that provides subscribers Memorandum of January 8, 2019 ...... 3961 703...... 1601 with a digital form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The 704...... 1601 digital form of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes Memorandum of January 15, 2019 ...... 3963 705...... 1601 HTML and PDF links to the full text of each document. 708a...... 1601 To join or leave, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/ 5 CFR 708b...... 1601 USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your email address, then 894...... 1599 709...... 1601 follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your 1655...... 1600 710...... 1601 subscription. 715...... 1601 Proposed Rules: 717...... 1601 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 532...... 3729 723...... 1601 service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 7 CFR 725...... 1601 To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 741...... 1601 51...... 959 and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow 745...... 1601 300...... 2427 the instructions. 746...... 1601 301...... 2427 747...... 1601, 2052 FEDREGTOC and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 318...... 2427 748...... 1601 respond to specific inquiries. 319...... 2427 749...... 1601 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 330...... 2427 750...... 1601 Federal Register system to: [email protected] 340...... 2427 760...... 1601 355...... 2427 790...... 1601 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 905...... 2047 regulations. 791...... 1601 989...... 2049 792...... 1601 1212...... 1343 1026...... 1356 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, FEBRUARY 1774...... 3669 1411...... 2437 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 959–1342...... 1 54...... 1641 1...... 3062 1343–1598...... 4 273...... 980 3...... 3062 1599–2042...... 5 1209...... 3114 5...... 3062 2043–2426...... 6 6...... 3062 9 CFR 2427–2704...... 7 23...... 3062 2705–3094...... 8 310...... 2430 24...... 3062 32...... 3062 3095–3284...... 11 10 CFR 3285–3668...... 12 34...... 3062 2...... 2433 3669–3966...... 13 44...... 2778 9...... 3095 46...... 3345 13...... 2433 160...... 3062 430...... 2436 192...... 3062 Proposed Rules: 206...... 3062 34...... 3116 208...... 3062 36...... 3116 211...... 3062 39...... 3116 215...... 3062 50...... 2069 217...... 3062

VerDate Sep 11 2014 21:13 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\13FECU.LOC 13FECU amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with FRONT MATTER CU ii Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Reader Aids

223...... 3062 Proposed Rules: 202...... 3693, 3698 44 CFR 225...... 3062 404...... 1006 203...... 3699 64...... 978, 3338 238...... 3062 416...... 1006 385...... 1918 248...... 2778 Proposed Rules: 21 CFR 251...... 3062 201...... 1661 45 CFR 303...... 3062 1308...... 2448 1149...... 1402 324...... 3062 38 CFR 1158...... 1402 337...... 2366, 3062 22 CFR 1607...... 1404 3...... 2449 347...... 3062 Proposed Rules: 1611...... 1408 8...... 2449 351...... 2778 171...... 1419 362...... 3062 14...... 2449 203...... 3351 46 CFR 365...... 1653, 3062 19...... 2449 390...... 1653, 3062 23 CFR 20...... 2449 506...... 2459 21...... 2449 1270...... 2731 Proposed Rules: 14 CFR 1275...... 2731 Proposed Rules: 515...... 2125 4...... 1678, 3354 39 ...... 2437, 2707, 2709, 2713, Proposed Rules: 38...... 2093 2715, 3285, 3288, 3290, 658...... 2071 47 CFR 3297 39...... 2093 48...... 3669 25 CFR 0...... 2753 71 ...... 961, 2718, 3095, 3097, 39 CFR 1 ...... 1618, 2460, 2461, 2753 Proposed Rules: 5...... 2753 3098, 3101, 3673, 3674, 20...... 3107 30...... 3135 25...... 2462 3676, 3677, 3679 3035...... 974 30...... 1618 73...... 3299 26 CFR Proposed Rules 95...... 963 64...... 1409 1...... 1838, 2952 3020...... 1420 97 ...... 2441, 2443, 2719, 2720 73...... 2753 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 74...... 2753 1...... 1014, 3015 40 CFR 13...... 3614 Proposed Rules: 19...... 2056 1...... 2485 39 ...... 2465, 2467, 2791, 2793, 27 CFR 2796, 3131 52 ...... 976, 1610, 1615, 2060, 25...... 2126 71...... 3349, 3730 Proposed Rules: 2063, 2449, 2738, 3302, 32...... 2132 107...... 3732, 3856 9...... 3353 3305, 3701, 3703, 3705, 54...... 2132 3708, 3711 65...... 2132 29 CFR 15 CFR 60...... 3108 73...... 2485 6...... 2445 30...... 3301 61...... 3108 Proposed Rules: 62...... 3712 902...... 2725 48 CFR 950...... 3101 1404...... 1420 63 ...... 2742, 3108, 3308 4001...... 2075 70...... 1615, 3108 501...... 1410, 3714 16 CFR 4204...... 2075 80...... 2453 511...... 3714 517...... 3714 Proposed Rules: 4206...... 2075 122...... 3324 519...... 1410 Ch. II ...... 3134 4207...... 2075 124...... 3324 4211...... 2075 125...... 3324 532...... 3714 17 CFR 4219...... 2075 180...... 2456 536...... 3714 543...... 3714 143...... 3103 Proposed Rules: 31 CFR 546...... 3714 229...... 2402 Ch. I ...... 3396 240...... 2402 27...... 3105 49...... 1690 552...... 1410, 3714 5215...... 3112 Proposed Rules: 52 ...... 1015, 1016, 1021, 1025, 32 CFR 5242...... 3113 Ch. I ...... 3350 1037, 1690, 2109, 2801, 5252...... 3113 9...... 3350 75...... 3681 3354, 3358, 3369, 3373, 36...... 3350 100...... 968 3376, 3381, 3384, 3387, Proposed Rules: 37...... 3350 101...... 968 3389, 3740, 3742, 3744 806...... 1014 38...... 3350 279...... 969 60...... 2484, 2485 39...... 3350 809a...... 2734 62...... 1039 49 CFR 63...... 1570, 2670 43...... 3350 Proposed Rules: 75...... 2778 33 CFR 110...... 2483 112...... 2483 10...... 2137 255...... 2778 100...... 3301 563...... 2804 270...... 1286 117...... 1401, 2735 116...... 2483 117...... 2483 1002...... 1046 274...... 1286 165...... 969, 2736 1312...... 1046 Proposed Rules: 122...... 2483 18 CFR 154...... 2799 131...... 3395 11...... 1359 155...... 2800 174...... 2115 50 CFR 250...... 966 165...... 2479 180...... 1691, 2115 622 ...... 1631, 2759, 3723 385...... 966 328...... 2483 232...... 2483 635...... 3724 Proposed Rules: 334...... 3739 300 ...... 2116, 2122, 2483 648 ...... 1632, 2463, 2760, 3341 7...... 2469 302...... 2483 665...... 2767 35...... 993 34 CFR 401...... 2483 679 .....2067, 2068, 2723, 2776, 141...... 1412 36...... 971 3342, 3726, 3727 385...... 1412 668...... 971 42 CFR 680...... 2723 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 20 CFR 37 CFR 493...... 1536 217...... 3136 30...... 3026 201...... 3693 1001...... 2340 300...... 3403

VerDate Sep 11 2014 21:13 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\13FECU.LOC 13FECU amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with FRONT MATTER CU Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Reader Aids iii

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 February 1, 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 20:29 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\13FECU.LOC 13FECU amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with FRONT MATTER CU