Vol. 81 Friday, No. 5 January 8, 2016

Pages 869–1114

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER

VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:57 Jan 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\08JAWS.LOC 08JAWS asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER II Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016

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, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions: Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Email [email protected] Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the Phone 202–741–6000 issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents currently on file for public inspection, see www.ofr.gov. The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. It is also available online at no charge at www.fdsys.gov, a service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office. The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the 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 59, 1 (January 2, 1994) 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 $749 plus postage, or $808, plus postage, 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 $165, 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: 81 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 19:57 Jan 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\08JAWS.LOC 08JAWS asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 81, No. 5

Friday, January 8, 2016

Agriculture Department Federal Aviation Administration See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service RULES Airworthiness Directives: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service The Boeing Company Airplanes, 869 NOTICES NOTICES Petition for Determination of Nonregulated Status: Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Scotts Co. and Monsanto Co.; Creeping Bentgrass Proposed Airport, Angoon, AK, 991 Genetically Engineered for Resistance to Glyphosate, Meetings: 902–903 RTCA Special Committee 214/EUROCAE WG–78: Standards for Air Traffic Data Communication Services, 990 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Federal Emergency Management Agency Meetings: NOTICES Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance, 943 Special Emphasis Panel; Initial Review, 937 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board NOTICES NOTICES Combined Filings, 928–930, 932–934 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 903 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Comanche Trail Pipeline, LLC; San Elizario Crossing Commerce Department Project, 935 See International Trade Administration Trans-Pecos Pipeline, LLC; Presidio Border Crossing See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Project, 925–926 Filings: City of Anaheim, CA, 927–928 Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or City of Colton, CA, 925 Severely Disabled Heartland Consumers Power District, 933 NOTICES Martha Coakley, Massachusetts Attorney General, et al. v. Procurement List; Additions and Deletions, 915–917 Bangor Hydro-Electric Co., et al., 931 Martha Coakley, Massachusetts Attorney General, et al. vs Defense Department Bangor Hydro-Electric Co., et al., 928, 931–932 NOTICES Martha Coakley, Massachusetts Attorney General; Arms Sales, 917–924 Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority; et Meetings: al. vs. Bangor Hydro-Electric Co.; Central Maine National Defense University Board of Visitors, 922 Power Co.; et al., 927 Missouri Joint Municipal Electric Utility Commission, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 927 NOTICES Hydroelectric Applications: Meetings; Sunshine Act, 924 Public Service Co. of New Hampshire, 930–931 Preliminary Permit Applications: Education Department Water District No.1 of Johnson County, KS, 926 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Federal Reserve System Submissions, and Approvals: NOTICES Loan Cancellation in the Federal Perkins Loan Program, Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank 924–925 Holding Companies, 936–937 Fish and Wildlife Service Energy Department PROPOSED RULES See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: RULES 12-Month Finding on a Petition to Downlist the West Energy Conservation Program: Indian Manatee, and Proposed Rule to Reclassify the Energy Conservation Standards for Refrigerated Bottled or West Indian Manatee as Threatened, 1000–1026 Canned Beverage Vending Machines, 1028–1113 Non-subsistence Take of Wildlife, and Public Participation and Closure Procedures, on National Wildlife Refuges Environmental Protection Agency in Alaska, 886–897 NOTICES NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.; Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Availability, 936 Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge and Wallops Meetings: Island National Wildlife Refuge, Accomack County, Great Lakes Advisory Board, 935–936 VA, 947–948

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:16 Jan 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\08JACN.SGM 08JACN asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER IV Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Contents

Food and Drug Administration Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People’s Republic NOTICES of China, 903–907 Guidance: Over-the-Counter Sunscreens—Safety and Effectiveness Labor Department Data, 940–941 NOTICES Use of Nucleic Acid Tests to Reduce the Risk of Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Transmission of Hepatitis B Virus from Donors of Submissions, and Approvals: Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Agreement Approval Process for Use of Functional Products, 937–938 Affirmative Action Programs, 970–971 Meetings: VETS’ Competitive Grant Programs Reporting, 970 Gastroenterology and Urology Devices Panel of the Requests for Information: Medical Devices Advisory Committee, 938–940 Department of Labor Research and Evaluation Plan for 2016, 967–970 General Services Administration PROPOSED RULES Land Management Bureau Federal Travel Regulation: NOTICES Incidental Expenses Definition and the Laundry, Meetings: Cleaning, and Pressing of Clothing Policy, 883–884 Las Cruces District Resource Advisory Council, NM, 961– 962 Health and Human Services Department Wyoming Resource Advisory Council, 961 See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Food and Drug Administration Management and Budget Office See National Institutes of Health NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Final Sequestration Report to the President and Congress National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: for Fiscal Year 2016, 971–972 Revisions to the Vaccine Injury Table, 884–885 National Institutes of Health Homeland Security Department NOTICES See Federal Emergency Management Agency Meetings: See Transportation Security Administration Center for Scientific Review, 942–943 National Institute of Mental Health, 941–942 Housing and Urban Development Department National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 942 PROPOSED RULES Meetings: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Negotiated Rulemaking Committee Native American PROPOSED RULES Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: 1996:, 881–882 Bycatch Management in the Bering Sea Pollock Fishery, NOTICES 897–901 Federal Property Suitable as Facilities to Assist the Review of Monitor National Marine Sanctuary Boundary, Homeless, 945–947 879–881 NOTICES Indian Affairs Bureau Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, NOTICES Submissions, and Approvals, 910 Proclaiming Certain Lands as Reservation for the Mashpee Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Wampanoag, 948–961 Submissions, and Approvals: Fisheries Certificate of Origin, 914–915 Interior Department Socioeconomics of Commercial Fishers and For Hire See Fish and Wildlife Service Diving and Fishing Operations in the Flower Garden See Indian Affairs Bureau Banks National Marine Sanctuary, 910–911 See Land Management Bureau Meetings: See National Park Service Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 911–912 See Reclamation Bureau New England Fishery Management Council, 912–913 See Special Trustee for American Indians Office South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 913–914 Internal Revenue Service National Park Service PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Substantiation Requirement for Certain Contributions; Charter Renewals: Withdrawal, 882–883 National Park System Advisory Board, 962 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: International Trade Administration Glen Canyon Dam, Page, AZ; Long-Term Experimental NOTICES and Management Plan for Operation; Meetings, 963– Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, 966 or Reviews: National Register of Historic Places; Pending Nominations Coated Paper Suitable for High-Quality Print Graphics and Related Actions, 962–963 Using Sheet-Fed Presses from Indonesia and the People’s Republic of China, 907–908 National Science Foundation Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not NOTICES Assembled Into Modules, from the People’s Republic Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, of China, 908–910 Submissions, and Approvals, 972

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:16 Jan 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\08JACN.SGM 08JACN asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Contents V

Antarctic Conservation Act Permit Applications, 972–973 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 991–992 Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Transportation Department Meetings; Sunshine Act, 973 See Federal Aviation Administration Requests to Amend a License to Import Radioactive Waste, See Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 973–974 Administration See Surface Transportation Board Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Pipeline Safety: Submissions, and Approvals, 992–995 Liquid Pipeline Advisory Committee Meeting, 885–886 Transportation Security Administration Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES RULES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Procedures Related to Commission Views, 869–878 Submissions, and Approvals: NOTICES Airspace Waiver Program, 945 New Postal Products, 974–978 Enhanced Security Procedures at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, 943–944 Postal Service Office of Law Enforcement/Federal Air Marshal Service NOTICES Mental Health Certification, 944–945 Product Changes: First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Treasury Department Agreement, 978 See Internal Revenue Service Parcel Select Negotiated Service Agreement, 978 Veterans Affairs Department Reclamation Bureau NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Submissions, and Approvals: Glen Canyon Dam, Page, AZ; Long-Term Experimental Voice of Veteran Surveys, Generic Clearance for the and Management Plan for Operation; Meetings, 963– Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency 966 Service Delivery, etc., 995–997 Meetings: Securities and Exchange Commission MyVA Federal Advisory Committee, 998 NOTICES Reimbursement for Caskets and Urns for Burial of Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Unclaimed Remains in a National Cemetery, 997–998 BATS Exchange, Inc., 989 EDGX Exchange, Inc., 987–989 NYSE Arca, Inc., 987 Separate Parts In This Issue The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 978–986 Part II Social Security Administration Interior Department, Fish and Wildlife Service, 1000–1026 NOTICES Privacy Act; Computer Matching Program, 989–990 Part III Special Trustee for American Indians Office Energy Department, 1028–1113 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Reader Aids Application to Withdraw Tribal Funds from Trust Status, Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for 966–967 phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws. Surface Transportation Board To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents NOTICES LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// Acquisitions and Operation Exemptions: listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Jackson County, Mo. from Union Pacific Railroad Co., archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change 992 settings); then follow the instructions.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:16 Jan 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\08JACN.SGM 08JACN asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER VI Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Contents

CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE

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

10 CFR 429...... 1028 431...... 1028 14 CFR 39...... 869 15 CFR Proposed Rules: 922...... 879 24 CFR Proposed Rules: Ch. IX...... 881 26 CFR Proposed Rules: 1...... 882 39 CFR 3017...... 869 41 CFR Proposed Rules: 300–3...... 883 301–11...... 883 301–12...... 883 301–70...... 883 42 CFR Proposed Rules: 100...... 884 49 CFR Proposed Rules: 195...... 885 50 CFR Proposed Rules: 17...... 1000 32 (2 documents) ...... 886, 887 36 (2 documents) ...... 886, 887 679...... 897

VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:54 Jan 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\08JALS.LOC 08JALS tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with LS 869

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 81, No. 5

Friday, January 8, 2016

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of the determination may be designated contains regulatory documents having general David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at confidential for reasons of foreign policy applicability and legal effect, most of which 202–789–6820. or national security. Id. are keyed to and codified in the Code of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The introduction of a formal advisory Federal Regulations, which is published under role for the Commission in this area was 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. Table of Contents a significant change from previous law, The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by I. Introduction as previous law did not require the the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of II. Rulemaking Context Secretary of State to request the new books are listed in the first FEDERAL III. Summary of Proposed Rules Commission’s views in carrying out the REGISTER issue of each week. IV. Review and Analysis of Comments Secretary’s responsibilities.3 V. Ordering Paragraphs Notwithstanding a degree of shared I. Introduction responsibility, the PAEA makes clear DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION On July 21, 2015, the Commission that the Secretary of State exercises primary authority for the conduct of Federal Aviation Administration issued proposed rules describing general procedures related to the foreign policy with respect to international postal services and other 14 CFR Part 39 development of the Commission’s views on certain international mail matters international delivery services, [Docket No. FAA–2015–0828; Directorate pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1).1 For the including the determination of U.S. Identifier 2014–NM–146–AD; Amendment reasons discussed below, the positions and the conduct of U.S. 39–18341; AD 2015–25–03] Commission adopts final rules on this participation in negotiations with RIN 2120–AA64 topic. The final rules reflect several foreign governments and international minor revisions to the proposed rules. bodies. See 39 U.S.C. 407(b)(2). Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Pursuant to the directive in section Company Airplanes II. Rulemaking Context 407(c)(1), the Secretary of State In addition to revising the requested—and the Commission Correction longstanding approach to establishing provided—views on certain proposals In rule document 2015–30881, domestic mail rates and classifications, submitted for consideration at the appearing on pages 80242–80247, in the the Postal Accountability and quadrennial Universal Postal Union Issue of Thursday, December 24, 2015, Enhancement Act (PAEA) of 2006 (UPU) Congresses 4 held in 2008 and make the following correction: amended several statutory provisions 2012, which occurred after enactment of Beginning in the second column, concerning international mail matters.2 the PAEA. In anticipation of preparing under the heading ‘‘Request to Add One of these amendments directs the views in connection with the 2012 Terminating Action’’ on page 80243 and Secretary of State, prior to concluding a Congress, the Commission established continuing to the end of the document, treaty, convention, or amendment Docket No. PI2012–1 to receive written the entry ‘‘Boeing Alert Service Bulletin establishing a market dominant rate or comments from the public on the 747–57A2443’’ is corrected to read classification, to request the principles that should guide the ‘‘Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– Commission’s views on the consistency development of its views.5 The 57A2343’’. of such rate or classification with the Commission closed Docket No. PI2012– 6 [FR Doc. C1–2015–30881 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] standards and criteria established by the 1 on January 29, 2015. Commission under 39 U.S.C. 3622. 39 BILLING CODE 1505–01–D U.S.C. 407(c)(1). Section 3622 concerns III. Summary of Proposed Rules the establishment of a modern system The proposed rules describe general for regulating rates and classes for procedures associated with the POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION market dominant products. development of the Commission’s views 39 CFR Part 3017 A companion provision requires the on certain proposals submitted for Secretary of State to ensure that each consideration at UPU Congresses and [Docket No. RM2015–14; Order No. 2960] treaty, convention, or amendment related meetings. They are patterned on concluded under section 407(b) is the approach followed in Docket No. Procedures Related to Commission consistent with the Commission’s views Views unless the Secretary makes a written 3 See 39 U.S.C. 407(d) (1998), amended by the PAEA. AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. determination that ensuring such consistency is not in the Nation’s 4 The UPU Congress is the plenipotentiary body ACTION: Final rule. of this international organization that has the foreign policy or national security authority to amend the UPU Acts. These Acts SUMMARY: The Commission is issuing a interest. 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(2). Such a include the UPU Constitution, General Regulations, set of final rules establishing the written determination must be provided Rules of Procedure, and Postal Payment Services Commission’s process for developing to the Commission, along with a full Agreement. 5 Docket No. PI2012–1, Order No. 1420, Notice views to the Secretary of State on explanation of the reasons, but portions Providing Opportunity to Comment on certain international mail matters Development of Commission Views pursuant to 39 pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1). Relative 1 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, July 21, 2015 U.S.C. 407(c)(1), July 31, 2012. The next UPU to the proposed rules, the changes are (Order No. 2602). Congress is tentatively scheduled to convene in 2 See Postal Accountability and Enhancement mid-September 2016 in Istanbul, Turkey. minor in nature. Act, Public Law 109–435, 120 Stat. 3198 (2006), 6 Docket No. PI2012–1, Order No. 2335, Order DATES: Effective: February 8, 2016. section 405(a) (PAEA). Closing Docket, January 29, 2015, at 1.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:51 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM 08JAR1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES 870 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

PI2012–1 with several adjustments to • several other matters related to the doubt that the [v]iews are a ‘rule’ as reflect the Commission’s experience in comment procedure, including the defined by the APA.’’ FedEx Comments that docket. absence of an affirmative right to file at 8. FedEx acknowledges that there are The proposed rules establish a docket reply comments; several exceptions to the APA notice for each UPU Congress and related • the definition of views; and comment requirements, and meetings to serve as an administrative • the Commission’s option to comments that the foreign affairs mechanism for soliciting and receiving suspend or forego solicitation of exception is the only one that ‘‘could public comments and posting related comments, including the proposed plausibly be deemed applicable.’’ Id. at notices and documents. Each docket standard for exercising this option; and 8–9. will be established on or about 150 days • the availability of proposals and the FedEx asserts that Congress has before the date a UPU Congress is Commission’s views. carefully avoided the procedural scheduled to convene. As in Docket No. Having considered the comments dilemma that combining regulatory and PI2012–1, the Commission will seek received, the Commission adopts final executive functions poses by comments on the general principles that rules that reflect several revisions to the deliberately creating a bifurcated should guide the Commission in the proposed rules in response to comments decision-making process in 39 U.S.C. formation of its views. The proposed as well as several other minor changes. 407(c)(1) and (c)(2). Id. at 9. According rules also allow comments on specific The latter include revisions to reflect to FedEx, under this process the proposals to the extent such proposals the Commission’s intention to designate Commission’s responsibility is to apply are publicly available. Comment future dockets established pursuant to title 39 of the U.S. Code to the rates and deadlines will be established on a case- 39 CFR part 3017 as ‘‘International classifications under consideration, by-case basis and based on the Mail’’ (IM) dockets, instead of ‘‘Public while the responsibility of the Secretary Commission’s assessment of how much Inquiry’’ (PI) dockets, and to refer to of State is to protect the foreign policy time can be allowed, consistent with ‘‘comments’’ instead of ‘‘public and national security interests of the timely submission of its views to the comments.’’ The Commission used the United States by limiting, if necessary, Secretary of State. IM docket designation prior to the application of the Commission’s views. enactment of the PAEA for agency Id. FedEx acknowledges that the courts IV. Review and Analysis of Comments action related to preparation of a series have never addressed this bifurcation in A. Overview of annual reports to Congress on the context of the approval of The Commission received initial international mail financial results. This intergovernmental postal agreements, comments from Joyce Dillard, Federal change, which makes it easier for but cites two cases it alleges concern Express Corporation (FedEx), the Public interested persons to locate similar bifurcations of regulatory and Representative, and the Postal Service.7 international documents on the foreign policy functions in support of its 10 The Commission received reply Commission’s Web site, requires minor position. comments from FedEx, United Parcel conforming changes to several of the FedEx contends that South African Service (UPS), the Public proposed sections of part 3017. Airways concerned a bifurcation of Representative, and the Postal Service.8 functions very similar to those in B. Applicability of APA Procedural section 407. FedEx Comments at 9–10. Commenters generally support issuance Requirements to Commission Views of rules on procedures for administering As explained by FedEx, in South certain view-related matters, but seek Proposed rules. The Commission African Airways, the Court of Appeals clarification of, and revisions relating to: proposed adding rules in a new part for the District of Columbia Circuit • The applicability of Administrative 3017 to provide the public with a found it appropriate for a court to Procedure Act (APA) procedural description of the general procedures it review an order of the Secretary of requirements to views; plans to use in connection with the Transportation revoking a permit of a • the scope of comments and scope of development of views pursuant to 39 foreign air carrier. Id. at 10. While such Commission views, particularly with U.S.C. 407(c)(1), primarily with regard orders were subject to disapproval for regard to the proposed definition of to obtaining public input. The proposed foreign policy or national defense modern market regulation; rules incorporate procedures consistent considerations by the President, the with the Commission’s core court found that judicial review was 7 Comments Received from Joyce Dillard, August responsibility to provide its views to the appropriate because the Secretary of 28, 2015 (Dillard Comments); Comments of Federal Secretary of State in a timely manner. Transportation’s order was based on Express Corporation, August 27, 2015 (FedEx The proposed rules also reflect the economic considerations and thus did Comments); Comments of the Public Representative, August 27, 2015 (PR Comments); Commission’s commitment to having not encroach on the President’s foreign and United States Postal Service Comments on the docket serve as a mechanism for policy powers. Id. Procedures Related to Commission Views, August handling related matters, such as FedEx contends that the South 27, 2015 (Postal Service Comments). informing the public about the African Airways holding was confirmed 8 Reply Comments of Federal Express and extended in Aerolineas Argentinas. Corporation, September 11, 2015 (FedEx Reply availability of relevant proposals, the Comments); Reply Comments of United Parcel Commission’s views, or other Id. at 11. In support of this contention, Service on the Proposed Rule to Adopt Procedures documents. FedEx asserts that the Court of Appeals Related to the Commission’s Views on International for the District of Columbia Circuit held Postal Agreements, September 11, 2015 (UPS Reply Commenters’ positions. FedEx asserts Comments); Errata Notice of United Parcel Service, that the proposed docket must comply that a determination by the Secretary of September 14, 2015; and Reply Comments of with the notice and comment Transportation that Argentina had United Parcel Service on the Proposed Rule to requirements of the APA, located in 5 unjustly discriminated against U.S. Adopt Procedures Related to the Commission’s 9 carriers was subject to judicial review Views on International Postal Agreements U.S.C. 553. FedEx states that the (Corrected and Refiled), September 14, 2015 Commission must employ APA (Corrected UPS Reply Comments); Reply Comments procedures whenever it adopts a rule, 10 Id. at 9–10. See South African Airways v. Dole, of the Public Representative, September 11, 2015 817 F.2d 119 (D.C. Cir. 1987); and Aerolineas (PR Reply Comments); and United States Postal and asserts there is ‘‘no reasonable Argentinas S.A. v. U.S. Department of Service Reply Comments on Procedures Related to Transportation, 415 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2005) Commission Views, September 11, 2015 (Postal 9 FedEx Comments at 8–12; FedEx Reply (hereafter, South African Airways and Aerolineas Service Reply Comments). Comments at 4. Argentinas, respectively).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:51 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM 08JAR1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 871

after expiration of the period in which procedures apply is that the rule must consistency of UPU proposals with U.S. the President could have, but did not, have the force and effect of law. Id. She postal laws that assist the Secretary of disapprove of the determination. Id. reasons that a view does not fall under State in making foreign policy FedEx asserts that the court ‘‘pointedly the APA’s broad definition of a rule decisions. Id. at 5. The Postal Service noted’’ that it should not lightly because absent action by the Secretary asserts that interpretation relates to an presume that Congress intended to grant of State, it lacks any future legal effect. agency action to review and provide a the Department of Transportation ‘‘an Id. The Public Representative also notes true meaning or understanding as to unreviewable discretion to engage in that a UPU body must approve the language. Id. It concludes that 39 U.S.C. otherwise noxious decisionmaking.’’ Id. relevant proposals before they can take 407(c)(1) does not involve any FedEx concludes that the two cases effect. Id. at 3. interpretation by the Commission. Id. demonstrate that the Commission must The Public Representative also Finally, the Postal Service states the comply with the requirements of 5 considers FedEx’s reliance on South Commission’s views do not prescribe U.S.C. 553 because the Commission’s African Airways misplaced because the law or policy within the purview of the views do not involve a foreign affairs order at issue in that case is Commission; instead, it asserts the function of the United States. Id. at 11– distinguishable from the Commission’s views have no legal or policy 12. views. Id. First, she asserts that the ramifications, but instead provide UPS supports FedEx’s proposal to order from the Secretary of interagency guidance. Id. As such, the amend the proposed rules and Transportation revoking foreign air Postal Service contends these views are incorporate APA notice and comment carrier permits is distinguishable not a rule under the APA and the procedures on grounds that the because the order was presented for Commission need not comply with the Commission’s views meet the definition presidential review while views are formal rulemaking requirements of title of a rule under the APA because they subject to the approval of the Secretary 5 of the United States Code. Id. are agency statements interpreting or of State. Id. at 3–4. Second, the order at Commission analysis. Under the APA, prescribing law or policy. Corrected issue in South African Airways revoked a rule is defined broadly and includes UPS Reply Comments at 8 n.6. UPS also a permit, while views provide the any agency statement of general or asserts that the Commission has an Secretary of State with the expert particular applicability and future effect important role under section 407(c)(1), opinion of the agency in the best designed to implement, interpret, or noting that the Commission’s views position to determine the consistency of prescribe law or policy, including the should be crucial in determining the such rates and classifications with approval or prescription for the future of Secretary of State’s posture in domestic postal law before the Secretary rates. 5 U.S.C. 551(4). Rulemaking is the international postal negotiations. Id. at supports or opposes a proposal. Id. at 4. agency process for formulating, 2. It nevertheless concludes that the She asserts that Congress intended for amending, or repealing a rule.12 5 U.S.C. foreign affairs exception is inapplicable views to contribute to the development 551(5). Significantly, 5 U.S.C. 553, on grounds that it is a particularly of the United States’ position on a which addresses rulemakings, provides narrow exception to APA notice and specific foreign relations matter, while an exception to the requirements of that comment requirements. Id. at 8–9. UPS the Secretary of Transportation revoked provision to the extent a military or asserts that for the exception to apply, South African Airways’ permit pursuant foreign affairs function of the United the rulemaking should provoke to a foreign policy determination States is implicated by the rulemaking undesirable international consequences, expressed by Congress, by statute, and or the rulemaking relates to agency and concludes that complying with the President, by executive order. Id. at management or personnel or to public APA notice and comment procedures 4–5. property, loans, grants, benefits, or ‘‘could hardly be said’’ to produce this The Postal Service asserts that contracts. 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1) and (2). result. Id. at 9. UPS also contends that FedEx’s assertion that the Commission Under 5 U.S.C. 553, rulemakings the scope of comments and the providing its views to the Secretary of generally require that an agency publish Commission’s views are limited to State constitutes issuance of an agency a notice concerning the intended compliance with the standards and rule pursuant to the APA is simply rulemaking in the Federal Register and criteria established by the Commission wrong. Postal Service Reply Comments provide an opportunity for commenters under 39 U.S.C. 3622 and concludes the at 4. It contends that FedEx’s discussion to submit written comments. 5 U.S.C. foreign affairs exception is inapplicable of the definition of rule relies on only 553(b)(1)–(3); 5 U.S.C. 553(c). because 39 U.S.C. 3622 does not directly part of the definition, and that a Publication of a substantive rule is to concern foreign affairs. Id. complete understanding of the APA occur not less than 30 days before the The Public Representative and the definition of rule clearly establishes that effective date, except in certain Postal Service assert that the views of the Commission are not a specified circumstances. 5 U.S.C. characterization of the Commission’s rule subject to the APA rulemaking 553(d)(1)–(3). views as a rule under the APA is requirements. Id. FedEx and UPS contend that views incorrect.11 The Public Representative The Postal Service states that a rule as are rules as defined by the APA, and as states that while the APA broadly defined by the APA implements, a result, FedEx and UPS assert that the defines a rule, the definition does not interprets, or prescribes law or policy. Commission should amend the include a statement from an expert Id. at 5. The Postal Service examines proposed rules to ensure that the APA’s agency intended to inform the Secretary each of these characteristics separately notice and comment requirements are of State on the consistency of a potential as they relate to the role of the incorporated into the final rules. FedEx international agreement with U.S. Commission in 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1) and Comments at 8–12; Corrected UPS regulations. PR Reply Comments at 2. contends that the views do not Moreover, she contends that a constitute rules under the APA. Id. It 12 Rulemaking is one of two categories of agency significant characteristic of a rule to states that implementation of a law or actions defined in the APA; adjudication is the policy requires an action that results in other. See 5 U.S.C. 551(7). Adjudication involves which APA notice and comment matters such as the issuance of permits or an impact on a specific party, and certificates. 5 U.S.C. 551(8). No commenter 11 PR Reply Comments at 2; Postal Service Reply contends that views are merely the addressing APA procedural requirements asserts Comments at 4. position of the Commission on the that development of views involves adjudication.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:51 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM 08JAR1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES 872 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

Reply Comments at 8–9. The Postal orders at issue in South African Airways have legal effect. Id. The test for Service and the Public Representative and Aerolineas Argentinas.13 determining whether a rule has legal disagree and provide support for their The advisory, interagency nature of effect involves consideration of the assertion that the APA’s notice and the communication and the subject following factors: ‘‘(1) Whether in the comment requirements do not apply to matter—international rates and absence of the rule there would not be views. Postal Service Reply Comments classifications—also materially an adequate legislative basis for at 4–6; PR Reply Comments at 2–5. As distinguish the Commission’s views enforcement action or other agency a whole, the comments raise two from the conventional rulemaking action to confer benefits or ensure the distinct questions concerning the activity of ratemaking. The performance of duties, (2) whether the applicability of the APA to views: Commission’s domestic rate and agency has published the rule in the Whether views constitute rules under 5 classification rulemakings typically are Code of Federal Regulations, (3) U.S.C. 551(4); and whether views must not purely advisory in nature, nor are whether the agency has explicitly comply with the notice and comment they designed for the sole consideration invoked its general legislative authority, requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553 if views of the Secretary of State. Instead, these [and] (4) whether the rule effectively are in fact rules under the APA. The rulemakings are intended to have amends a prior legislative rule.’’ Id. Commission concludes that views are binding effect on those who are (citing Am. Mining Cong. v. Mine Safety not rules as defined by the APA, and regulated (or engage in activities & Health Admin., 995 F.2d 1106, 1112 that even if views were considered to be regulated) by the agency conducting the (D.C. Cir. 1993)). Courts also consider rules, they are exempt from the notice rulemaking. However, the Secretary of the agency’s characterization of its rule and comment requirements of 5 U.S.C. State pursuant to title 39 exercises the and whether the rule has been applied 553. primary authority for the conduct of consistently in the past. Id. Determining whether views are rules foreign policy with respect to The Commission’s views are not under the APA begins with examination international postal and delivery substantive legislative rules. They do of the function the Commission services, including the determination of not grant rights or impose obligations, performs in developing views and the U.S. positions in negotiations with nor do they produce other significant statutory authority for the exercise of foreign governments and international effects on private interests; instead, they that function. With respect to function, bodies. See 39 U.S.C. 407(b)(2). simply advise the Secretary of State. The Commission provides advisory the plain language of 39 U.S.C. 407 They have not been and will not be views to the Secretary of State, which makes clear that Commission views are published in the Federal Register. The are distinct from rules under the APA an interagency advisory communication Commission provides its advisory views that directly implement, interpret, or prepared at the request, and for the sole in accordance with 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1), consideration of, the Secretary of State prescribe law or policy with respect to the application of future rates, wages, or which does not grant the Commission prior to his/her conclusion of treaties, prices. Commission views do not general legislative authority. Views, conventions, or amendments addressing prescribe, establish, or enforce unlike regulations, do not amend past certain international postal rates and international rates or classifications. views but instead address current UPU classifications. See 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1) These considerations all support the proposals. Therefore, even if views were and (2). This interagency conclusion that views sent to the considered to be rules, the notice and communication advises the Secretary of Secretary of State are a statutory comment requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553 State on the consistency of those rate responsibility that falls outside the do not apply. and classification proposals with title 39 APA’s definition of a rule. Second, views are also exempt from policies. The advisory nature of views is Even if views were considered rules APA notice and comment requirements demonstrated by how many steps the under the APA, the notice and comment pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1) as an views are removed from final requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553 do not agency action involving a foreign affairs international postal rates and apply. First, under the APA, substantive function. In considering the classifications. After the Commission legislative rules are the only rules applicability of the foreign affairs transmits its views to the Secretary of subject to the notice and comment exception, the initial question is State, the Secretary of State then requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553.14 whether a view involves a foreign affairs finalizes U.S. positions on UPU Legislative rules are defined as ‘‘those function. Several factors support the proposals consistent with the that grant rights, impose obligations, or conclusion that this is the case with Commission’s views unless the produce other significant effects on Commission views. For example, the Secretary of State determines foreign private interests.’’ Id. (citing Batterton v. Commission’s responsibility for policy or national security reasons Marshall, 648 F.2d 694, 701–02 (D.C. developing a view is lodged in 39 U.S.C. dictate otherwise. 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(2). Cir. 1980)). Legislative rules also must 407(c)(1). The parent provision, 39 The Secretary of State then uses the U.S.C. 407, is captioned ‘‘International various U.S. positions to negotiate and 13 The two cases are also distinguishable from postal arrangements.’’ Also, act on UPU proposals. The UPU Acts views on several other grounds, including that the contextually, the plain language of 39 are then amended to incorporate orders in these cases involved action on permits, U.S.C. 407(c)(1) establishes the requisite adopted proposals and generally must not rates and classifications. Agency action on permits falls within the APA definition of a license, nexus to a foreign affairs function by be signed by the President or his/her which is associated with adjudication (and related providing that ‘‘before concluding any delegate for U.S. ratification or orders), rather than rulemaking. See 5 U.S.C. 551(8); treaty, convention, or amendment’’ that accession. The Commission’s views are see also 5 U.S.C. 551(6) and (7). In addition, the establishes a rate for a market dominant simply too many steps removed from facts involved statutory provisions that mandated issuance of an order and directly addressed the product, the Secretary of State shall the final rates and classifications terms for judicial review of permit actions, in request the Commission’s views. By adopted by the UPU and signed by the contrast to section 407’s silence on issuance of an definition, the Commission is advising President to be classified as rules. The order and judicial review. the Secretary of State on matters directly number of steps between the view and 14 Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Assn, 135 S.Ct. 1199, 1203–04 (2015); Mountain States Health related to foreign affairs—the terms of a final binding decision also Alliance v. Burwell, No. 13–641, 2015 WL 5297498, international postal treaties, distinguishes views from the types of at *7 (D.D.C. Sep. 10, 2015). conventions, and amendments.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:51 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM 08JAR1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 873

As exemptions to the APA’s UPU with very little time for evaluation, and criteria established by the procedural requirements are to be the Commission will frequently provide Commission. Id. at 7. The Postal Service narrowly construed, the second its preliminary assessment verbally, contends that its proposed definition of question is whether a rulemaking would following up later with a written view. modern rate regulation unambiguously unduly interfere with the asserted Ensuring that interested persons have an identifies the standards and criteria foreign affairs function. If not, the opportunity to review all proposals— established by the Commission as being exemption generally does not apply.15 and responding to each concern as found in part 3010 for UPU proposals The critical considerations associated occurs in most rulemakings—would related to rates and in part 3020 for UPU with 39 U.S.C. 407(c), in terms of the preclude timely preparation and proposals related to classifications, and Commission’s role, are the soundness submission of views to the Secretary of points commenters to the relevant and timeliness of the views, as the State. regulations on which the Commission Secretary of State must have an Fourth, given the compressed will base its view to the Secretary of opportunity to review and assess them timetable under which 39 U.S.C. 407(c) State. Id. at 9–10. prior to concluding his/her functions occur, waiting until 30 days The Postal Service suggests that responsibilities under 39 U.S.C. 407(c), after publication in the Federal Register changes in these rates might be which includes development of U.S. would in many cases mean that the analogized to a Type 1 rate adjustment positions on UPU proposals. Secretary of State could not rely on the and proposes that the standards for In practice, the development of the Commission’s views until well after a Type 1 rate adjustments in 39 CFR Commission’s view occurs within an U.S. position had been developed and 3010.11(d) be applied to UPU proposals. extremely compressed timetable. Given the proposals are deliberated at the Id. at 5. The Postal Service also notes this practical reality, compliance with UPU. See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). For these that part 3020 establishes the rules for all APA procedural requirements would reasons, the foreign affairs exemption Postal Service products and the hamstring the Commission’s ability to would apply if views were found to be classification of those products. Id. With provide the Secretary of State with rules within the meaning of the APA. respect to the Commission review sound, timely views. A brief review of process of UPU proposals, however, it C. Section 3017.1(a)—Definition of the process illustrates the difficulties. states that part 3020 is rarely applicable Modern Rate Regulation First, development of a Commission because UPU proposals reviewed by the view typically occurs in the context of Proposed rule. Proposed § 3017.1(a) Commission rarely relate to a UPU Congress. The UPU is solely defines modern rate regulation as the classification changes for market responsible for determining the standards and criteria the Commission dominant products. Id. Thus, the Postal distribution schedule for the proposals has established pursuant to 39 U.S.C. Service asserts that the Commission the Commission reviews. In light of 3622. usually does not need to consider the different submission deadlines and the Commenters’ positions. The Postal standards and criteria in part 3020 when need for translation, typically the UPU Service proposes that the definition of issuing its views to the Secretary of does not make all proposals available at modern rate regulation be amended to State. Id. once, and often makes many proposals ‘‘the standards and criteria that the UPS asserts that the Postal Service’s available only very near the start of a Commission has established in [39 CFR proposed definition of modern rate UPU Congress. In some cases, part 3010] with respect to rates and part regulation is inconsistent with 39 U.S.C. amendments to proposals are only made 3020 with respect to classification 407(c) and urges the Commission to available immediately before the pursuant to its authority in [39 U.S.C. reject it. Corrected UPS Reply meeting at which the proposals are to be 3622].’’ Postal Service Comments at 9. Comments at 1. UPS observes that the considered. In addition, verbal The Postal Service observes that the issues raised by UPU proposals extend amendments may be proposed during definition in the proposed rules is beyond the legality of terminal dues deliberations. identical to the statutory language of 39 rates. Id. at 4. It asserts that the Second, the Commission is unable to U.S.C. 407(c)(1). Id. However, it Commission must also consider other ensure the availability of the proposals contends that this definition, if UPU proposals in light of, for example, to interested parties because the UPU interpreted as it has been in the past, the objective of 39 U.S.C. 3622(b)(7) to does not make them publicly available. not only deviates from the enhance mail security and deter Third, upon receipt of the proposals, Commission’s statutory authority, but terrorism. Id. development of views entails may result in confusion for members of UPS also contends the Postal deliberations by the Commission and the public and unnecessary work for Service’s proposal is at odds with how coordination of a view in time for the those submitting comments. Id. at 2. It the Postal Service interpreted the Secretary of State to have a meaningful urges the Commission to clarify the Commission’s authority in 2012, when opportunity to consider the definition to ensure comments do not the Postal Service stated that under Commission’s advice. In cases when exceed the scope of the Commission’s section 407(c), the Commission is tasked proposals are made available by the views as delineated by 39 U.S.C. with providing its view on whether 407(c)(1). Id. proposals are consistent with the 39 15 See United States Department of Justice, The Postal Service notes that in U.S.C. 3622 objectives and factors. Id. at Attorney General’s Manual on the Administrative Docket No. PI2012–1, the Commission 10 n.7. Procedure Act 26 (1947), noting that the Senate and House reports stated that the phrase ‘‘foreign affairs solicited comments on the principles UPS asserts that when the function’’ is not to be loosely interpreted to mean that should guide development of its Commission considers the objectives any function extending beyond the borders of the views on the consistency of proposals and factors of 39 U.S.C. 3622 in United States, but only to those ‘‘affairs’’ which so with the standards and criteria of 39 evaluating UPU proposals, it is giving affect relations with other governments that, for example, the public rulemaking provisions would U.S.C. 3622. Id. at 6. It asserts that this heed to the statutory language of 39 clearly provoke definitely undesirable international solicitation, while closely related to the U.S.C. 407(c)(1). Id. at 10. UPS contends consequences. In addition, it has been held that statute, exceeded the scope of 39 U.S.C. that any standard or criterion modification, interpretation, or violation of an international agreement’s terms are clearly and 407(c)(1) and resulted in comments established by the Commission ‘‘under’’ directly matters of foreign affairs. Mast Industries, focused on the objectives and factors of section 3622 must be consistent with Inc. v. Regan, 596 F. Supp. 1567, 1579 (1984). 39 U.S.C. 3622 rather than the standards section 3622 because agencies’

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:51 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM 08JAR1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES 874 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

jurisdiction and substantive powers are Commission analysis. The Comments at 12–13. Instead, FedEx limited by statute, and they can only act Commission declines to adopt the contends that the definition should in conformance with their statutory revision proposed by the Postal Service. encompass each opinion the mandate. Id. The Commission concludes that the Commission is obliged to provide to the UPS also states that having definition as originally proposed, which Secretary of State before a treaty, empowered and required the defines modern rate regulation in terms convention, or amendment that Commission to craft regulations in ‘‘identical to the statutory language of establishes a rate or classification for a conformance with section 3622, it is [39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1)],’’ is appropriate. product subject to subchapter I of implausible that Congress would require See Postal Service Comments at 9. In chapter 36 is concluded. Id. FedEx that the Commission ignore section addition to being consistent with the asserts that section 407(c)(1) applies to 3622 when evaluating UPU proposals. statute, the definition is also consistent all rates and classifications for Id. at 11. It states that agencies must with the Commission’s past practices international market dominant products always consider their governing statutes with respect to providing its views to established by the Secretary of State by when taking any action and must ensure the Secretary of State on the consistency intergovernmental agreement. Id. at 13. that their actions are consistent with of such rate or classification with In response, the Public Representative those statutes. Id. UPS contends that at modern rate setting criteria.16 asserts that FedEx’s proposed revision is a minimum, 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1) should The Postal Service’s proposed unnecessary. PR Reply Comments at 6. not be read as preventing the modification would also artificially She nonetheless states that the proposed Commission from considering the detach the Commission’s views from the rules may benefit from clarifying that objectives and factors of 39 U.S.C. 3622. underlying objectives and factors of part 3017 does not preclude the Id. UPS asserts that 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1) modern rate regulation, which are the Commission from initiating a docket is most sensibly read as affirmatively basis of the ‘‘standards and criteria and soliciting comments on a relevant encouraging the Commission to established by the Commission under non-UPU treaty, convention, or consider the objectives and factors. Id. section 3622.’’ 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1). amendment. Id. at 6–7. FedEx agrees, in principle, with the Moreover, the Postal Service’s proposed The Public Representative also Postal Service’s assertion that the analogy to Type 1 rate cases seemingly recommends, in conjunction with a Commission’s approach to reviewing conflicts with its comments in light of suggestion to add a definition of proposed UPU rates and classifications the fact that sections in 39 CFR part relevant proposal, that the proposed for market dominant products should 3010 request expansive comments (i.e., definition of views be limited to closely parallel the agency’s review of 39 CFR 3010.11(c)) and explicitly refer opinions on ‘‘relevant proposals.’’ PR rates and classifications for market to the objectives and factors enumerated Comments at 6–7. She notes that the dominant domestic products, but in 39 U.S.C. 3622 (i.e., 39 CFR proposed rules indicate that the disagrees with the Postal Service on the 3010.12(b)(7) and (8)). Furthermore, the Commission will provide views on implications of this observation for the Postal Service’s suggestion to restrict the proposals that affect a market dominant proposed rules. FedEx Reply Comments definition to 39 CFR parts 3010 and rate or classification but would not at 1. FedEx disagrees with the Postal 3020 is too limiting. For example, the exclude proposals that are unable to be Service’s conclusion that 39 CFR parts Commission’s authority to regulate assessed because they are for future 3010 and 3020 prohibit commenters and service performance standards was also rates or classifications and lack the the Commission from considering the drawn from 39 U.S.C. 3622. See 39 CFR detail needed to make an assessment, or proposals that were rejected or consistency of relevant UPU proposals part 3055. Consequently, the with title 39 requirements other than withdrawn. Id. at 7. The Public Commission declines to adopt the Postal those explicitly mentioned in 39 CFR Representative recommends that the Service’s proposed modification and parts 3010 and 3020. Id. at 3. It Commission amend § 3017.1 to limit adopts the proposed paragraph (a) as a observes, for example, that 39 CFR views to relevant proposals and then final rule, without change. 3010.11(c) provides that public offer a separate definition of relevant comments may address other relevant D. Section 3017.1(b)—Definition of proposal in § 3017.1. Id. at 7; statutory provisions and applicable Views Attachment 1 at 1. Commission orders and directives. Id. Proposed rule. Proposed § 3017.1(b) Commission analysis. FedEx proposes Moreover, FedEx notes that the Postal defines views as the opinion the to define views as opinions the Service’s position that 39 CFR parts Commission provides to the Secretary of Commission provides to the Secretary of 3010 and 3020 constrain the State in the context of certain UPU State before the Secretary of State concludes any treaty, convention, or Commission’s review rests on the proceedings on the consistency of a amendment that establishes a rate or assumption that UPU rates are proposal affecting a market dominant classification for a product subject to considered a Type 1 rate adjustments, rate or classification with modern rate subchapter I of chapter 36. This an issue that the Commission has not regulation. decided. Id. Commenters’ positions. FedEx and the accurately reflects the language of 39 FedEx asserts that given the intense Public Representative suggest revisions U.S.C. 407(c)(1). However, each reconsideration of product definitions to the definition of views. FedEx asserts applicable ‘‘treaty, convention, or now underway at the UPU, it is hardly that the definition should correspond to amendment’’ since the PAEA was enacted has occurred in the context of self-evident that the rates and the scope of the Commission’s certain UPU proceedings. It appears that classifications that will be proposed for obligations under section 407(c)(1), and the two suggested approaches have consideration at the next UPU Congress should not be limited only to the identical practical effects and that tying should be considered analogous to Type opinion the Commission provides to the each docket to a specific UPU Congress 1 rate adjustments. Id. It also argues that Secretary of State in the context of will allow interested persons to more the international nature of UPU rates certain UPU proceedings. FedEx necessarily requires the Commission to easily track relevant proposed changes. consider some elements of title 39 that 16 See e.g., Order No. 2602 at 1–2; Docket No. As a result, the Commission adjusts the are not involved in a review of domestic PI2012–1, Comments of the United States Postal definition of views in § 3017.1 to rates and classifications. Id. Service, August 27, 2012, at 2–4. accommodate the scope of the statute as

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:51 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM 08JAR1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 875

discussed above. Part 3017 is not each public inquiry docket will be FedEx applies to views was intended to intended to preclude the Commission published in the Federal Register. apply to commenters. It was also from establishing a docket, accepting intended to allow comments on both 1. Scope of the Docket comments, or giving views in non-UPU specific proposals and general contexts that meet the requirements of Commenters’ positions. FedEx seeks principles that can be applied to various 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1). expansion of the scope of the public proposals or in cases where specific The Commission also concludes that inquiry docket to include all proposals are unavailable. Id. at 7–8. the proposals on which it provides its international agreements that impact The Public Representative concludes views do not require clarification. rates or classifications of market that she supports § 3017.3 as proposed. According to the proposed definition, dominant products. FedEx Comments at Id. at 8. the Commission only gives views on 13. It asserts that the wording of Commission analysis. FedEx ‘‘. . . the consistency of a proposal paragraph (a) suggests that the highlights a need to revise the wording affecting a market dominant rate or Commission can limit its views to a of § 3017.3 to clarify that it is the classification with modern rate high level review of proposed rates and solicitation of comments that may be regulation.’’ The requirement that the classifications; however, it contends limited due to the Commission’s proposal affect a market dominant rate that 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1) clearly requires inability to make proposals available. or classification excludes proposals that the Commission to consider carefully all FedEx Comments at 13. The will not have an effect because they of the criteria set out in 39 U.S.C. 3622. Commission intends for § 3017.3(a) to have been withdrawn or rejected, as Id. FedEx also asserts that the allow for comments to cover both well as proposals with effects unable to Commission cannot fail to provide approaches and principles that pertain be assessed because they lack the views on relevant proposals merely to the proposals generally as well as requisite detail to make an assessment. because they are not available on or specific proposals when the Consequently, except for the changes in about 150 days before a UPU Congress Commission is able to make these the definition section as explained convenes. Id. It further asserts that the available. above, the Commission adopts the Commission is obliged by 39 U.S.C. FedEx also is concerned the proposed proposed rule as a final rule without 407(c)(1) to develop views on specific rules are too narrowly tailored to UPU any additional changes relating to the proposals as they become available. Id. Congresses. Id. at 13. As noted in Order comments regarding proposals. The Postal Service characterizes No. 2602, each docket will cover a UPU FedEx’s position as ‘‘directly counter to Congress and related meetings. Order E. Section 3017.2—Purpose the plain reading of section 407(c)(1).’’ No. 2602 at 2–3. To further clarify its Proposed rule. The proposed rule Postal Service Reply Comments at 5. It intent in the proposed regulations, the states that the proposed part 3017’s notes that FedEx uses the word Commission will insert into section purpose is to facilitate public ‘‘agreement,’’ which is different and 3017.3 the phrase, ‘‘or such advance participation in, and promote the distinct from what is set forth in the time as the Commission determines for transparency of, the development of statute. Id. The Postal Service asserts any other 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1) matter.’’ Commission views. that 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1) requires the The Commission adopts the proposed Commenters’ positions. No Secretary of State to seek the § 3017.3 as a final rule, with commenter specifically addresses this Commission’s view prior to concluding clarifications outlined above concerning proposed rule. any treaty, convention, amendment. Id. the scope of comments and revisions to Commission analysis. The at 5–6. The Postal Service asserts that reflect the intention to use the IM Commission has reviewed this section these terms are distinct from an designation. and concludes that it accurately ‘‘agreement’’ as interpreted by FedEx, 2. Availability of Proposals describes the purpose of the rules. and that the Commission has properly Consequently, it adopts the proposed focused the proposed rules on issues Commenters’ positions. The Public rule as a final rule, without change. governed by the UPU Congress. Id. at 6. Representative suggests that the The Postal Service further asserts that Commission make every effort to F. Section 3017.3—Establishment and 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1) ‘‘only applies to provide the text or a detailed summary Scope of Docket decisions taken by the United States, of the relevant proposals to the public. Proposed § 3017.3 consists of three [through] the Secretary of State, at the PR Comments at 3. She believes this paragraphs. As proposed, paragraph (a) UPU Congress, and thus the will facilitate discussion by providing establishes the target date for Commission need not create a potential commenters with a lexicon of establishing a public inquiry docket as procedure for public solicitation of terms and titles for use in referencing on or about 150 days before a UPU comments for every UPU proposal at specific proposals and with better Congress convenes, and states that the meetings between UPU Congresses.’’ Id. information about the scope of issues in Commission will solicit comments on In response to FedEx, the Public each docket. See generally PR the general principles that should guide Representative notes that proposed Comments at 3–5. By not providing the Commission’s development of views § 3017.3 can be interpreted as providing proposals, the Public Representative is on relevant proposals, in a general way, a docket for each UPU Congress, concerned the public is segregated into and, if available, on specific relevant including the relevant proposals for those who have independent knowledge proposals. Proposed paragraph (b) states UPU meetings following that Congress of proposals and those who do not. Id. that the public inquiry docket but prior to the next Congress. PR Reply at 5. The Public Representative established pursuant to paragraph (a) of Comments at 7. She nonetheless does acknowledges that circumstances may this section may also encompass matters not object to a clarification of the rule. prevent the Commission from providing related to development of the Id. The Public Representative also text or summaries of all proposals, but Commission’s views, such as the responds to FedEx’s statement that nonetheless asserts that the Commission availability of relevant proposals, the proposed § 3017.3(a) suggests that the should provide information regarding views, other documents, and related Commission can limit its views to a specific proposals in advance. Id. at 6. actions. Proposed paragraph (c) high level review. Id. She argues that UPS supports this suggestion, and provides that the notice establishing the language from the proposed rule that further supports any and all efforts by

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:51 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM 08JAR1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES 876 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

the Commission to provide as much Commission places on receiving general or foregoing comments in order to allow information as soon as possible. comments concerning suggested the Commission to provide views to the Corrected UPS Reply Comments at 6. It principles and approaches. Secretary of State in a timely manner.17 asserts that ‘‘[o]therwise, any discussion She opposes FedEx’s approach because G. Section 3017.4—Comment of the proposals would likely lack it ‘‘would negatively impact the United Deadline(s) meaningful impact.’’ Id. States’ ability to negotiate and conclude The Postal Service observes that UPU Proposed rule. Proposed § 3017.4 international agreements.’’ PR Reply proposals generally are not publicly consists of two paragraphs. Proposed Comments at 6. However, she suggests available documents, and states that the paragraph (a) provides that the deadline including a requirement for issuance of Commission should not release for public comments will be established a notice of suspension as new documents that are not publicly consistent with the Commission’s § 3017.4(b)(1). PR Comments at 9–10; id. available. Postal Service Reply assessment of its ability to file timely Attachment 1 at 2. Comments at 2. In addition, the Postal views with the Secretary of State. Commission analysis. As explained in Service contests the Public Proposed § 3017.4(b) employs the same section IV.B supra, the requirements of Representative’s contention that absent standard for suspending or foregoing 5 U.S.C. 553 are inapplicable to the Commission’s provision of the solicitation of public comments if Commission views. Although the APA proposals, the public is not in a position receiving comments would impede the notice and comment requirements do to provide meaningful feedback. Id. The Commission’s ability to provide timely not apply, the Commission shares the Postal Service states that the ability to submission of views to the Secretary of commenters’ interests in having provide comments on how the State. procedures that enhance opportunities Commission should undertake its 1. Suspending or Foregoing Solicitation for public participation and has crafted statutory role is not dependent on of Public Comments part 3017 for that reason. At the same access to specific proposals. Id. It states time, Docket No. PI2012–1 that the prior public inquiry docket Commenters’ positions. FedEx, demonstrated for the Commission that shows that the public can comment on consistent with its position on the providing an opportunity for input must broad policy objectives and principles. applicability of APA notice and be balanced with the Commission’s Id. comment requirements to a part 3017 primary statutory responsibility under The Postal Service also asserts that docket, suggests that provisions for 39 U.S.C. 407—the timely submission of comments on specific proposals ‘‘will deadlines and abbreviated procedures its views to the Secretary of State. The significantly burden the commenters should conform to 5 U.S.C. 553. FedEx Commission concludes that the and the Commission without providing Comments at 14. FedEx does not standard for suspending and foregoing the overarching opinions of the consider timely submission of the comments that appears in proposed commenters that are most beneficial to Commission views to the Secretary of § 3017.4(b) appropriately balances an the Commission in developing its State an adequate justification for opportunity for comment with the views.’’ Id. In addition, the Postal curtailing or eliminating notice and Commission’s statutory responsibility. Service states that the proposed rule comment procedures required by the The Commission will endeavor to keep 3017.3(a) already sets forth that when a APA. Id. commenters informed when comments specific proposal is relevant and Joyce Dillard states comments should are suspended. Nonetheless, the deemed significant to assist in not be suspended or foregone because Commission declines to adopt the developing the Commission’s view, the ‘‘all public comment should be Public Representative’s suggestion of Commission will seek comments on that welcomed on any United States treaty, the issuance of a formal notice of specific proposal. Id. The Postal Service convention, amendment, or any other suspension (or of foregoing) solicitation asserts that the proposed rules transactions.’’ Dillard Comments at 1. of comments on grounds that a formal appropriately seek general comments on She also states that privatization of the requirement may reduce the relevant proposals that impact market government should not be the Commission’s ability to file timely dominant rates and classifications and Commission’s objective. Id. She further comments with the Secretary of State. specific proposals when determined asserts that the public needs a voice and The Commission adopts proposed necessary. Id. at 2–3. representation. Id. § 3017.4 as a final rule, with minor Commission analysis. The FedEx agrees with Joyce Dillard’s editorial revisions to reflect the Commission appreciates commenters’ position on the public’s need for a voice intention to use the IM designation and interest in access to specific proposals. and representation. FedEx Reply the replacement of ‘‘public comment’’ The Commission is neither the Comments at 4. However, it suggests with ‘‘comment.’’ originator nor the official custodian of that Joyce Dillard’s implication that the these documents and as such, it is not proposed procedures also imply the 2. Absence of Provision for Reply in a position to guarantee their Commission’s intent to foster Comments availability. As commenters also privatization of the government may be The Public Representative acknowledge, the proposals are not due to a misunderstanding of the acknowledges that the Commission has usually publicly available. However, the Commission’s notice. Id. at 4–5. The explained that it is not initiating reply rule expresses the Commission’s intent Postal Service opposes Joyce Dillard’s comments due to time constraints, but to solicit comments on specific suggestions, arguing that ‘‘the reads the proposed rules to allow proposals if it can make them available. Commission should maintain the ability interested parties the opportunity to In addition, the Commission found to forego solicitation of comments when submit reply comments at the comments on the general principles that necessary, especially when the Commission’s discretion. PR Comments should guide the Commission’s submission of the Commission’s views at 7–8. She encourages the Commission development of views useful and to the Secretary of State would to provide interested parties an informative in Docket No. PI2012–1. otherwise be delayed.’’ Postal Service opportunity to submit reply comments The inclusion of a reference to specific Reply Comments at 6–7. proposals in the proposed set of rules The Public Representative states that 17 PR Comments at 9–10; PR Reply Comments does not diminish the importance the circumstances may require suspending at 5.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:51 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM 08JAR1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 877

if time permits and suggests to provide an opportunity for reply and encourages participation in part incorporating reply comments into comments in the ordinary course of a 3017 dockets. Id. at 7–8. § 3017.4. Id. at 8; Attachment 1 at 2. She part 3017 docket. Commission analysis. As indicated in also suggests that the Commission § 3017.3(b), the Commission intends to H. Section 3017.5—Commission provide advance notice of the post its views in the docket with which Discretion opportunity to file reply comments as it is associated after conclusion of she believes this will facilitate timely Proposed rule. Proposed rule 3017.5 deliberations on a related treaty, public participation. Id. at 9; states that the Commission will review convention, or amendment. The Attachment 1 at 2. timely filed comments prior to Commission believes that posting its UPS agrees with the Public submitting its views to the Secretary of views on the agency Web site will Representative’s suggestion with respect State. address UPS’s concerns. to providing for reply comments. Commenter’s position. FedEx asserts Corrected UPS Reply Comments at 8. that proposed § 3017.5 overstates the V. Ordering Paragraphs UPS’s rationale is that reply comments Commission’s discretion. FedEx It is ordered: are valuable because they allow parties Comments at 14. It asserts that the 1. The Commission adopts 39 CFR to point out flaws in other parties’ Commission’s discretion with respect to part 3017 as a final rule, effective 30 initial comments. UPS states that reply its review of comments is limited by the days following publication in the comments should expedite rather than APA and principles of administrative Federal Register. delay development of the Commission’s law and draws an analogy to the 2. The Secretary shall arrange for views. Id. Commission’s review of domestic rates. publication of this Order in the Federal The Postal Service contends that reply Id. FedEx suggests that proposed Register. comments are unnecessary and would § 3017.5 be deleted. Id. delay the proceedings. Postal Service Commission analysis. As explained in List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 3017 Reply Comments at 3. It asserts that in section IV.B supra, Commission views Administrative practice and the past, the Commission specifically are not subject to the requirements of 5 procedure, International agreements, set forth the policies and scope of the U.S.C. 553. As such, the Commission is Postal Service. not required to follow the APA’s notice comments it was soliciting from the ■ For the reasons discussed in the and comment requirements prior to public, resulting in ample opportunity preamble, the Commission amends submitting its views. Despite no legal to develop and submit comments. Id. chapter III of title 39 of the Code of requirement that it do so, the The Postal Service further asserts that Federal Regulations by adding part 3017 Commission is creating a new part 3017 the proposed dockets are not adversarial to read as follows: proceedings requiring counter to allow for increased public input and arguments and that a single round of transparency into the development of its PART 3017—PROCEDURES RELATED comments is sufficient to allow views pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 407(c). TO COMMISSION VIEWS commenters to provide their own views Proposed § 3017.5 is intended to place to the Commission. Id. the public on notice that comments Sec. Commission analysis. As the Public submitted in response to a part 3017 3017.1 Definitions in this part. Representative and the Postal Service solicitation will be reviewed by the 3017.2 Purpose. note, the Commission did not originally Commission, and that the review will be 3017.3 Establishment and scope of docket. 3017.4 Comment deadline(s). include an opportunity to file reply limited to timely filed comments. 3017.5 Commission discretion as to comments when it established Docket Limiting review to timely filed treatment of comments. No. P2012–1. However, the Commission comments is consistent with the subsequently granted a request to file necessity that an opportunity to provide Authority: 39 U.S.C. 407; 503. reply comments, but due to the comments in a part 3017 docket does § 3017.1 Definitions in this part. timetable concluded that it could only not hinder the Commission’s ability to (a) Modern rate regulation refers to allow 3 days for reply comments.18 The submit its views to the Secretary of State the standards and criteria the limited time for reply comments in a timely manner. However, the Commission has established pursuant to allowed in Docket No. PI2012–1 Commission concludes that it would be 39 U.S.C. 3622. strained the Commission’s preparation useful to clarify that comments must not (b) Views refers to the opinion the of views and, as the Public only be timely filed, but filed in Commission provides to the Secretary of Representative observes, the limited response to a Commission solicitation State pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 407(c)(1) on time also may not have provided all under this part. the consistency with modern rate commenters with adequate time to The Commission adopts proposed regulation of a proposed treaty, review the initial comments and file § 3017.5 as a final rule, with minor convention, or amendment that responses. revisions to the caption and text for establishes a market dominant rate or The Commission appreciates that clarity. classification. reply comments may provide additional I. Publication of Views in the Federal § 3017.2 Purpose. useful insights; however, as the Postal Register Service observes, the purpose of a part The rules in this part are intended to 3017 docket is not to facilitate an Commenter’s position. UPS proposes facilitate public participation in, and adversarial proceeding, but rather to that the Commission publish its views promote the transparency of, the provide an opportunity for commenters in the Federal Register when the views development of Commission views. to provide input on how the views are sent to the Department of State. should be developed. This can be Corrected UPS Reply Comments at 6. It § 3017.3 Establishment and scope of accomplished without reply comments. asserts that publishing the docket. As such, the Commission does not plan Commission’s views engenders greater (a) On or about 150 days before a public confidence that the objectives of Universal Postal Union Congress 18 Docket No. PI2012–1, Order No. 1451, Order 39 U.S.C. 3622 and 39 U.S.C. 407 are convenes or such advance time as the Allowing for Reply Comments, August 28, 2012. being followed, increases transparency, Commission determines for any other 39

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:51 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM 08JAR1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES 878 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

U.S.C. 407(c)(1) matter, the Commission (c) The Commission shall arrange for consistent with timely submission of will establish a docket to solicit publication in the Federal Register of Commission views to the Secretary of comments on the general principles that the notice establishing each docket State. should guide the Commission’s authorized under this part. § 3017.5 Commission discretion as to development of views on relevant § 3017.4 Comment deadline(s). treatment of comments. proposals, in a general way, and on specific relevant proposals, if the (a) The Commission shall establish a The Commission will review timely deadline for comments upon Commission is able to make these filed comments responding to a establishment of the docket that is available. Commission solicitation under this part consistent with timely submission of the prior to submitting its views to the (b) The docket established pursuant to Commission’s views to the Secretary of Secretary of State. paragraph (a) of this section may also State. The Commission may establish By the Commission. include matters related to development other deadlines for comments as of the Commission’s views, such as the appropriate. Stacy L. Ruble, availability of relevant proposals, (b) The Commission may suspend or Secretary. Commission views, other documents, or forego solicitation of comments if it [FR Doc. 2016–00036 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] related actions. determines that such solicitation is not BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:51 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM 08JAR1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES 879

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 81, No. 5

Friday, January 8, 2016

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to Location: United States Navy Memorial, contains notices to the public of the proposed http://www.regulations.gov/ Main Auditorium issuance of rules and regulations. The #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NOS-2015- Address: 701 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., purpose of these notices is to give interested 0165, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, Washington, DC 20004 persons an opportunity to participate in the complete the required fields, and enter rule making prior to the adoption of the final (5) Nags Head, NC rules. or attach your comments. • Mail: David Alberg, Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2016, Superintendent, Monitor National 6:00 p.m.–9:00 p.m. Location: Jennette’s Pier, Oceanview DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Marine Sanctuary, 100 Museum Drive, Newport News, VA 23606–3759. Hall National Oceanic and Atmospheric Instructions: Comments sent by any Address: 7223 S. Virginia Dare Trail, Administration other method, to any other address or Nags Head, NC 27959 individual, or received after the end of I. Background the comment period, may not be 15 CFR Part 922 MNMS was designated the nation’s considered by NOAA. All comments first national marine sanctuary in 1975. Notice of Intent To Review Monitor received are a part of the public record National Marine Sanctuary Boundary The site protects the wreck of the famed and will generally be posted for public Civil War ironclad USS MONITOR, best viewing on www.regulations.gov AGENCY: Office of National Marine known for its 1862 battle with the Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean without change. All personal identifying Confederate ironclad CSS VIRGINIA at Service (NOS), National Oceanic and information (for example, name, Hampton Roads, VA. It is located Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), address, etc.), confidential business approximately 16 miles southeast of Department of Commerce (DOC). information, or otherwise sensitive Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, where it information submitted voluntarily ACTION: Notice of intent to review sank in a storm while under tow on submitted by the commenter will be boundaries; intent to prepare December 31, 1862 with the loss of publicly accessible. NOAA will accept environmental impact statement; hold sixteen sailors. The vessel was the anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in scoping meetings. prototype for a class of U.S. Civil War the required fields if you wish to remain ironclad, turreted warships that SUMMARY: In accordance with section anonymous). significantly altered both naval 304(e) of the National Marine FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: technology and marine architecture in Sanctuaries Act, as amended, (NMSA), David Alberg, Superintendent, Monitor the nineteenth century. The shipwreck the Office of National Marine National Marine Sanctuary, (757) 591– and its contents comprise an Sanctuaries (ONMS) of the National 7326. irreplaceable historical record and Oceanic and Atmospheric SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public represent a monument to the American Administration (NOAA) is reviewing scoping meetings will be held as naval tradition that the vessel itself the Monitor National Marine Sanctuary detailed below: helped to create. (MNMS or sanctuary) boundaries in The sanctuary consists of a column of order to evaluate and consider the (1) Raleigh, NC water one mile in diameter extending benefits, need and impact of expanding Date: Tuesday, February 9, 2016, 6:00 from the seabed to the surface, the sanctuary’s boundaries to include p.m.–9:00 p.m. surrounding the shipwreck. The highest additional submerged maritime cultural Location: North Carolina Museum of priority management goal for the and archaeologic resources as described History sanctuary is resource protection through in the February 2013 Monitor National Address: 5 East Edenton St., Raleigh, NC comprehensive and coordinated Marine Sanctuary Final Management 27601 conservation of the wreck and its Plan and Environmental Assessment. (2) Beaufort, NC surroundings. An important part of our This review process will be conducted nation’s history, the USS MONITOR, the per the National Environmental Policy Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2016, archaeological information at the site, Act (NEPA) and section 106 of the 6:00 p.m.–9:00 p.m. the artifact collection, and the USS National Historic Preservation Act Location: North Carolina Maritime MONITOR’s records are all part of the (NHPA). Museum sanctuary’s resources. Address: 315 Front St., Beaufort, NC The waters of coastal North Carolina DATES: Comments must be received by 28516 March 18, 2016. Public scoping contain some of the most significant meetings will be held on the following (3) Hatteras, NC shipwrecks in the United States and dates: Date: Thursday, February 11, 2016, 6:00 represent an ideal location to study and 1. February 9, 2016 p.m.–9:00 p.m. preserve nationally significant historic 2. February 10, 2016 Location: Graveyard of the Atlantic wreck sites that include vessels and 3. February 11, 2016 Museum other artifacts dating back to the Age of 4. February 16, 2016 Address: 59200 Museum Dr., Hatteras, North American Exploration, the 5. February 17, 2016 NC 27943 Revolutionary War, the Civil War and ADDRESS: Comments may be submitted World War II among others. The by any of the following methods: (4) Washington, DC Expansion Working Group, as the basis • Electronic Submission: Submit all Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2016, 6:00 for their recommended expansion electronic public comments via the p.m.–9:00 p.m. models, has considered four broad

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 880 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

thematic categories, which include: (1) individual wrecks of historic Model D: Model includes three The Colonial and Pre-Contact Period, (2) significance. Under the SAC’s specific areas, each exhibiting both a Commerce, (3) Conflict, and (4) Coastal recommendation, State waters would representative collection of wrecks in Heritage. Veterans groups, historians, not be included. Federal and potentially State waters archaeologists, divers, the preservation Model B: Includes a small area from many eras and vessel types, and community, the general public and the centered around the waters off Cape the primary historically significant MNMS Sanctuary Advisory Council Hatteras. Boundaries could be wrecks off of the Outer Banks. This (SAC) have asked NOAA to consider established to include several wrecks model includes a collection of at least expansion of the sanctuary as a means and adjacent waters and culturally 100 known wrecks representing all to protect and conserve these wrecks for significant features in the landscape, identified thematic areas of cultural current and future generations. such as Diamond Shoals (Cultural significance in the region. The The topic of possible boundary Landscapes are further defined here recommendations from the Working expansion was a primary point of http://monitor.noaa.gov/pdfs/gota- Group recommended that the inclusion discussion during a series of scoping final.pdf). Selected wrecks represent of state waters be considered based on and public hearings held in 2008 as part many historic themes, including the public input and further discussions of the sanctuary’s management plan period of North American exploration, with the State as described in Models B review process. In 2009, the MNMS several conflicts and commerce. This and C above. SAC voted unanimously to recommend model includes at least 65 known II. Need for Action that sanctuary management establish an shipwrecks within Federal waters. The expansion working group to examine recommendations from the Working NOAA is initiating a review of MNMS the implications of possible future Group recommended that the inclusion boundaries to evaluate the benefits and expansion of the sanctuary’s of state waters be considered based on effects of potential sanctuary expansion. boundaries. The working group public input and further discussions This action is being taken to elevate and recommended NOAA formally evaluate with the State. If during the public promote these resources and their and assess an expansion of existing scoping process it is determined to history; to facilitate better protection boundaries to protect, manage, and include state waters in the expanded and management of these nationally interpret additional historic shipwrecks area (denoted by the blue strip important resources under the National and other potential maritime heritage designating state waters in each model) Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA); to resources that are located or believed to many more shipwrecks would be better coordinate maritime heritage be located in the adjacent waters of located within the boundaries. The resource management with other current North Carolina in an area known as the combined collection of resources in and potential users of these waters; to ‘‘Graveyard of the Atlantic’’. The federal and state waters in this model increase the scope of submerged sanctuary’s final management plan are representative of a wide range of archaeological research; to create (completed in 2013 and available at previously identified historical themes: educational opportunities for the public; http://monitor.noaa.gov/management/ Colonial and Pre-Contact, the History of and to potentially benefit local coastal 2013-plan.html) included the following Maritime Commerce, Conflict and War communities through increased tourism strategy: ‘‘Evaluate and consider the Along the Coast, and Coastal Heritage and economic growth. benefits, need, and impact of a future (fishing, lifesaving service, local boundary expansion of MNMS to III. Process watermen). include additional submerged cultural The process for considering changes resources.’’ Model C: Includes a larger area also to MNMS is composed of four primary The expansion working group centered off Cape Hatteras that stages: presented possible expansion models to incorporates many historically 1. Scoping, including information the MNMS SAC and the public at the significant wrecks in federal waters with collection and characterization, and the June 5, 2014 SAC meeting. the potential for include of state waters consideration of public comments; Subsequently, a motion that the SAC based upon future public input and 2. Preparation and release of a draft consider the working group models discussions with the State as described environmental impact statement (DEIS) passed on October 1, 2015 to submit in Model B above. This model includes and Draft Management Plan (DMP) as them to NOAA for consideration as sanctuary boundaries surrounding required by Section 304(a) of the NMSA possible templates for expansion. A individual wreck sites, and further that identifies boundary expansion detailed narrative of each of the models surrounded by a larger study area. If alternatives (including a no-action as well as further information regarding other historically significant wrecks are alternative under the National the MNMS in general can be found at discovered within this study area in the Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)), as http://monitor.noaa.gov/management/ future NOAA could consider adding well as a notice of proposed rulemaking expansion.html. Each model is briefly these wrecks to the MNMS through a (NPRM) to amend the sanctuary described below. future public process. This area regulations to reflect any new boundary Model A: Includes isolated shipwreck encompasses the majority of the most if proposed; sites. Boundaries would be restricted to historically significant wrecks (as 3. Public review and comment on the select wreck sites and separate from determined by the criteria of the DEIS, DMP and NPRM; and each other. Under this model, some National Historic Preservation Act) in 4. Preparation and release of a final examples of sites which might be the waters off Cape Hatteras (at least 75 environmental impact statement and included are: USS YP–389, U–85, known wrecks in Federal waters with at final management plan, including a U–352, U–701, HMT Bedfordshire, least 175 additional sites in adjacent response to public comments, with a Diamond Shoals Lightship, and E.M. state waters), several representative final rule if appropriate. Clark (this is a sample list only and may wrecks from multiple periods of history With this document, NOAA is include additional wrecks). This model and cultural significance. The area in opening a public comment period to: would include wrecks listed on the between known sites would be designed 1. Gather information and public National Register of Historic Places, as a ‘study area’ allowing for inclusion comments from individuals, state craft, military gravesites and other of sites as they are identified. organizations, and government agencies

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 881

on whether to expand sanctuary DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND tribes for affordable housing activities. boundaries, suggestions for the extent URBAN DEVELOPMENT The amount of assistance made and configuration of an expanded available to each Indian tribe is boundary, and the potential effects of a 24 CFR Chapter IX determined using a formula that was boundary expansion; and [Docket No. FR–5650–N–11] developed as part of the NAHASDA 2. Help determine the scope of issues negotiated process. Based on the to be addressed in the preparation of an Native American Housing Assistance amount of funding appropriated for the environmental impact statement (EIS) and Self-Determination Act of 1996: IHBG program, HUD calculates the annual grant for each Indian tribe and pursuant to NEPA. Negotiated Rulemaking Committee; Notice of Eighth Meeting provides this information to the Indian IV. Consultation Under the National tribes. An Indian Housing Plan for the AGENCY: Office of Assistant Secretary for Historic Preservation Act Indian tribe is then submitted to HUD. Public and Indian Housing, HUD. If the Indian Housing Plan is found to This document confirms that NOAA ACTION: Notice of meetings of negotiated be in compliance with statutory and will fulfill its responsibility under rulemaking committee. regulatory requirements, the grant is section 106 of the National Historic SUMMARY: This notice announces the made. Preservation Act (NHPA, 16 U.S.C. 470) eighth meeting of the Indian Housing On July 3, 2012 at 77 FR 39452, HUD through the ongoing NEPA process, Block Grant (IHBG) program negotiated announced its intention to establish a pursuant to 36 CFR 800.8(a), including rulemaking committee. negotiated rulemaking committee for the the use of NEPA documents and public DATES: The eighth meeting will be held purpose of developing regulatory and stakeholder meetings to meet the on Tuesday, January 26, 2016 and changes to the formula allocation for the section 106 requirements. The NHPA Wednesday, January 27, 2016. On each IHBG program. On June 12, 2013 at 78 specifically applies to any agency day, the session will begin at FR 35178, HUD announced the list of undertaking that may affect historic approximately 8:30 a.m., and adjourn at proposed members for the negotiated properties. Pursuant to 36 CFR approximately 5:30 p.m. rulemaking committee, and requested 800.16(l)(1), a ‘‘historic property means additional public comment on the ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place proposed membership. On July 30, 2013 any prehistoric or historic district, site, at the Weaver Building, U.S. at 78 FR 45903, HUD announced the building, structure, or object included Department of Housing and Urban in, or eligible for inclusion in, the Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., final list of committee members to National Register of Historic Places Washington, DC 20410. revise the allocation formula used under maintained by the Secretary of the the IHBG. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Committee meetings have taken place Interior. The term includes artifacts, Randy Akers, Acting Deputy Assistant on August 27–28, 2013, September 17– records, and remains that are related to Secretary for Native American 19, 2013, April 23–24, 2014, June 11–13, and located within such properties. The Programs, Office of Public and Indian 2014, July 29–31, 2014, August 26–28, term includes properties of traditional Housing, Department of Housing and 2014, and August 11–13, 2015. All of religious and cultural importance to an Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street the Committee meetings were Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian SW., Room 4126, Washington, DC announced in the Federal Register and organization and that meet the National 20410, telephone number 202–401–7914 were open to the public.1 Register criteria.’’ (this is not a toll-free number). Hearing- In fulfilling its responsibility under or speech-impaired individuals may II. Eighth Committee Meeting access this number via TTY by calling the NHPA and NEPA, NOAA intends to The eighth meeting of the IHBG the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 1– identify consulting parties; identify Formula Negotiated Rulemaking 800–877–8339. historic properties and assess the effects Committee will be held on Tuesday, of the undertaking on such properties; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: January 26, 2016 and Wednesday, initiate formal consultation with the I. Background January 27, 2016. On each day, the State Historic Preservation Officer, the session will begin at approximately 8:30 Advisory Council of Historic The Native American Housing and Assistance and Self-Determination Act a.m., and adjourn at approximately 5:30 Preservation, and other consulting p.m. The meeting will take place at the parties; involve the public in of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4101 et seq.) (NAHASDA) changed the way that Weaver Building, U.S. Department of accordance with NOAA’s NEPA housing assistance is provided to Native Housing and Urban Development, 451 procedures; and in consultation with Americans. NAHASDA eliminated Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC the identified consulting parties, several separate assistance programs 20410. The primary agenda items for develop alternatives and proposed and replaced them with a single block this meeting will be limited to measures that might avoid, minimize or grant program, known as the Indian discussion and vote on adjustments to mitigate any adverse effects on historic Housing Block Grant (IHBG) program. data sources and approval of final properties and describe them in any The regulations governing the IHBG preamble language. environmental assessment or draft formula allocation are codified in These meetings will be open to the environmental impact statement. subpart D of part 1000 of HUD’s public; however, all members of the Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. regulations in title 24 of the Code of public will be required to register their 470. Federal Regulations. In accordance with attendance; present valid identification, and be subject to security screening Dated: December 22, 2015. section 106 of NAHASDA, HUD developed the regulations with active upon entrance to the building. The John Armor, tribal participation using the procedures deadline for registration is 5:00 p.m. Acting Director, Office of National Marine of the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of Sanctuaries. 1 See, 78 FR 45903 (July 30, 2013), 78 FR 54416 1990 (5 U.S.C. 561–570). (September 4, 2013), 79 FR 14204 (March 13, 2014), [FR Doc. 2015–33169 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Under the IHBG program, HUD makes 79 FR 29700 (May 23, 2014), 80 FR 30004 (May 26, BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P assistance available to eligible Indian 2015).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 882 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

Eastern Standard Time, January 22, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: framework addressing the manner and 2016. The public may register using the Robert Basso at (202) 317–7011 (not a timing for donee reporting under section following link: http:// toll-free number). 170(f)(8)(D). On September 17, 2015, a newregistration.firstpic.org/rulemaking/ SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: notice of proposed rulemaking (REG– index.php or by calling 1–202–393– 138344–13) was published in the 6400 (this is not a toll-free number). Background Federal Register (80 FR 55802). The Through the registration process, Section 170(f)(8)(A) of the Internal proposed framework for donee reporting attendees will be informed of the Revenue Code provides the statutory was based on a specific-use information acceptable forms of identification to requirement that a taxpayer who claims return that would include, among other present for admittance to the building. a charitable contribution deduction for things, the donor’s name, address, and Public attendance may be limited to the any contribution of $250 or more obtain taxpayer identification number. Similar space available. Members of the public substantiation in the form of a to other specific-use information returns may make statements during the contemporaneous written filed with the IRS, the donor’s taxpayer meetings, to the extent time permits, acknowledgment (CWA) from the donee identification number was required in and file written statements with the organization. However, in section order to properly associate the donation committee for its consideration. Written 170(f)(8)(D), Congress provided an information with the correct taxpayer. statements should be submitted to the exception to the CWA requirement. Unlike a CWA, which is not sent to the address listed in the FOR FURTHER Under the exception, a CWA is not IRS, the donee reporting information INFORMATION CONTACT section of this required if the donee organization files return would be sent to the IRS, which document. a return on such form and in accordance must have a means to store, maintain, with such regulations as the Treasury and readily retrieve the return III. Future Committee Meetings Department may prescribe (donee information for a specific taxpayer if Notices of all future meetings will be reporting). and when substantiation is required in published in the Federal Register. HUD Section 1.170A–13(f) of the Income the course of an examination. will make every effort to publish such Tax Regulations provides the rules The proposed framework for donee notices at least 15 calendar days prior to issued by the Treasury Department and reporting was intended to minimize the each meeting. the IRS for substantiating charitable reporting burden on donee contributions of $250 or more. See TD organizations by making it voluntary, Dated: December 31, 2015. 8690 (1997–1 CB 68). When issuing TD and to protect donor privacy by not Lourdes Castro Ramı´rez, 8690 in 1997, the Treasury Department using the Form 990 series. In the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for and the IRS specifically declined to preamble to the proposed regulations, Public and Indian Housing. issue regulations to implement donee the Treasury Department and the IRS [FR Doc. 2016–00185 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] reporting under section 170(f)(8)(D). The expressed concern about the potential BILLING CODE 4210–67–P IRS has consistently maintained that the risk for identity theft with a donee section 170(f)(8)(D) exception is not reporting system based on a specific-use available unless and until the Treasury information return because donee DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Department and the IRS issue final organizations would be collecting regulations prescribing the method for donors’ taxpayer identification numbers Internal Revenue Service donee reporting. Nevertheless, some and maintaining those numbers for taxpayers under examination for their some period of time. The Treasury 26 CFR Part 1 claimed charitable contribution Department and the IRS requested deductions have recently argued that a comments, including specifically on [REG–138344–13] failure to comply with the CWA whether additional guidance was requirements of section 170(f)(8)(A) may necessary regarding the procedures a RIN 1545–BL94 be cured if the donee organization files donee organization should use to an amended Form 990, ‘‘Return of mitigate the risk of identity theft of Substantiation Requirement for Certain Organization Exempt From Income donor information. Contributions; Withdrawal Tax,’’ that includes the donor’s The Treasury Department and the IRS contribution information. These received a substantial number of public AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), taxpayers argue that an amended Form comments in response to the notice of Treasury. 990 constitutes permissible donee proposed rulemaking. Many of these ACTION: Withdrawal of notice of reporting under section 170(f)(8)(D), public comments questioned the need proposed rulemaking. even if the amended Form 990 is for donee reporting, and many submitted to the IRS many years after comments expressed significant SUMMARY: This document withdraws the purported charitable contribution concerns about donee organizations proposed regulations that would was made. In response to some donors’ collecting and maintaining taxpayer implement the statutory exception to requests, some donee organizations have identification numbers for purposes of the ‘‘contemporaneous written filed amended Forms 990 attempting to the specific-use information return. In acknowledgement’’ requirement for effectuate donee reporting. The Treasury response to those comments, the substantiating charitable contribution Department and the IRS have concluded Treasury Department and the IRS have deductions of $250 or more. The that the Form 990 is an unsuitable decided against implementing the withdrawal affects persons that make reporting method for this purpose and statutory exception to the CWA charitable contributions and may not be used to effectuate donee requirement, and therefore that organizations that receive charitable reporting. exception remains unavailable unless contributions. However, in response to the interest and until final regulations are issued DATES: As of January 8, 2016 the notice by some taxpayers in donee reporting prescribing the method for donee of proposed rulemaking published on under the statutory exception, the reporting. Accordingly, the notice of September 17, 2015 (80 FR 55802), is Treasury Department and the IRS proposed rulemaking is being withdrawn. proposed regulations to implement a withdrawn.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 883

List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1 all correspondence related to this case. to 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2) because it applies Income taxes, Reporting and All comments will be posted without to agency management or personnel. change to http://www.regulations.gov, recordkeeping requirements. D. Paperwork Reduction Act including any personal and/or business Withdrawal of Notice of Proposed confidential information provided. To The Paperwork Reduction Act does Rulemaking confirm receipt of your comment(s), not apply because the proposed changes Under the authority of 26 U.S.C. 7805, please check www.regulations.gov to the FTR do not impose recordkeeping the notice of proposed rulemaking approximately two to three days after or information collection requirements, (REG–138344–13) that was published in submission to verify posting (except or the collection of information from the Federal Register on September 17, allow 30 days for posting of comments offerors, contractors, or members of the 2015 (80 FR 55802) is withdrawn. submitted by mail). public that require the approval of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Office of Management and Budget Karen M. Schiller, clarification of content, contact Mr. Cy (OMB) under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. Acting Deputy Commissioner for Services and Greenidge, Program Analyst, Office of Enforcement. E. Small Business Regulatory Government-wide Policy, at 202–219– Enforcement Fairness Act [FR Doc. 2016–00189 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] 2349. Contact the Regulatory Secretariat BILLING CODE 4830–01–P (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., This proposed rule is also exempt Washington, DC 20405, 202–501–4755, from Congressional review prescribed for information pertaining to status or under 5 U.S.C. 801. This proposed rule GENERAL SERVICES publication schedules. Please cite FTR is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804. ADMINISTRATION case 2015–304. List of Subjects in 41 CFR Parts 300–3, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 41 CFR Parts 300–3, 301–11, 301–12, 301–11, 301–12 and 301–70 and 301–70 A. Background Administrative practices and procedures, Government employees, [FTR Case 2015–304; Docket 2015–0017, The FTR currently lists incidental Sequence 1] expenses as fees and tips given to Travel and transportation expenses. Dated: December 7, 2015. RIN 3090–AJ56 porters, baggage carriers, hotel staff, and staff on ships. Including ATM fees in Giancarlo Brizzi, Federal Travel Regulation; Updating incidental expenses, rather than Acting Associate Administrator (M), Office the Incidental Expenses Definition and reimbursing as a miscellaneous expense, of Government-wide Policy. the Laundry, Cleaning, and Pressing of will increase the Government’s ability to For the reasons set forth in the Clothing Policy project travel costs, improve cost preamble, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5701– control, and simplify rules of official 5711, GSA proposes to amend 41 CFR AGENCY: Office of Government-wide travel. Additionally, this proposed rule parts 300–3, 301–11, 301–12, and 301– Policy (OGP), General Services removes the ambiguity on whether 70 as set forth below: Administration (GSA). reimbursement of expenses for laundry, ACTION: Proposed rule. cleaning, and pressing of clothing for PART 300–3—GLOSSARY OF TERMS employees who go on official travel are SUMMARY: GSA is proposing to amend subject to agency discretion. ■ 1. The authority citation for 41 CFR the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) by part 300–3 continues to read as follows: updating the definition for incidental B. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 expenses to include ATM fees, and by Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5707; 40 U.S.C. 121(c); Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 49 U.S.C. 40118; 5 U.S.C. 5738; 5 U.S.C. clarifying the policy for laundry, 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs 5741–5742; 20 U.S.C. 905(a); 31 U.S.C. 1353; cleaning, and pressing of clothing. and benefits of available regulatory E.O 11609, as amended, 3 CFR, 1971–1975 DATES: Interested parties should submit alternatives, and if regulation is Comp. p. 586, Office of Management and comments to the Regulatory Secretariat necessary, to select regulatory Budget Circular No. A–126, revised May 22, at one of the addresses shown below on approaches that maximize net benefits 1992. or before March 8, 2016 to be (including potential economic, ■ 2. Amend § 300–3.1 in the definition considered in the formation of the final environmental, public health and safety ‘‘Per diem allowance’’ by revising rule. effects, distributive impacts, and paragraph (c) to read as follows: ADDRESSES: Submit comments equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the identified by FTR Case 2015–304 by any importance of quantifying both costs § 300–3.1 What do the following terms of the following methods: and benefits, of reducing costs, of mean? • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// harmonizing rules, and of promoting * * * * * www.regulations.gov. Submit comments flexibility. This proposed rule is not a Per diem allowance *** via the Federal eRulemaking portal by significant regulatory action, and (c) Incidental expenses—Transaction searching for ‘‘FTR Case 2015–304.’’ therefore, was not subject to review fees for ATM services, and fees and tips Select the link ‘‘Comment Now’’ that under Section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, given to porters, baggage carriers, hotel corresponds with ‘‘FTR Case 2015–304’’ Regulatory Planning and Review, dated staff, and staff on ships. and follow the instructions provided at September 30, 1993. * * * * * the screen. Please include your name, C. Regulatory Flexibility Act company name (if any), and ‘‘FTR Case PART 301–11—PER DIEM EXPENSES 2015–304’’ on your attached document. This proposed rule would not have a ■ 3. The authority citation for 41 CFR • Mail: General Services significant economic impact on a part 301–11 continues to read as Administration, Regulatory Secretariat substantial number of small entities follows: (MVCB), Attn. Ms. Flowers, 1800 F within the meaning of the Regulatory Street NW., Washington, DC 20405. Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. This Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5707. Instructions: Please submit comments proposed rule is also exempt from the ■ 4. Amend § 301–11.31 by removing only and cite ‘‘FTR Case 2015–304’’, in Administrative Procedure Act pursuant the first two sentences and adding one

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 884 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

sentence in their place to read as (c) Who will determine if other along with all other written comments follows: miscellaneous expenses such as received during the comment period expenses for laundry, cleaning and specified in the NPRM. Individuals or § 301–11.31 Are laundry, cleaning, and pressing of clothing are appropriate for representatives of interested pressing of clothing expenses reimbursable? reimbursement in connection with organizations are invited to participate official travel. in the public hearing in accordance with Your agency may reimburse the the schedule and procedures set forth expenses incurred for laundry, cleaning, [FR Doc. 2015–33147 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820–14–P below. and pressing of clothing as a The presiding officer representing the miscellaneous travel expense for TDY Secretary, HHS will be Dr. Melissa within CONUS. * * * Houston, Director, Division of Injury DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Compensation Programs, Healthcare PART 301–12—MISCELLANEOUS HUMAN SERVICES Systems Bureau (HSB), Health EXPENSES Resources and Services Administration. 42 CFR Part 100 ■ 5. The authority citation for 41 CFR Persons who wish to participate are part 301–12 continues to read as RIN 0906–AB00 requested to file a notice of participation follows: with the Department of Health and National Vaccine Injury Compensation Human Services (HHS) on or before Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5707. Program: Revisions to the Vaccine January 11, 2016. The notice should be § 301–12.1 [Amended] Injury Table mailed to Annie Herzog, Division of Injury Compensation Programs, HSB, ■ 6. Amend § 301–12.1 by removing AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Room from the second column titled ‘‘Fees to ACTION: Notice of public hearing. 08N146B, Maryland 20857 or emailed to obtain money’’ the words ‘‘Transaction [email protected]. To ensure timely SUMMARY: fees for use of automated teller This document announces a handling, any outer envelope or the machines (ATMs)—Government public hearing to receive information subject line of an email should be contractor-issued charge card’’. and views on the Notice of Proposed clearly marked ‘‘DICP NPRM Hearing.’’ Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ‘‘National The notice of participation should PART 301–70—INTERNAL POLICY Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: AND PROCEDURE REQUIREMENTS contain the interested person’s name, Revisions to the Vaccine Injury Table.’’ address, email address, telephone ■ 7. The authority citation for 41 CFR DATES: January 14, 2016, from 11 a.m.– number, any business or organizational part 301–70 continues to read as 12:30 p.m. (EST). affiliation of the person desiring to make follows: ADDRESSES: 5600 Fishers Lane, a presentation, a brief summary of the Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5707; 40 U.S.C. 121(c); Conference Room 08SWH01, Rockville, presentation, and the approximate time Sec. 2, Pub. L. 105–264, 112 Stat. 2350 (5 Maryland 20857 (and via audio requested for the presentation. Groups U.S.C. 5701, note), OMB Circular No. A–126, conference call and Adobe Connect). that have similar interests should revised May 22, 1992, and OMB Circular No. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. consolidate their comments as part of A–123, Appendix B, revised January 15, Melissa Houston, Director, Division of one presentation. Time available for the 2009. Injury Compensation Programs, at 855– hearing will be allocated among the ■ 8. Amend § 301–70.200 by— 266–2427 or by email at persons who properly file notices of ■ a. Removing from paragraph (f) the [email protected]. participation. If time permits, interested parties attending the hearing who did ‘‘cases and’’ and adding ‘‘cases’’ in its SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The place; not submit notice of participation in Secretary proposes to amend the advance will be allowed to make an oral ■ b. Removing from paragraph (g) the Vaccine Injury Table (Table) by presentation at the conclusion of the period after the citation ‘‘§ 301– regulation. These proposed regulations hearing. 11.18(c)’’ and adding ‘‘; and’’ in its will have effect only for petitions for Persons who find that there is place; and compensation under the National insufficient time to submit the required ■ c. Adding paragraph (h) to read as Vaccine Injury Compensation Program information in writing may give oral follows: (VICP) filed after the final regulations notice of participation by contacting § 301–70.200 What governing policies become effective. The Secretary is Annie Herzog, Division of Injury must we establish for authorization and seeking public comment on the Compensation Programs, at (301) 443– payment of per diem expenses? proposed revisions to the Table. 6634 or email at [email protected], no * * * * * The NPRM was published in the later than January 11, 2016. (h) Who will determine, and in what Federal Register, July 29, 2015, 80 FR After reviewing the notices of instances, an employee will be 45132, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/ participation and accompanying separately reimbursed for transaction FR-2015-07-29/pdf/2015-17503.pdf. The information, HHS will schedule each fees for use of automated teller public comment period closes on appearance and notify each participant machines (ATMs) when using the January 26, 2016. by mail, email, or telephone of the time Government contractor-issued charge A public hearing will be held within allotted to the person(s) and the card, even though this expense is part the 180-day public comment period. approximate time the person’s oral of incidental expenses under per diem. This hearing is to provide an open presentation is scheduled to begin. ■ 9. Amend § 301–70.301 by revising forum for the presentation of Written comments and transcripts of paragraph (c) to read as follows: information and views concerning all the hearing will be made available for aspects of the NPRM by interested public inspection as soon as they have § 301–70.301 What governing policies persons. been prepared, on weekdays (federal must we establish for payment of In preparing a final regulation, the holidays excepted) between the hours of miscellaneous expenses? Secretary will consider the 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. (EDT) by * * * * * administrative record of this hearing contacting Annie Herzog by mail at

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 885

Division of Injury Compensation [email protected] if you are having Federal Register notice issued by any Programs, Room 08N146B, 5600 Fishers trouble connecting to the meeting site. agency. Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857, email Dated: January 4, 2016. Fax: 1–202–493–2251. at [email protected], or phone at 301– Sylvia M. Burwell, Mail: Docket Management Facility; 443–6634. We intend to post written Secretary. U.S. Department of Transportation comments and transcripts to (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., regulations.gov as soon as practicable. [FR Doc. 2016–00156 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] West Building, Room W12–140, The public can join the meeting by: BILLING CODE 4165–15–P Washington, DC 20590–001. 1. (In Person) Persons interested in Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on the attending the meeting in person are ground level of the DOT West Building, encouraged to submit a written DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., notification to: Annie Herzog, Division Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Washington, DC, between 9:00 a.m. and of Injury Compensation Programs, Safety Administration 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, Healthcare Systems Bureau (HSB), except on Federal Holidays. Health Resources and Services 49 CFR Part 195 Instructions: Identify the docket Administration (HRSA), 5600 Fishers numbers, PHMSA–2010–0229 and Lane, Room 08N146B, Rockville, [Docket No. PHMSA–2015–0173] PHMSA–2015–0173 at the beginning of Maryland 20857 or email: your comments. Note that all comments [email protected]. Since this meeting is Pipeline Safety: Notice of Liquid received will be posted without change held in a federal government building, Pipeline Advisory Committee Meeting to http://www.regulations.gov, including attendees will need to go through a AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous any personal information provided. You security check to enter the building and Materials Safety Administration should know that anyone is able to participate in the meeting. This written (PHMSA); DOT. search the electronic form of all notification is encouraged so that a list ACTION: Notice of Liquid Pipeline comments received into any of our of attendees can be provided to make Advisory Committee meeting. dockets by the name of the individual entry through security quicker. Persons submitting the comment (or signing the may attend in person without providing SUMMARY: This document announces a comment, if submitted on behalf of an written notification, but their entry into public meeting of the Liquid Pipeline association, business, labor union, etc.). the building may be delayed due to Advisory Committee (LPAC). The Therefore, you may want to review security checks and the requirement to committee will meet to consider and DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement be escorted to the meeting by a federal vote on the proposed rule, ‘‘Pipeline in the Federal Register published on government employee. To request an Safety: Safety of Hazardous Liquid April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477) or view escort to the meeting after entering the Pipelines,’’ and the associated the Privacy Notice at http:// building, call Annie Herzog at 301–443– regulatory assessment. www.regulations.gov before submitting 6634. The meeting will be held at 5600 DATES: The meeting will be held on any such comments. Fishers Lane, Conference Room Monday, February 1, 2016, from 10:00 Docket: For access to the docket or to 08SWH01, Rockville, Maryland 20857. a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST. read background documents or Individuals who plan to attend and The meeting will not be web cast; comments, go to http:// need special assistance, such as sign however, presentations will be available www.regulations.gov at any time or to language interpretation or other on the meeting Web site and posted on Room W12–140 on the ground level of reasonable accommodations, should the E-Gov Web site: http:// the DOT West Building, 1200 New notify the contact person listed above at www.regulations.gov under docket Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, least 10 days prior to the meeting. number PHMSA–2015–0173 within 30 between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., 2. (Audio Portion) Calling the days following the meeting. Monday through Friday, except Federal conference phone number 888–455– ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place holidays. 9673 and providing the following in the Washington, DC Metropolitan If you wish to receive confirmation of information: area at a location yet to be determined. receipt of your written comments, Leaders Name: Dr. A. Melissa The location of the meeting and other please include a self-addressed, Houston. details will be posted on the PHMSA stamped postcard with the following Password: 4185364. Web site under Regulations/Pipeline statement: ‘‘Comments on PHMSA– 3. (Visual Portion) Connecting to the Advisory Committees at http:// 2010–0229 and PHMSA 2015–0173.’’ ACCV Adobe Connect Pro Meeting www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/regs/ The Docket Clerk will date-stamp the using the following URL: https:// technical-advisory-comm about 15 days postcard prior to returning it to you via hrsa.connectsolutions.com/accv/ (copy before the meeting date. Individuals the U.S. mail. Please note that due to and paste the link into your browser if wishing to attend and receive an email delays in the delivery of U.S. mail to it does not work directly, and enter as with the location should register in Federal offices in Washington, DC, we a guest). Participants should call and advance at https:// recommend that persons consider an connect 15 minutes prior to the meeting primis.phmsa.dot.gov/meetings/ alternative method (internet, fax, or in order for logistics to be set up. If you MtgHome.mtg?mtg=110 or contact the professional delivery service) of have never attended an Adobe Connect individual listed under FOR FURTHER submitting comments to the docket and meeting, please test your connection INFORMATION CONTACT by January 15, ensuring their timely receipt at DOT. using the following URL: https:// 2016. Privacy Act Statement hrsa.connectsolutions.com/common/ Comments on the meeting may be help/en/support/meeting_test.htm and submitted to the docket in the following Anyone may search the electronic get a quick overview by following URL: ways: form of all comments received for any http://www.adobe.com/go/ E-Gov Web site: http:// of our dockets. You may review DOT’s connectpro_overview. Call (301) 443– www.regulations.gov. This site allows complete Privacy Act Statement in the 6634 or send an email to the public to enter comments on any Federal Register published on April 11,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 886 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

2000, (70 FR 19477) or visit http:// practicability, and cost-effectiveness of Issued in Washington, DC, on January 4, dms.dot.gov. each proposed pipeline safety standard. 2016, under authority delegated in 49 CFR PHMSA staff may also provide an 1.97. Information on Services for Individuals Alan K. Mayberry, With Disabilities update on several regulatory and policy initiatives if time allows. Deputy Associate Administrator for Policy For information on facilities or and Programs. services for individuals with III. Preliminary Agenda [FR Doc. 2016–00135 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] disabilities, or to seek special assistance BILLING CODE 4910–60–P at the meeting, please contact Cheryl The agenda will include the Whetsel at 202–366–4431 by January 15, committee’s discussion and vote on the proposed rule, ‘‘Pipeline Safety: Safety 2016. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For of Hazardous Liquid Pipelines,’’ information about the meetings, contact published in the Federal Register on Fish and Wildlife Service Cheryl Whetsel by phone at 202–366– October 13, 2015, (80 FR 61610) and on 4431 or by email at the associated regulatory analysis. 50 CFR Parts 32 and 36 [email protected] or for technical The proposed rule includes critical questions about the proposed rule safety improvements for hazardous [Docket No. FWS–R7–NWRS–2014–0005; FF07R06000 167 FXRS12610700000] contact Mike Israni by phone at 202– liquid pipelines and seeks to strengthen 366–4595 or by email at the way they are operated, inspected RIN 1018–BA31 [email protected]. and maintained in the United States. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Non-Subsistence Take of Wildlife, and In this proposed rule, PHMSA Public Participation and Closure I. Meeting Details addresses effective measures that Procedures, on National Wildlife hazardous liquid operators can take to Members of the public may attend Refuges in Alaska improve the protection of high and make a statement during the AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, advisory committee meetings. For a consequence areas and other vulnerable Interior. better chance to speak at the meetings, areas along their hazardous liquid please contact the individual listed onshore pipelines. In summary, the ACTION: Proposed rule; announcement of under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION proposed rule addresses the following open houses and public hearings. CONTACT by January 15, 2016. areas: • SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and II. Committee Background Requirements for gravity lines. Wildlife Service (USFWS), published a • Reporting requirements for The LPAC is a statutorily created proposed rule elsewhere in today’s committee that advises PHMSA on gathering lines. Federal Register to amend our proposed safety standards, risks • Inspections of pipelines following regulations for National Wildlife assessments, and safety policies for extreme weather events. Refuges (refuges) in Alaska. The public comment period on the proposed rule hazardous liquid pipelines (49 U.S.C. • Periodic assessments of pipelines 60115). The committee’s activities are closes on the date specified in that not subject to integrity management. document. This supplementary subject to the Federal Advisory • Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463, 5 U.S.C. Pipeline repair criteria. document contains the dates, times, and App. 1). The committee consists of 15 • Expanded use of leak detection locations for the upcoming open houses members—with membership evenly systems. and public hearings on the proposed rule. divided among the federal and state • Increased use of in-line inspection government, the regulated industry, and tools. DATES: We will hold nine open houses the public. The committee advises • and public hearings on the proposed PHMSA on technical feasibility, Clarifying other requirements. rule as follows:

Date City Time of open house Time of public hearing

January 26 , 2016 ...... Kotzebue, Alaska ...... 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m...... 2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. January 27, 2016 ...... Kodiak, Alaska ...... 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m...... 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. February 8, 2016 ...... Bethel, Alaska ...... 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m...... 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. February 10, 2016 ...... Fairbanks, Alaska ...... 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m...... 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. February 11, 2016 ...... Tok, Alaska ...... 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m...... 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. February 16, 2016 ...... Soldonta, Alaska ...... 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m...... 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. February 18, 2016 ...... Anchorage, Alaska ...... 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m...... 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. March 1, 2016 ...... Dillingham, Alaska ...... 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m...... 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. March 3, 2016 ...... Galena, Alaska ...... 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m...... 2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Document Availability: You www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, Processing, Attn: FWS–R7–NWRS– may obtain copies of the proposed rule enter FWS–R7–NWRS–2014–0005, 2014–0005; Division of Policy, at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket which is the docket number for this Performance, and Management No. FWS–R7–NWRS–2014–0005. rulemaking. Then click on the Search Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Comment Submission: You may button. On the resulting page, you may Service, MS: BPHC; 5275 Leesburg Pike, submit comments on the proposed rule submit a comment by clicking on Falls Church, VA 22041–3803. by any one of the following methods: ‘‘Comment Now!’’ (3) At open houses or the public (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail hearings: Written comments will be eRulemaking Portal: http:// or hand-delivery to: Public Comments accepted by Service personnel at any of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 887

the nine scheduled open houses or We request that you send comments means that we will post any personal public hearings. Public testimony will only by the methods described above. information you provide us. be recorded and submitted for the We will post all comments on http:// Open Houses and Public Hearings: record at the public hearings via a court www.regulations.gov. This generally We will hold open houses and public reporter. hearings at the following locations:

City Location information

Kodiak, Alaska ...... Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge Visitor Center, 402 Center Ave, Kodiak, Alaska; 907–487–2600. Bethel, Alaska ...... Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge Conference Room, 807 Chief, Eddie Hoffman Highway, Bethel, Alaska; 907–543–3151. Fairbanks, Alaska ...... Morris Thompson Cultural and Visitor Center, 101 Dunkel St., Fairbanks, Alaska; 907–456–0440. Tok, Alaska ...... Tok School, 249 Jon Summar Road, Tok, Alaska; 907–883–5312. Soldonta, Alaska ...... Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Visitor Center, Ski Hill Road, Soldotna, Alaska; 907–260–2820. Anchorage, Alaska ...... U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Office, Gordon Watson Conference Room, 1011 Tudor Rd., Anchorage, Alaska; 907–786–3872. Dillingham, Alaska ...... Dillingham City Council Chambers, 141 Main Street, Dillingham, Alaska; 907–842–1063. Galena, Alaska ...... Charlie Larsen Community Hall, Galena, Alaska; 907–656–1231. Kotzebue, Alaska ...... Selawik National Wildlife Refuge Conference Room at the Selawik National Wildlife Refuge Headquarters, 160 Second Avenue, Kotzebue, Alaska; 907–442–3799.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: hearings, the open houses allow the Authority Stephanie Brady, Chief of Conservation public the opportunity to interact with The authority for this action is 5 Planning and Policy, National Wildlife Service staff, who will be available to U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 460k et seq., 664, Refuge System, Alaska Regional Office, provide information and address 668dd–668ee, 715i, and 3101 et seq. 1011 E. Tudor Rd., Mail Stop 211, questions on the proposed rule and the Anchorage, AK 99503; telephone (907) environmental assessment. Karen Hyun, 306–7448. Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and We cannot accept verbal testimony at SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Wildlife and Parks. any of the open houses; verbal [FR Doc. 2016–00021 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Background testimony can only be accepted at the BILLING CODE 4333–15–P We published a proposed rule public hearings. Anyone wishing to elsewhere in today’s Federal Register to make an oral statement at a public clarify how our existing mandates for hearing for the record is encouraged to DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR the conservation of natural and provide a written copy of their biological diversity, biological integrity, statement to us at the hearing. In the Fish and Wildlife Service and environmental health on refuges in event there is a large attendance, the Alaska relate to predator control; time allotted for oral statements may be 50 CFR Parts 32 and 36 prohibit several particularly effective limited. Speakers can sign up at a [Docket No. FWS–R7–NWRS–2014–0005; methods and means for take of hearing if they desire to make an oral FF07R05000 145 FXRS12610700000] predators; and update our public statement. Oral and written statements RIN 1018–BA31 participation and closure procedures. receive equal consideration. There are The proposed rule would not change no limits on the length of written Non-Subsistence Take of Wildlife, and Federal subsistence regulations or comments submitted to us. Public Participation and Closure restrict the taking of fish or wildlife for Persons with disabilities needing Procedures, on National Wildlife subsistence uses under Federal Refuges in Alaska subsistence regulations. See the reasonable accommodations to proposed rule and associated participate in an open house or public AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, environmental assessment at http:// hearing should contact Stephanie Brady, Interior. www.regulations.gov at Docket No. Chief of Conservation Planning and ACTION: Proposed rule. FWS–R7–NWRS–2014–0005 for further Policy, National Wildlife Refuge details. System, Alaska (see FOR FURTHER SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), propose to Open Houses and Public Hearings INFORMATION CONTACT). Reasonable accommodation requests should be amend our regulations for National We are holding nine open houses and received at least 3 business days prior Wildlife Refuges (refuges) in Alaska. public hearings on the dates listed to the open house or public hearing to This proposed rule clarifies how our DATES existing mandates for the conservation above in the section at the help ensure availability; American Sign ADDRESSES of natural and biological diversity, locations listed above in the Language or English as a second section. We are holding the public biological integrity, and environmental language interpreter needs should be hearings to provide interested parties an health on refuges in Alaska relate to received at least 2 weeks prior to the opportunity to present verbal testimony predator control; prohibits several (formal, oral comments) or written open house or public meeting. particularly effective methods and comments regarding the proposed rule Authors means for take of predators; and updates and associated environmental our public participation and closure assessment. A formal public hearing is The primary author of this document procedures. This proposed rule would not, however, an opportunity for is Stephanie Brady, Chief of not change Federal subsistence dialogue with the Service; it is only a Conservation Planning and Policy, regulations or restrict the taking of fish forum for accepting formal verbal National Wildlife Refuge System, or wildlife for subsistence uses under testimony. In contrast to the public Anchorage Regional Office. Federal subsistence regulations.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 888 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

DATES: We must receive your comments for management specific to refuges in maintaining natural diversity of fish and on or before March 8, 2016. Alaska. ANILCA added approximately wildlife populations and their ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 54 million acres of land to the NWRS in dependent habitats for the long term by any one of the following methods: Alaska, managed by USFWS; benefit of all citizens’’ (126 Cong. Rec. (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal established nine new refuges; and H12,352–53 (daily ed. Dec. 11, 1980) eRulemaking Portal: http:// established or redesignated seven other (statement of Rep. Udall). www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, already established refuges. ANILCA In its ANILCA Title VIII statement of enter FWS–R7–NWRS–2014–0005, also designated 18.7 million acres in 13 policy, Congress stated, ‘‘nonwasteful which is the docket number for this wilderness areas on refuges in Alaska as subsistence uses of fish and wildlife and rulemaking. Then click on the Search units of the National Wilderness other renewable resources [by rural button. On the resulting page, you may Preservation System. residents] shall be the priority submit a comment by clicking on Under ANILCA, each refuge in Alaska consumptive uses of all such resources ‘‘Comment Now!’’ has a nonexclusive list of purposes for on the public lands of Alaska when it (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail which it was established, including to is necessary to restrict taking in order to or hand-delivery to: Public Comments ‘‘conserve fish and wildlife populations assure the continued viability of a fish Processing, Attn: FWS–R7–NWRS– and habitats in their natural diversity’’ or wildlife population or the 2014–0005; Division of Policy, followed by a list of representative continuation of subsistence uses of such Performance, and Management species particular to each refuge. Under population, the taking of such Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife ANILCA, all other refuge establishment population for nonwasteful subsistence Service, MS: BPHC; 5275 Leesburg Pike, purposes for Alaska refuges (except uses shall be given preference on the Falls Church, VA 22041–3803. international treaty obligations) must be public land over other consumptive (3) In person: We will hold nine open managed consistently with the first uses’’ (16 U.S.C. 3112(2)). This houses and public hearings at which purpose for the conservation of natural subsistence preference includes all comments may be submitted. See the diversity. While ‘‘natural diversity’’ is National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska. related document published elsewhere not defined in ANILCA, its legislative All refuges in Alaska (except the in today’s Federal Register with history provides guidance. The Senate Kenai National Wildlife Refuge) have information about the dates, times, and Report on H.R. 39 states that refuges among their stated statutory purposes to locations of those open houses and represent ‘‘the opportunity to manage provide the opportunity for continued hearings and the various ways in which these areas on a planned ecosystem- subsistence use by local rural residents oral and written comments will be wide basis with all of their pristine in a manner consistent with the accepted. ecological processes intact’’ (S. Rep. No. conservation of fish and wildlife We will post all comments on http:// 96–413 at 174 (1979), reprinted in 1980 populations and habitats in their natural www.regulations.gov. This generally U.S.C.C.A.N. 5118). Nine days after diversity and fulfilling the international means that we will post any personal ANILCA was signed into law on treaty obligations of the United States information you provide us. For December 2, 1980, Congressman Udall, with respect to fish and wildlife and additional information, see the Public during a speech on the floor of the their habitats. In a further statement of Participation and Public Availability of House of Representatives described the Title VIII policy, Congress stated that Comments sections, below. source of the term ‘‘natural diversity.’’ ‘‘consistent with sound management FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: He stated that the conservation of principles, and the conservation of Stephanie Brady, Chief of Conservation natural diversity refers not only to healthy populations of fish and wildlife, Planning and Policy, National Wildlife ‘‘protecting and managing all fish and the utilization of the public lands in Refuge System, Alaska Regional Office, wildlife populations within a particular Alaska is to cause the least adverse 1011 E. Tudor Rd., Mail Stop 211, wildlife refuge system unit in the impact possible on rural residents who Anchorage, AK 99503; telephone (907) natural ‘mix,’ not to emphasize depend upon subsistence uses of the 306–7448. management activities favoring one resources of such lands; consistent with SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: species to the detriment of another’’ management of fish and wildlife in (126 Cong. Rec. H12, 352–53 (daily ed. accordance with recognized scientific Background Dec. 11, 1980) (statement of Rep. principles and the purposes for each The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Udall)). During this floor speech, unit established . . . the purpose of this (USFWS) has various mandates it must Congressman Udall also stated that in title [Title VIII] is to provide the adhere to in managing the National managing for natural diversity it was the opportunity for rural residents engaged Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS). There intent of Congress, ‘‘to direct the U.S. in a subsistence way of life to do so’’ (16 are three statutes in particular that Fish and Wildlife Service to the best of U.S.C. 3112(1)). The Senate Committee provide direction and authority specific its ability, . . . to manage wildlife on Energy and Natural Resources in its to the Alaska NWRS: The 1980 Alaska refuges to assure that habitat diversity is report on H.R. 39 stated that ‘‘the phrase National Interest Lands Conservation maintained through natural means, ‘the conservation of healthy populations Act (ANILCA; 16 U.S.C. 3111–3126); the avoiding artificial developments and of fish and wildlife’ is to mean the 1997 National Wildlife Refuge System habitat manipulation programs ...; to maintenance of fish and wildlife Improvement Act (Improvement Act; 16 assure that wildlife refuge management resources in their habitats in a condition U.S.C. 668dd–668ee, which amended fully considers the fact that humans which assures stable and continuing the National Wildlife Administration reside permanently within the natural populations and species mix of Act of 1966 (Administration Act)); and boundaries of some areas and are plants and animals in relation to their the 1964 Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. dependent, . . . on wildlife refuge ecosystems, including recognition that 1131–1136). subsistence resources; and to allow local rural residents engaged in The Improvement Act provides that management flexibility in developing subsistence uses may be a natural part ANILCA takes precedence if there is a new and innovative management of that ecosystem . . . ’’ (S. Rep. No. 96– conflict between the two, and thus programs different from lower 48 413 at 233, reprinted in 1980 ANILCA provides the primary direction standards, but in the context of U.S.C.C.A.N. 5177).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 889

The USFWS recognizes the based on sound professional judgment, unless further restricted by Federal law importance of the fish, wildlife, and were present prior to substantial human (see 50 CFR 32.2(d)) or closures to other natural resources in the lives and related changes to the landscape.’’ In Federal public land, such as under cultures of Alaska Native peoples, rural implementing this policy on refuges, we Federal subsistence regulations (36 CFR residents, and in the lives of all favor ‘‘management that restores or 242.26 or 50 CFR 100.26). In Alaska, Alaskans, and we continue to recognize mimics natural ecosystem processes or sport hunting is commonly referred to subsistence uses of fish and wildlife and functions to achieve refuge as general hunting and trapping and other renewable resources as the purposes(s).’’ Additionally, under this includes State subsistence hunts and priority consumptive use on Federal policy, we ‘‘formulate refuge goals and general permits open to both Alaska lands in Alaska, which includes all objectives for population management residents and nonresidents (see National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska. by considering natural densities, social proposed definition under the Proposed This proposed rule would not change structures, and population dynamics at Regulation Promulgation section, existing or future Federal subsistence the refuge level’’ and manage below). These activities remain subject regulations (36 CFR 242 and 50 CFR populations for ‘‘natural densities and to Federal law, including mandates 100) or restrict taking of fish or wildlife levels of variation.’’ under ANILCA; the Improvement Act; for subsistence uses under Federal The Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C. and, where applicable, the Wilderness subsistence regulations. 1131–1136) states that wilderness ‘‘is Act. Applicable directives and guidance The Improvement Act states that hereby recognized as an area where the can also be found in policies in the earth and its community of life are refuges must be managed to fulfill the USFWS Manual at 601 FW 3 (Biological untrammeled by man . . . which is mission of the NWRS and purposes of Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental protected and managed so as to preserve the individual refuge. The Improvement Health), 610 FW 2 (Wilderness its natural conditions.’’ Our wilderness Act also clearly states the mission of the Administration and Resource stewardship policy (610 FW 1) NWRS, which is to ‘‘administer a Stewardship), and 605 FW 2 (Hunting). interprets ‘‘untrammeled’’ to be ‘‘the national network of lands and waters for Additionally, the regulations at 50 CFR freedom of a landscape from the human the conservation, management, and 36.32(a) state that the Refuge Manager intent to permanently intervene, alter, where appropriate, restoration of fish, ‘‘may designate areas where, and control, or manipulate natural wildlife, and plant resources and their establish periods when, no taking of a conditions or processes.’’ The second habitats within the United States for the particular population of fish or wildlife chapter of the wilderness stewardship shall be permitted.’’ benefit of present and future generations policy, which outlines administration of Americans.’’ Section 4(a)(4)(B) of the and resource stewardship (610 FW 2), The State of Alaska’s (State) legal Improvement Act states that ‘‘In directs that USFWS will not manipulate framework for managing wildlife in administering the System, the Secretary ecosystem processes, specifically Alaska is based on sustained yield, shall . . . ensure that the biological including predator/prey fluctuations, in which is defined by statute to mean ‘‘the integrity, diversity, and environmental wilderness areas unless ‘‘necessary to achievement and maintenance in health [BIDEH] of the System are accomplish the purposes of the refuge, perpetuity of the ability to support a maintained for the benefit of present including Wilderness Act purposes, or high level of human harvest of game, and future generations of Americans in cases where these processes become subject to preferences among beneficial . . .’’ (16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(4)(B)). The unnatural’’ (i.e., disrupted predator/prey uses, on an annual or periodic basis’’ USFWS BIDEH policy (601 FW 3), relationships, spread of invasive (Alaska Statute (AS) 16.05.255(j)(5)). which provides guidance for species, and so forth). Additionally, Since 1994, Alaska State law (AS implementation of the Improvement nothing in this proposed rule applies to 16.05.255) has prioritized human Act, defines biological integrity as or is inconsistent with our policy that consumptive use of ungulates— ‘‘biotic composition, structure, and outlines special provisions for Alaska specifically moose, caribou, and deer. functioning at genetic, organism, and wilderness (610 FW 5). Known as the Intensive Management community levels comparable with The overarching goal of our wildlife- (IM) statute, the law requires the Alaska historic conditions, including the dependent recreation policy is to Board of Game (BOG) to designate natural biological processes that shape enhance opportunities and access to populations of ungulates for which genomes, organisms, and communities.’’ quality visitor experiences on refuges human consumptive use is the highest In that policy, biological diversity is and to manage the refuge to conserve priority use and to set population and defined as ‘‘the variety of life and its fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats harvest objectives for those populations. processes, including the variety of living (605 FW 1.6). We recognize hunting as To that end, the BOG must ‘‘adopt organisms, the genetic differences one of many priority uses of the Refuge regulations to provide for intensive among them, and communities and System (when and where compatible management programs to restore the ecosystems in which they occur.’’ The with refuge purposes) that is a healthy, abundance or productivity of identified policy defines environmental health as traditional outdoor pastime, deeply big game prey populations as necessary the ‘‘composition, structure, and rooted in the American heritage (605 to achieve human consumptive use functioning of soil, water, air, and other FW 2). As stated in part 36 of title 50 goals’’ (AS 16.05.255(e)). Once abiotic features comparable with of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 designated as an IM population, if either historic conditions, including the CFR 36), the taking of fish and wildlife populations or harvests fail to meet natural abiotic processes that shape the through public recreational activities, management objectives, nonresident environment.’’ Abiotic features are including sport hunting, is authorized hunting must first be eliminated, nonliving chemical and physical on refuges in Alaska ‘‘as long as such followed by reductions or eliminations features of the environment (e.g., soil, activities are conducted in manner of resident harvest opportunities. air, water, temperature, etc.). The policy compatible with the purposes for which However, under the IM statute, the BOG also defines ‘‘historic conditions’’ as the the areas were established’’ (50 CFR may not significantly reduce the harvest ‘‘composition, structure, and 36.31(a)). opportunities of an identified IM functioning of ecosystems resulting Sport hunting and trapping on refuges ungulate population unless it has from natural processes that we believe, is generally regulated by the States, adopted or is considering the adoption

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 890 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

of regulations ‘‘to restore the abundance Many of the recent actions by the whenever possible. The USFWS fully or productivity of the ungulate BOG to liberalize the State’s regulatory recognizes and considers that rural population through habitat frameworks for general hunting and residents use, and are often dependent enhancement, predation control, or trapping of wolves, bears, and coyotes on, refuge resources for subsistence other means’’ (AS 16.05.255(e)–(g) and reverse long-standing prohibitions and purposes, and the USFWS manages for (j)). restrictions on take of these wildlife this use consistent with the The BOG has adopted regulations species under State law. Unlike the conservation of species and habitats in under the IM statute that require recent practice of taking brown bears their natural diversity. The terms targeted reductions of wolf, black bear, over bait, black bear baiting has been an biological integrity, diversity, and brown bear, or a combination of these in authorized practice in Alaska since environmental health are defined in the designated ‘‘predation control areas’’ 1982, including on refuges. Black bear BIDEH policy (601 FW 3), which directs within game management units. These baiting is authorized by the State the USFWS to maintain the variety of State regulations are implemented pursuant to a permit and, in some life and its processes; to maintain biotic through IM plans that authorize instances, a special use permit (USFWS and abiotic compositions, structure, and activities including aerial shooting of Form 3–1383–G) issued by refuges. functioning; and to manage populations wolves or bears or both by State agency Taking of brown bears at black bear for natural densities and levels of personnel, trapping of wolves by paid baiting stations was recently authorized variation throughout the NWRS. contractors, allowance under permit for under State regulations in certain game same-day airborne hunting of wolves management units within the State Proposal and bears by the public, and allowance (several of which are within refuges) This proposed rule would not change under permit for the take of any black and is subject to the same restrictions as Federal subsistence regulations (36 CFR or brown bear through baiting or snaring black bear baiting. The State regulations 242 and 50 CFR 100) or otherwise by the public (5 Alaska Administrative prohibit setting up a bait station within restrict the taking of fish or wildlife for Code (AAC) 92). 1 mile of a home or other dwelling, subsistence by federally qualified users Thirteen of the 16 refuges in Alaska business, or campground, or within 1⁄4 under those regulations. This proposed contain lands within game management mile of a road or trail (5 AAC 85). rule would also not apply to take in units officially designated for IM. While Implementation of IM actions under Defense of Life and Property as defined predator control activities occurring the IM statute and many of the recent under State regulations (see 5 AAC under the authority of an IM plan have liberalizations of the general hunting 92.410). Hunting and trapping are not been permitted by USFWS on any and trapping regulations have direct priority uses of refuges in Alaska. The refuge in Alaska, some predator control implications for the management of proposed rule would not affect programs and activities are being refuges in Alaska. Predator-prey implementation of State hunting and implemented in predation control areas interactions represent a dynamic and trapping regulations that are consistent immediately adjacent to refuges. Given foundational ecological process in with Federal law and USFWS policies the large home ranges of many species Alaska’s arctic and subarctic on refuges, nor would it restrict hunting affected by IM actions, these control ecosystems, and are a major driver of or trapping activities outside USFWS- programs have the potential to impact ecosystem function. Regulations or managed refuge lands and waters. wildlife resources, natural systems, and activities on refuges in Alaska that are The proposed rule would make the ecological processes, as well as inconsistent with the conservation of following substantive changes: fish and wildlife populations and their conservation and management of these (1) We would prohibit predator habitats in their natural diversity, or the species on adjacent refuges. control on refuges in Alaska, unless it is maintenance of biological integrity, In recent years, concurrent with its determined necessary to meet refuge diversity, and environmental health, are adoption and implementation of IM purposes, Federal laws, or policy; is in direct conflict with our legal plans for predation control areas, the consistent with our mandates to manage BOG has also authorized measures mandates for administering refuges in Alaska under ANILCA, the for natural and biological diversity, under its general hunting and trapping biological integrity, and environmental regulations that have the potential to Improvement Act, and the Wilderness Act, as well as with several applicable health; and is based on sound science in greatly increase effectiveness of the take response to a significant conservation of predators and to disrupt natural agency policies (601 FW 3, 610 FW 2, and 605 FW 2). concern. Demands for more wildlife for processes and wildlife interactions. human harvest cannot be the sole or Examples of these recently adopted The USFWS is mandated to conserve species and habitats in their natural primary basis for predator control. A measures, which apply beyond areas Refuge Manager could authorize officially designated for IM, including diversity and ensure that biological integrity, diversity, and environmental predator control activities on a National many refuges in Alaska, are: Wildlife Refuge in Alaska only if: • Harvesting brown bears over bait at health are maintained on refuges in registered black bear bait stations; Alaska for the continuing benefit of (a) Alternatives to predator control • Taking wolves and coyotes present and future generations. In have been evaluated, attempted, and (including pups) during the denning managing for natural diversity, the exhausted as a practical means of season; USFWS conserves, protects, and achieving management objectives; • Expanding season lengths and manages all fish and wildlife (b) Proposed actions have been increasing bag limits; populations within a particular wildlife evaluated and found to be in • Classifying black bears as both refuge system unit in the natural ‘mix,’ compliance with the National furbearers and big game species (which not to emphasize management activities Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. could allow for trapping and snaring of favoring one species to the detriment of 4321 et seq.); bears and sale of their hides and skulls); another. The USFWS assures that (c) A formal refuge compatibility and habitat diversity is maintained through determination has been completed, as • Authorizing same-day airborne take natural means on refuges in Alaska, required by law; and of bears at registered bait stations (5 avoiding artificial developments and (d) The potential effects of predator AAC 85). habitat manipulation programs, control on subsistence uses and needs

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 891

have been evaluated through an The USFWS is seeking comment on procedures set forth at 50 CFR 36.42. ANILCA section 810 analysis. the type of bait allowed to be used for This annual list would include contact For clarity, we would define predator the baiting of black or brown bears. information for the lead staff and a control as the intention to reduce the Currently, State regulations, which are process for the public to provide input population of predators for the benefit adopted on refuges, require the bait and review. of prey species. The USFWS in Alaska’s used at bear baiting stations to be The current regulations provide for position for the last three decades has biodegradable. People use a range of emergency, temporary, and permanent been that the need for predator control different types of bait for the baiting of restrictions. The proposed changes must be based on sound science in bears, including parts of fish and game would outline emergency restrictions, response to a significant conservation that are not required to be salvaged limited to 60 days, and temporary concern. This requirement is consistent when these species are harvested, as restrictions, limited to the minimum with managing for the conservation of well as human and pet food products. time necessary, with review at least natural and biological diversity, (3) We would update our regulations every 3 years. biological integrity, and environmental to reflect Federal assumption of We would also update the closures health under ANILCA and the management of subsistence hunting and and restrictions notification procedures Improvement Act. fishing under Title VIII of ANILCA by for refuges in Alaska to reflect the This proposed rule would ensure that the Federal Government from the State availability of alternative take of wildlife under State regulations in the 1990s. communications technologies and (4) We would amend 50 CFR 32.2(h) and implementation of predator control approaches that have emerged or to state that black bear baiting is on refuges in Alaska are consistent with evolved over the last few decades. These authorized in accordance with State our legal mandates and policies for changes recognize that the Internet has regulations on national wildlife refuges administration of those refuges. become one of the primary methods to (2) We would also prohibit certain in Alaska. This change would help communicate with the public and is an practices for the taking of wildlife on ensure consistency in our regulations if effective tool for engaging Alaskans and Alaska National Wildlife refuges (except the amendments to 50 CFR 36, as the broader American public and that for subsistence uses by federally presented in this proposed rule, are there are other forms of broadcast qualified subsistence users in adopted. media, beyond just the radio, that we accordance with applicable Federal (5) We would update procedures for may want to use. laws and regulations), including: implementing closures or restrictions on • Taking black or brown bear cubs or refuges, including the taking of fish and The proposed changes to the sows with cubs (exception allowed for wildlife under sport hunting and notification procedures are not intended resident hunters to take black bear cubs trapping, to more effectively engage and to limit public involvement or reduce or sows with cubs under customary and inform the public and make the notice public notice; rather, we intend to traditional use activities at a den site and durational provisions more engage in ways more likely to encourage October 15–April 30 in specific game consistent with procedures set forth in public involvement and in a manner management units in accordance with Federal subsistence closure policy and that is fiscally sustainable. We recognize State law); regulations at 36 CFR 242.19 and 50 that in-person public meetings will still • Taking brown bears over bait; CFR 100.19 for emergency special be the most effective way to engage • Taking of bears using traps or actions on Federal public lands in Alaskans, and we intend to continue snares; Alaska. Improved consistency between that practice. We also recognize that • Taking wolves and coyotes during these Federal regulations and processes many individuals in rural Alaska do not the denning season (May 1–August 9); is intended to help minimize confusion have access to high speed Internet, and and and make it easier for the public to be for that reason, we will continue to use • Taking bears from an aircraft or on involved in the process. other methods of communication, such the same day as air travel has occurred. Under the proposed rule, the Regional as newspapers and radio, where The take of wolves or wolverines from Director will compile a list, updated at available to provide adequate notice. an aircraft or on the same day as air least annually, of Alaska refuge closures The following table summarizes the travel has occurred is already prohibited and restrictions under Federal Alaska changes we propose to the existing under current refuge regulations, and refuge regulations. Notice would be procedures for public participation and this would not change. provided in accordance with the closures at 50 CFR 36.42:

Current Proposed update

Authority

Refuge Manager may close an area or restrict an activity on an emer- No updates being considered. gency, temporary, or permanent basis.

Criteria (50 CFR 36.42(b))

Criteria includes: Public health and safety, resource protection, protec- Add conservation of natural diversity, biological integrity, biological di- tion of cultural or scientific values, subsistence uses, endangered or versity, and environmental health to the current list of criteria. threatened species conservation, and other management consider- ations necessary to ensure that the activity or area is being managed in a manner compatible with refuge purposes.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 892 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

Current Proposed update

Emergency closures or restrictions (50 CFR 36.42(c))

Emergency closure may not exceed 30 days ...... Increase the period from 30 to 60 days, with extensions beyond 60 days being subject to nonemergency closure procedures (i.e., tem- porary or permanent). Closure effective upon notice as prescribed in 50 CFR 36.42(f) (see Closure effective upon notice as prescribed in 50 CFR 36.42(f) (see below for details). Closures related to the taking of fish and wildlife below for details). will be accompanied by notice with a subsequent hearing.

Temporary closures or restrictions (50 CFR 36.42(d))

May extend only for as long as necessary to achieve the purpose of Temporary closures or restrictions related to the taking of fish and wild- the closure or restriction, not to exceed or be extended beyond 12 life may still only extend for so long as necessary to achieve the pur- months. pose of the closure or restriction. These closures or restrictions will be periodically re-evaluated at least every 3 years to determine whether the circumstances necessitating the original closure still exist and warrant continuation of the restriction. A formal finding will be made in writing that explains the reasoning for the decision. When a closure is no longer needed, action to remove it will be initi- ated as soon as practicable. The USFWS will maintain a list of all refuge closures and publish this list annually for public review. Closure effective upon notice as prescribed in 50 CFR 36.42(f) (see Closure subject to notice procedures as prescribed in 50 CFR 36.42(f) below for details). Closures related to the taking of fish and wildlife (see below for details). Closures related to the taking of fish and effective upon notice and hearing in the vicinity of the area(s) af- wildlife would require consultation with the State and affected Tribes fected by such closures or restriction, and other locations as appro- and Native Corporations, as well as the opportunity for public com- priate. ment and a public hearing in the vicinity of the area(s) affected.

Permanent closures or restrictions (50 CFR 36.42(e))

No time limit ...... No time limit. Closure effective after notice and public hearings in the affected vicinity Closures related to the taking of fish and wildlife would require con- and other locations as appropriate, and after publication in the Fed- sultation with the State and affected Tribes and Native Corporations, eral Register. as well as the opportunity for public comment and a public hearing in the vicinity of the area(s) affected. Closures would continue to be published in the Federal Register.

Notice (50 CFR 36.42(f))

Notice is to be provided through newspapers, signs, and radio ...... Add the use of the Internet, broadcast media, or other available meth- ods, in addition to continuing to use the more traditional methods of newspapers, signs, and radio.

(6) We propose to codify definitions environmental health [BIDEH] of the Management and Budget will review all for several terms (see the Proposed System are maintained for the benefit of significant rules. OIRA has determined Regulation Promulgation section, present and future generations of that this rule is not significant. below). These terms include ‘‘Bait,’’ Americans . . .’’ (16 U.S.C. Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the ‘‘Big game,’’ ‘‘Biological diversity,’’ 668dd(a)(4)(B)). The USFWS BIDEH principles of Executive Order 12866 policy (601 FW 3), which provides ‘‘Biological integrity,’’ ‘‘Cub bear,’’ while calling for improvements in the ‘‘Environmental health,’’ ‘‘Furbearer,’’ guidance for implementation of the nation’s regulatory system to promote ‘‘Historic conditions,’’ ‘‘Natural Improvement Act, provides definitions predictability, to reduce uncertainty, diversity,’’ ‘‘Predator control,’’ for each of these terms, as well as the and to use the best, most innovative, ‘‘Regional Director,’’ ‘‘Sport hunting,’’ term ‘‘historic conditions,’’ and those and ‘‘Trapping.’’ Most of these definitions are included word-for-word and least burdensome tools for definitions, including bait, big game, in this proposed rule. As was also achieving regulatory ends. The cub bear, furbearer, and predator discussed earlier in the preamble, under executive order directs agencies to control, are based on existing ANILCA, each refuge in Alaska has an consider regulatory approaches that definitions in Federal subsistence establishment purpose to ‘‘conserve fish reduce burdens and maintain flexibility regulations or policy. and wildlife populations and habitats in and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, During our scoping and tribal their natural diversity.’’ Our proposed consultation efforts, we heard that the definition for natural diversity is based feasible, and consistent with regulatory definitions for biological integrity, on the discussion of the term in the objectives. Executive Order 13563 biological diversity, natural diversity, legislative history of ANILCA. emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available and environmental health and the Required Determinations origins of these definitions were of science and that the rulemaking process significant interest to people. As Regulatory Planning and Review must allow for public participation and discussed earlier in the preamble, the (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) an open exchange of ideas. We have USFWS is mandated under the Executive Order 12866 provides that developed this rule in a manner Improvement Act to ‘‘ensure that the the Office of Information and Regulatory consistent with these requirements. biological integrity, diversity, and Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 893

Regulatory Flexibility Act mandates on conservation of natural local businesses. Due to the Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act diversity, biological integrity, biological unavailability of site-specific (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended diversity, and environmental health expenditure data, we use the Alaska by the Small Business Regulatory would not have a significant impact estimate from the 2011 National Survey Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of because the USFWS is and has been of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife 1996), whenever an agency must required to manage refuges in Alaska Associated Recreation to identify publish a notice of rulemaking for any consistent with these mandates for the expenditures for food and lodging, proposed or final rule, it must prepare last several decades since they were put transportation, and other incidental and make available for public comment into effect. Codifying previously and expenses. Using the average trip-related a regulatory flexibility analysis that currently prohibited sport hunting and expenditures for big game hunting ($139 describes the effects of the rule on small trapping practices would not have a per day) yields approximately $5.9 entities (small businesses, small significant impact because the few million annually in big game hunting- organizations, and small government changes that have occurred have been related expenditures on refuges in jurisdictions). However, no regulatory relatively recent, occurring over the last Alaska. Since only a small fraction of flexibility analysis is required if the several years, and this rule would big game hunters would choose not to head of the agency certifies the rule will actually constitute a change back to the hunt on refuges under the proposed rule, the impact would be minimal. The not have a significant economic impact status quo. State general hunting and net loss to the local communities would on a substantial number of small trapping regulations currently apply to be no more than $5.9 million annually, entities. SBREFA amended the RFA to refuges in Alaska. Therefore, the and most likely considerably less require Federal agencies to provide a prohibition of particular methods and because few hunters use the prohibited statement of the factual basis for means for the take of predators under methods and those hunters that do certifying that the rule will not have a State regulations on refuges in Alaska would likely choose a substitute site. significant economic impact on a that may affect visitor use on those refuges include the take of brown bears Small businesses within the retail substantial number of small entities. trade industry (such as hotels, gas Thus, for a regulatory flexibility analysis over bait, take of wolves and coyotes during the denning season, and same- stations, taxidermy shops, etc.) may be to be required, impacts must exceed a impacted from some decreased refuge threshold for ‘‘significant impact’’ and a day airborne take of bears. The take of black bear sows with cubs is only visitation. A large percentage of these threshold for a ‘‘substantial number of retail trade establishments in local small entities.’’ See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). allowed under State regulations in specific game management units for communities around refuges qualify as SBREFA amended the Regulatory small businesses. We expect that the Flexibility Act to require Federal customary and traditional use; therefore it is not currently nor in the past has it incremental recreational changes will be agencies to provide a statement of the scattered, and so we do not expect that factual basis for certifying that a rule been legal for the general public to participate in this activity outside of the rule would have a significant would have a significant economic economic effect on a substantial number impact on a substantial number of small that framework. As a result, big game hunting may decrease if a hunter’s of small entities in Alaska. entities. With the small change in overall The proposed rule would amend preferred hunting method is prohibited. Conversely, wildlife watching activities spending anticipated from this proposed regulations for refuges in Alaska. The rule, it is unlikely that a substantial proposed rule would: (1) Codify how may increase if there are increased opportunities to view wildlife, number of small entities would have our existing mandates for the more than a small impact from the conservation of natural and biological including bears, wolves, and coyotes. From 2009 to 2013, big game hunting on spending change near the affected diversity, biological integrity, and refuges. Therefore, we certify that this environmental health on refuges in refuges in Alaska averaged about 40,000 days annually and represented 2 percent proposed rule would not have a Alaska relate to predator control (50 significant economic effect on a CFR 36.1); (2) prohibit several of wildlife-related recreation on refuges. For Statewide hunting, big game substantial number of small entities as particularly effective methods and defined under the Regulatory Flexibility means for take of predators (50 CFR hunting on refuges in Alaska represented only 4 percent of all big Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) An initial 36.32); and (3) update our public regulatory flexibility analysis is not participation and closure procedures (50 game hunting days (1.2 million days). Due to the past ban on these proposed required. Accordingly, a small entity CFR 36.42). Predator control is compliance guide is not required. prohibited on refuges in Alaska unless prohibited methods and means for take it is determined necessary to meet of predators, we estimate that these Small Business Regulatory Enforcement refuge purposes, Federal laws, or policy hunting methods (take of brown bears Fairness Act (SBREFA) and is consistent with our mandates to over bait, take of wolves and coyotes This proposed rule is not a major rule manage for natural and biological during the denning season, and same- under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the SBREFA. diversity, biological integrity, and day airborne take of bears) represent a This rule: environmental health. The need for small fraction of all big game hunting on a. Would not have an annual effect on predator control must be based on refuges. As a result, big game hunting on the economy of $100 million or more. sound science in response to a refuges would change minimally. This b. Would not cause a major increase significant conservation concern. change in opportunity would most in costs or prices for consumers; Demands for more wildlife to harvest likely be offset by other sites (located individual industries; Federal, State, or cannot be the sole or primary basis for outside of refuges) gaining participants. local government agencies; or predator control. This rule would not Therefore, there would be a substitute geographic regions. change Federal subsistence regulations site for these hunting methods, and c. Would not have significant adverse (36 CFR 242 and 50 CFR 100) or restrict participation rates would not effects on competition, employment, taking of fish or wildlife for subsistence necessarily change. investment, productivity, innovation, or uses under Federal subsistence Hunters’ spending contributes income the ability of U.S. based enterprises to regulations. Codifying our existing to the regional economy and benefits compete with foreign-based enterprises.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 894 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act input in evaluating this proposed rule. (d) Be divided into short sections and This proposed rule would not impose In addition, we have evaluated this sentences; and an unfunded mandate on State, local, or proposed rule in accordance with 512 (e) Use lists and tables wherever tribal governments or the private sector DM 4 under Department of the Interior possible. of more than $100 million per year. The Policy on Consultation with Alaska If you feel that we have not met these rule would not have a significant or Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) requirements, send us comments by one unique effect on State, local, or tribal Corporations, August 10, 2012. We have of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES governments or the private sector. A been and will continue to consult with section, above. To better help us revise statement containing the information Alaska Native tribes and Alaska Native the rule, your comments should be as required by the Unfunded Mandates corporations regarding this proposed specific as possible. For example, you Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not rule. should tell us the numbers of the required. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) sections or paragraphs that you find Takings (Executive Order 12630) unclear, which sections or sentences are This proposed rule does not contain too long, the sections where you feel This proposed rule does not involve any new collections of information that lists or tables would be useful, etc. the taking of private property or require approval by the Office of otherwise have taking implications Management and Budget (OMB) under Authors under Executive Order 12630. This the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The The primary authors of this proposed proposed rule, if adopted, would affect special use permit mentioned in this rule are Heather Abbey Tonneson and the public use and management of proposed rule, FWS Form 3–1383–G, is Stephanie Brady of the U.S. Fish and Federal lands managed by USFWS in already approved by OMB under OMB Wildlife Service, Alaska Regional Alaska. A takings implication control number 1018–0102, which Office, with considerable review and assessment is not required. expires on June 30, 2017. We may not input from other USFWS Alaska refuge conduct or sponsor, and a person is not Federalism (Executive Order 13132) and Office of Subsistence Management required to respond to, a collection of managerial and biological staff. In accordance with Executive Order information unless it displays a 13132, this proposed rule does not have currently valid OMB control number. Public Participation significant Federalism effects. A federalism summary impact statement is National Environmental Policy Act It is the policy of the Department of the Interior, whenever practicable, to not required. This proposed rule, if We have analyzed this rule in afford the public an opportunity to adopted, would affect the public use accordance with the criteria of the participate in the rulemaking process. and management of Federal lands National Environmental Policy Act (42 Accordingly, interested persons may managed by USFWS in Alaska and U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the Department submit written comments regarding this would not have a substantial direct of the Interior’s manual at 516 DM. An proposed rule by one of the methods effect on State or local governments in environmental assessment has been listed in the ADDRESSES section, above. Alaska. prepared and is available for public In addition, see the related document comment during the comment period Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order published elsewhere in today’s Federal for this proposed rule. A copy of the 12988) Register with information on nine open environmental assessment can be found houses and public hearings that will be This proposed rule complies with the at http://www.regulations.gov under held in various locations around the requirements of Executive Order 12988. Docket No. FWS–R7–NWRS–2014– State and at which comments will be Specifically, this rule: 0005. a. Meets the criteria of section 3(a) accepted. requiring that all regulations be Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Public Availability of Comments reviewed to eliminate errors and (Executive Order 13211) ambiguity and be written to minimize Executive Order 13211 requires Before including your address, phone litigation; and agencies to prepare Statements of number, email address, or other b. Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) personal identifying information in your requiring that all regulations be written Energy Effects when undertaking actions that significantly affect energy comment, you should be aware that in clear language and contain clear legal your entire comment—including your standards. supply, distribution, or use. We believe that the rule would not have any effect personal identifying information—may Government-to-Government on energy supplies, distribution, or use. be made publicly available at any time. Relationship With Tribes Therefore, this action is not a significant While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying In accordance with the President’s energy action, and no Statement of Energy Effects is required. information from public review, we memorandum of April 29, 1994 cannot guarantee that we will be able to (Government-to-Government Relations Clarity of This Rule do so. with Native American Tribal Governments; 59 FR 22951 (May 4, We are required by Executive Orders List of Subjects 12866 and 12988 and by the 1994)), Executive Order 13175 50 CFR Part 32 (Consultation and Coordination with Presidential Memorandum of June 1, Indian Tribal Governments; 65 FR 1998, to write all rules in plain Fishing, Hunting, Reporting and 67249 (November 9, 2000)), and the language. This means that each rule we recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife, Department of the Interior Manual, 512 publish must: Wildlife refuges. (a) Be logically organized; DM 2, we readily acknowledge our 50 CFR Part 36 responsibility to communicate (b) Use the active voice to address meaningfully with recognized Federal readers directly; Alaska, Recreation and recreation Tribes on a government-to-government (c) Use common, everyday words and areas, Reporting and recordkeeping basis, and we are seeking the Tribes’ clear language rather than jargon; requirements, Wildlife refuges.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 895

Accordingly, we propose to amend deer, elk, mountain goat, moose, Wildlife Service, or an authorized title 50, chapter I, subchapter C, of the muskox, Dall sheep, wolf, and representative. Code of Federal Regulations as follows: wolverine. * * * * * Biological diversity means the variety Sport hunting means the taking of or PART 32—HUNTING AND FISHING of life and its processes, including the attempting to take wildlife under State variety of living organisms, the genetic hunting or trapping regulations. In ■ 1. The authority citation for part 32 differences among them, and Alaska, this is commonly referred to as continues to read as follows: communities and ecosystems in which general hunting and trapping and Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 460k, they occur. includes State subsistence hunts and 664, 668dd–668ee, and 715i. Biological integrity means the biotic general permits open to both Alaska § 32.2 [Amended] compositions, structure, and residents and nonresidents. functioning at genetic, organism, and ■ 2. Amend § 32.2(h) by removing the * * * * * community level comparable with words, ‘‘(Baiting is authorized in Trapping means taking furbearers historic conditions, including the accordance with State regulations on under a trapping license. natural biological processes that shape national wildlife refuges in Alaska).’’ * * * * * genomes, organisms, and communities. and adding in their place the words, ‘‘(Black bear baiting is authorized in Cub bear means a brown (grizzly) bear Subpart B—Subsistence Uses in its first or second year of life, or a accordance with State regulations on § 36.11 [Amended] national wildlife refuges in Alaska.)’’. black bear (including the cinnamon and blue phases) in its first year of life. ■ 6. Amend § 36.11 by removing PART 36—ALASKA NATIONAL * * * * * paragraph (d) and by redesignating WILDLIFE REFUGES Environmental health means the paragraph (e) as paragraph (d). ■ 7. Revise § 36.13 to read as follows: composition, structure, and functioning ■ 3. The authority citation for part 36 of soil, water, air, and other abiotic § 36.13 Subsistence fishing. continues to read as follows: features comparable with historic Fish may be taken by Federally Authority: 16 U.S.C. 460(k) et seq., 668dd– conditions, including the natural abiotic qualified subsistence users, as defined 668ee, 3101 et seq. processes that shape the environment. at 50 CFR part 100.5, for subsistence Subpart A—Introduction and General * * * * * uses on Alaska National Wildlife Provisions Furbearer means a beaver, coyote, Refuges where subsistence uses are arctic fox, red fox, lynx, marten, mink, allowed in compliance with this subpart ■ 4. Amend § 36.1 by: least weasel, short-tailed weasel, and 50 CFR part 100. ■ a. Redesignating paragraphs (a), (b), muskrat, river (land) otter, flying ■ 8. Revise § 36.14 to read as follows: and (c) as paragraphs (b), (c), and (d), squirrel, ground squirrel, red squirrel, § 36.14 Subsistence hunting and trapping. respectively; and Alaskan marmot, hoary marmot, ■ b. Adding a new paragraph (a) to read woodchuck, wolf, or wolverine. Federally qualified subsistence users, as follows: Historic conditions means the as defined at 50 CFR part 100.5, may composition, structure, and functioning hunt and trap wildlife for subsistence § 36.1 How do the regulations in this part uses on Alaska National Wildlife apply to me and what do they cover? of ecosystems resulting from natural processes that we believe, based on Refuges where subsistence uses are (a) National Wildlife Refuges in sound professional judgment, were allowed in compliance with this subpart Alaska are maintained to conserve present prior to substantial human and 50 CFR part 100. species and habitats in their natural related changes to the landscape. diversity and to ensure biological Subpart D—Non-subsistence Uses Natural diversity means the existence integrity, diversity, and environmental of all fish, wildlife, and plant ■ 9. Revise the heading of subpart D to health for the continuing benefit of populations within a particular wildlife read as set forth above. present and future generations. refuge system unit in the natural mix ■ 10. Amend § 36.32 to read as follows: * * * * * and in a healthy condition for the long § 36.32 Taking of fish and wildlife. ■ 5. Amend § 36.2 by adding, in term benefit of current and future alphabetical order, definitions for generations. Managing for natural (a) The taking of fish and wildlife for ‘‘Bait,’’ ‘‘Big game,’’ ‘‘Biological diversity includes avoiding emphasis of sport hunting and trapping and for sport diversity,’’ ‘‘Biological integrity,’’ ‘‘Cub management activities favoring some fishing is authorized in accordance with bear,’’ ‘‘Environmental health,’’ species to the detriment of others; applicable State and Federal law, and ‘‘Furbearer,’’ ‘‘Historic conditions,’’ assuring that habitat diversity is such laws are hereby adopted and made ‘‘Natural diversity,’’ ‘‘Predator control,’’ maintained through natural means, a part of these regulations, except as ‘‘Regional Director,’’ ‘‘Sport hunting,’’ avoiding artificial developments and noted below and provided however, that and ‘‘Trapping,’’ to read as follows: habitat manipulation programs the Refuge Manager, pursuant to § 36.42, may designate areas where, and § 36.2 What do these terms mean? whenever possible; and taking into consideration the fact that humans are establish periods when, no taking of a * * * * * dependent on wildlife refuge particular population of fish or wildlife Bait means any material excluding a subsistence resources. will be allowed. scent lure that is placed to attract an (b) Predator control is prohibited on animal by its sense of smell or taste; * * * * * National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska, however, those parts of legally taken Predator control is the intention to unless it is determined necessary to animals that are not required to be reduce the population of predators for meet refuge purposes, Federal laws, or salvaged and which are left at the kill the benefit of prey species. policy; is consistent with our mandates site are not considered bait. * * * * * to manage for natural and biological Big game means black bear, brown Regional Director means the Alaska diversity, biological integrity, and bear, bison, caribou, Sitka black-tailed Regional Director of the U.S. Fish and environmental health; and is based on

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 896 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

sound science in response to a motorized vehicles, and aircraft landing (ii) Each person must comply with the significant conservation concern. directly incident to the exercise of such applicable provisions of Federal law; Demands for more wildlife for human rights or privileges, is authorized; (iii) In addition to the requirements of harvest cannot be the sole or primary Provided, however, that the Refuge paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, basis for predator control. A Refuge Manager may restrict or prohibit the each person must continue to secure a Manager will authorize predator control exercise of these rights or privileges or trapping permit from the appropriate activities on a National Wildlife Refuge uses of federally owned lands directly Refuge Manager prior to trapping on the in Alaska only if: incident to such exercise if the Refuge Kenai, Izembek, and Kodiak Refuges (1) Alternatives to predator control Manager determines, after conducting a and the Aleutian Islands Unit of the have been evaluated, attempted, and public hearing in the affected locality, Alaska Maritime Refuge. exhausted as a practical means of that they are inconsistent with the (iv) It is unlawful for a person having achieving management objectives; purposes of the refuge and that they (2) Proposed actions have been been airborne to use a firearm or any constitute a significant expansion of other weapon to take or assist in taking evaluated in compliance with the commercial fishing activities within National Environmental Policy Act (42 any species of bear, wolf, or wolverine such refuge beyond the level of such until after 3 a.m. on the day following U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); activities in 1979. (3) A formal refuge compatibility the day in which the flying occurred, determination has been completed, as (d) The following provisions apply to except that a trapper may use a firearm required by law; and any person while engaged in the taking or any other weapon to dispatch a (4) The potential effects of predator of fish and wildlife within an Alaska legally caught wolf or wolverine in a control on subsistence uses and needs National Wildlife Refuge: trap or snare on the same day in which have been evaluated through an (1) Trapping and sport hunting. (i) the flying occurred. This prohibition ANILCA section 810 analysis. Each person must secure and possess all does not apply to flights on regularly (c) The exercise of valid commercial required State licenses and must comply scheduled commercial airlines between fishing rights or privileges obtained with the applicable provisions of State regularly maintained public airports. pursuant to existing law, including any law unless further restricted by Federal (v) The following methods and means use of refuge areas for campsites, cabins, law; for take of wildlife are prohibited:

Prohibited acts Exceptions

(A) Using snares, nets, or traps to take any species of bear ...... None. (B) Using bait ...... (1) Bait may be used to trap furbearers. (2) Bait may be used to hunt black bears. (C) Taking wolves and coyotes from May 1 through August 9 ...... None. (D) Taking bear cubs or sows with cubs ...... In accordance with Alaska State law and regulation, resident hunters may take black bear cubs or sows with cubs under customary and traditional use activities at a den site October 15—April 30 in game management units 19A, 19D, 21B, 21C, 21D, 24, and 25D.

(2) Sport and commercial fishing. (i) ■ 11. Amend § 36.42 by revising (4) Emergency closures or restrictions Each person must secure and possess all paragraphs (a), (b), (c)(4), (d), (e), (f), (g), may not exceed a period of 60 days. required State licenses and must comply and (h) to read as follows: Extensions beyond 60 days are subject with the applicable provisions of State to nonemergency closure procedures. § 36.42 Public participation and closure (d) Temporary closures or restrictions. law unless further restricted by Federal procedures. law; (1) Temporary closures or restrictions relating to the use of aircraft, (ii) Each person must comply with the (a) Applicability and authority. The snowmachines, motorboats, or applicable provisions of Federal law. Refuge Manager may close an area or restrict an activity in an Alaska National nonmotorized surface transportation (e) Persons transporting fish or Wildlife Refuge on an emergency, will be effective only after notice and wildlife through Alaska National temporary, or permanent basis in hearing in the vicinity of the area(s) Wildlife Refuges must carry an Alaska accordance with this section. affected by such closures or restriction, State hunting or fishing license, or in (b) Criteria. In determining whether to and other locations as appropriate. cases where a person is transporting (2) Temporary closures or restrictions close an area or restrict an activity game for another person, they are related to the taking of fish and wildlife otherwise allowed, the Refuge Manager required to carry an Alaska State will be effective only after allowing for will be guided by factors such as public ‘‘Transfer of Possession Form’’ on their the opportunity for public comment and health and safety; resource protection; person and make these available when a public hearing in the vicinity of the protection of cultural or scientific requested by law enforcement area(s) affected. Temporary closures or values; subsistence uses; conservation of personnel. restrictions related to the taking of fish endangered or threatened species; and wildlife also require consultation (f) Nothing in this section applies to conservation of natural diversity, with the State and affected Tribes and or restricts the taking or transporting of biological integrity, biological diversity, Native Corporations. fish and wildlife by Federally qualified and environmental health; or other (3) Other temporary closures will be subsistence users under Federal management considerations necessary effective upon notice as set forth at subsistence regulations. to ensure that the activity or area is § 36.42(f). (g) Animal control programs will only being managed in a manner compatible (4) Temporary closures or restrictions, be conducted in accordance with a with the purposes for which the Refuge other than those relating to the taking of special use permit issued by the Refuge was established. fish and wildlife, will extend only for as Manager. (c) * * * long as necessary to achieve the purpose

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 897

of the closure or restriction, not to abide by restrictions established under • Mail: Submit written comments to exceed 12 months. this section is prohibited. Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional (5) Temporary closures or restrictions Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Karen Hyun, related to the taking of fish and wildlife Division, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn: will extend only for as long as necessary Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Wildlife and Parks. to achieve the purpose of the closure or Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802–1668. restriction. These temporary closures [FR Doc. 2016–00022 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Instructions: Comments sent by any and restrictions will be periodically re- BILLING CODE 4333–15–P other method, to any other address or evaluated as necessary, at least every 3 individual, or received after the end of years, to determine whether the the comment period, may not be DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE circumstances necessitating the original considered by NMFS. All comments closure or restriction still exist and National Oceanic and Atmospheric received are a part of the public record warrant continuation. A formal finding Administration and will generally be posted for public will be made in writing that explains viewing on www.regulations.gov the reasoning for the decision. When a 50 CFR Part 679 without change. All personal identifying closure is no longer needed, action to information (e.g., name, address), remove it will be initiated as soon as RIN 0648–BF25 confidential business information, or practicable. otherwise sensitive information (6) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic submitted voluntarily by the sender will will maintain a list of all refuge closures Zone Off Alaska; Bycatch Management be publicly accessible. NMFS will and restrictions and will publish this in the Bering Sea Pollock Fishery accept anonymous comments (enter list annually for public review. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries ‘‘N/A’’ in the required fields if you wish (e) Permanent closures or restrictions. Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and to remain anonymous). Permanent closures or restrictions Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Electronic copies of Amendment 110 relating to the use of aircraft, Commerce. and the Environmental Assessment/ snowmachines, motorboats, or ACTION: Notice of availability of fishery Regulatory Impact Review/Initial nonmotorized surface transportation, or management plan amendments; request Regulatory Flexibility Analysis prepared taking of fish and wildlife, will be for comments. for this action (collectively the effective only after allowing for the ‘‘Analysis’’) may be obtained from opportunity for public comment and a SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery www.regulations.gov. public hearing in the vicinity of the Management Council (Council) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: area(s) affected and publication in the submitted Amendment 110 to the Gretchen Harrington, 907–586–7228. Federal Register. Permanent closures or Fishery Management Plan for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: restrictions related to the taking of fish Groundfish of the Bering Sea and The and wildlife would require consultation Aleutian Islands Management Area Magnuson-Stevens Fishery with the State and affected Tribes and (FMP). If approved, Amendment 110 Conservation and Management Act Native Corporations. would improve the management of (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires that (f) Notice. Emergency, temporary, or Chinook and chum salmon bycatch in each regional fishery management permanent closures or restrictions will the Bering Sea pollock fishery by council submit any fishery management be published on the U.S. Fish and creating a comprehensive salmon plan amendment it prepares to NMFS Wildlife Service’s Web site at http:// bycatch avoidance program. This for review and approval, disapproval, or www.fws.gov/alaska/nwr/ proposed action is necessary to partial approval by the Secretary of ak_sp_hunt_regs.htm. Additional means minimize Chinook and chum salmon Commerce. The Magnuson-Stevens Act of notice reasonably likely to inform bycatch in the Bering Sea pollock also requires that NMFS, upon receiving residents in the affected vicinity will fishery to the extent practicable while a fishery management plan amendment, also be provided where available, such maintaining the potential for the full immediately publish a notice in the as: harvest of the pollock total allowable Federal Register announcing that the (1) Publication in a newspaper of catch within specified prohibited amendment is available for public general circulation in the State and in species catch limits. Amendment 110 is review and comment. This notice local newspapers; intended to promote the goals and announces that proposed Amendment (2) Use of electronic media, such as objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens 110 to the FMP is available for public the Internet and email lists; Fishery Conservation and Management review and comment. NMFS manages the pollock fishery in (3) Broadcast media (radio, television, Act, the FMP, and other applicable the exclusive economic zone of the etc.); or laws. (4) Posting of signs in the local Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) vicinity or at the Refuge Manager’s DATES: Comments must be received no under the FMP. The Council prepared office. later than March 8, 2016. this FMP under the authority of the (g) Openings. In determining whether ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 to open an area to public use or activity on this document, identified by NOAA– et seq. Regulations implementing the otherwise prohibited, the Refuge NMFS–2015–0081, by any of the FMP appear at 50 CFR part 679. General Manager will provide notice in the following methods: regulations governing U.S. fisheries also Federal Register and will, upon request, • Electronic Submission: Submit all appear at 50 CFR part 600. hold a public meeting in the affected electronic public comments via the vicinity and other location, as Federal e Rulemaking Portal. Go to The Bering Sea Pollock Fishery appropriate, prior to making a final www.regulations.gov/ Amendment 110 would apply to determination. #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015- owners and operators of catcher vessels, (h) Except as otherwise specifically 0081, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, catcher/processors, motherships, allowed under the provisions of this complete the required fields, and enter inshore processors, and the six Western part, entry into closed areas or failure to or attach your comments. Alaska Community Development Quota

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 898 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

(CDQ) Program groups participating in cooperatives also facilitate transfers of requires the Council to select, and the pollock (Gadus chalcogrammus) pollock among the cooperative NMFS to implement, conservation and fishery in the Bering Sea subarea of the members, enforce contract provisions, management measures that, to the BSAI. The pollock fishery is the largest and participate in an intercooperative extent practicable, minimize bycatch single species fishery, by volume, in the agreement to minimize non-Chinook and bycatch mortality. United States. In 2013, the value of this salmon bycatch as well as an incentive The bycatch of culturally and fishery was more than 1.329 billion plan agreement to minimize Chinook economically valuable species like dollars, the most recent year of complete salmon bycatch. Chinook salmon and chum salmon, data on wholesale value. In 2015, the The inshore sector is comprised of which are fully allocated and, in some pollock TAC was 1,310,000 metric tons catcher vessels eligible to deliver cases, facing conservation concerns, are (mt). pollock to the seven eligible AFA categorized as prohibited species under The pollock fishery is managed under inshore processors. Eligible catcher the FMP and are the most regulated and the American Fisheries Act (AFA) (16 vessels may form inshore cooperatives closely managed category of bycatch. U.S.C. 1851 note). In October 1998, associated with a particular inshore Pacific salmon, steelhead trout, Pacific Congress enacted the AFA, which processor. NMFS permits the inshore halibut, king crab, Tanner crab, and ‘‘rationalized’’ the pollock fishery by cooperatives, allocates pollock to them, Pacific herring are classified as identifying the vessels and processors and manages these allocations through a prohibited species in the groundfish eligible to participate in the fishery and regulatory prohibition against an fisheries off Alaska. As a prohibited allocating pollock among those eligible inshore cooperative exceeding its species, fishermen must avoid salmon participants. For more information on pollock allocation. bycatch and any salmon caught must the AFA, please see the final rule The AFA catcher/processor sector is either be donated to the Prohibited implementing the AFA (67 FR 79692, comprised of the catcher/processors and Species Donation Program under catcher vessels eligible under the AFA December 30, 2002). § 679.26, or returned to Federal waters Under the AFA, 10 percent of the to deliver to catcher/processors. The as soon as is practicable, with a pollock total allowable catch (TAC) is AFA mothership sector is made up of minimum of injury, after an observer allocated to the CDQ Program. After the three motherships and the catcher has determined the number of salmon CDQ Program allocation is subtracted, vessels eligible under the AFA to and collected any scientific data or an amount needed for the incidental deliver pollock to these motherships. biological samples. catch of pollock in other groundfish These sectors have formed cooperatives; fisheries is subtracted from the TAC. In however, NMFS does not manage the Chinook Salmon Bycatch 2015, the CDQ allocation was 131,000 sub-allocations of pollock among the The pollock fishery catches more than mt of pollock and the incidental catch cooperative members. The cooperatives allowance was 47,160 mt. The control the harvest by their member 95 percent of the Chinook salmon taken allocation of pollock to the CDQ vessels so that the pollock allocation to incidentally in the BSAI groundfish Program is further allocated among the the sector is not exceeded. However, fisheries, based on data from 1992 six non-profit corporations (CDQ NMFS monitors pollock harvest by all through 2014. However, this percentage groups) that represent the 65 members of the catcher/processor sector has declined in recent years with the communities eligible for the CDQ and mothership sector. NMFS retains decline in the amount of Chinook Program under section 305(i)(1)(D) of the authority to close directed fishing salmon caught in the pollock fishery. the Magnuson-Stevens Act. for pollock by a sector if vessels in that From 1992 through 2001, the average The ‘‘directed fishing allowance’’ is sector continue to fish once the sector’s Chinook salmon bycatch in the pollock the remaining amount of pollock, after seasonal allocation of pollock has been fishery was 32,482 fish per year. subtraction of the CDQ Program harvested. Bycatch increased substantially from allocation and the incidental catch 2002 through 2007, to an average of allowance. The directed fishing Salmon Bycatch in the Bering Sea 74,067 Chinook salmon per year. A allowance is then allocated among the Pollock Fishery historic high of approximately 122,000 AFA inshore sector (50 percent), the Pollock is harvested with fishing Chinook salmon was taken in the AFA catcher/processor sector (40 vessels using trawl gear, which are large pollock fishery in 2007. However, since percent), and the AFA mothership nets towed through the water by the 2007 Chinook salmon bycatch then sector (10 percent). Annually, NMFS vessel. Pollock can occur in the same declined substantially to an average of further apportions the pollock locations as Chinook salmon and chum 15,500 Chinook salmon per year from allocations to the CDQ Program and the salmon. Consequently, Chinook salmon 2008 to 2014. The decline is most likely other three AFA sectors between two and chum salmon are incidentally due to a combination of factors, seasons—40 percent to the A season caught in the nets as fishermen target including changes in abundance and (January 20 to June 10) and 60 percent pollock. distribution of Chinook salmon and to the B season (June 10 to November 1) Section 3 of the Magnuson-Stevens pollock, as well as changes in fleet (see § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(B)(1)). Act defines bycatch as fish that are behavior to avoid salmon bycatch. The AFA allows for the formation of harvested in a fishery, which are not Chinook salmon taken in the pollock fishery cooperatives within the non- sold or kept for personal use. Therefore, fishery originate from Alaska, the CDQ sectors. A purpose of these AFA Chinook salmon and chum salmon Pacific Northwest, and Canada. cooperatives is to further subdivide each caught in the pollock fishery are Estimates vary, but more than half of the sector’s or inshore cooperative’s pollock considered bycatch under the Chinook salmon bycatch in the pollock allocation among participants in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the FMP, and fishery may be destined for western sector or cooperative through private NMFS regulations at 50 CFR part 679. Alaska. Western Alaska includes the contractual agreements. The Bycatch of any species, including Bristol Bay, Kuskokwim, Yukon, and cooperatives manage these allocations to discard or other mortality caused by Norton Sound areas. Section 3.4 of the ensure that individual vessels and fishing, is a concern of the Council and Analysis provides additional companies do not harvest more than NMFS. National Standard 9 and section information about Chinook salmon their agreed upon share. The 303(a)(11) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act biology, distribution, and stock

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 899

assessments by river system or region first management priority is to meet bycatch using a method called the (see ADDRESSES). spawning escapement goals to sustain voluntary rolling hotspot system. The salmon resources for future generations. ICA operates in lieu of a fixed area Chum Salmon Bycatch The next priority is for subsistence use closure and is required to identify and The pollock fishery catches over 95 under both State and Federal law. close areas of high salmon bycatch and percent of the chum salmon taken Salmon is a primary subsistence food in move vessels to other areas. incidentally as bycatch in the BSAI some areas. Subsistence fisheries Amendment 84 required that parties to groundfish fisheries. The pollock fishery management includes coordination with the ICA include the AFA cooperatives, catches chum salmon almost U.S. Federal agencies where Federal the six CDQ groups, at least one third exclusively in the B season (after June rules apply under the Alaska National party group, including any 10). The pollock fishery has caught large Interest Lands Conservation Act. organizations representing western numbers of chum, with a historic high In recent years of low Chinook salmon Alaskans who depend on salmon and of approximately 700,000 chum salmon returns, the in-river harvest of western have an interest in salmon bycatch taken in 2005. Since then, bycatch Alaska Chinook salmon has been reduction, and at least one entity levels have been quite variable, ranging severely restricted and, in some cases, retained to facilitate bycatch avoidance from a low of 13,280 chum salmon in river systems have not met escapement behavior and information sharing. All 2010 to a high of 309,646 chum salmon goals. Surplus fish beyond escapement AFA cooperatives and CDQ groups in 2006. Average chum salmon bycatch needs and subsistence use are made participate in the ICA. from 2006 to 2014 was 115,190 chum available for other uses. Commercial Amendment 91 removed Chinook salmon. In 2014, the pollock fishery fishing for Chinook salmon may provide salmon bycatch from the Amendment caught 219,428 chum salmon. the only source of income for many 84 program and established a separate Genetic information indicates that the people who live in remote villages. program to manage Chinook salmon. majority of the chum salmon caught in Appendix A–4 of the Analysis provides Amendment 91 combined a limit on the the pollock fishery are of Asian origin an overview of the importance of amount of Chinook salmon that may be (approximately 60 percent) while a subsistence salmon harvests and caught incidentally with a novel smaller percentage (approximately 21 commercial salmon harvests (see approach designed to minimize bycatch percent) originate from aggregate ADDRESSES). to the extent practicable in all years and streams in western Alaska. Chum prevent bycatch from reaching the limit Management of Salmon Bycatch in the salmon from elsewhere in Alaska, the in most years while providing the fleet Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Pacific Northwest, and Canada comprise the flexibility to harvest the pollock the remaining percentage of the bycatch Over the last 20 years, the Council TAC. (approximately 19 percent). While the and NMFS have implemented several Amendment 91 established two PSC genetics cannot differentiate hatchery- management measures to limit salmon limits for the pollock fishery—60,000 origin fish from wild Asian chum bycatch in the BSAI trawl fisheries. and 47,591 Chinook salmon. Under salmon, given the high proportion of Management measures have focused on Amendment 91, the PSC limit is 60,000 Pacific Rim hatchery-released chum minimizing Chinook salmon bycatch, Chinook salmon if some or all of the from Japan, much of the Asian origin chum salmon bycatch, and non-Chinook pollock industry participates in an chum observed in the bycatch is likely salmon bycatch. Non-Chinook bycatch industry-developed contractual to be of Asian hatchery-origin. While is a category that includes all salmon arrangement, called an incentive plan Alaska chum salmon runs have species except Chinook salmon, but is agreement (IPA) that establishes an indicated a history of volatility in run comprised predominantly by chum incentive program to minimize bycatch sizes, chum salmon stocks in Alaska are salmon. at all levels of Chinook salmon generally at higher levels of abundance Most recently, NMFS implemented abundance. Participation in an IPA is than historical periods. Section 3.4 of Amendment 84 to the FMP to address voluntary; however, any vessel or CDQ the Analysis provides additional increases in Chinook salmon and non- group that chooses not to participate in information about chum salmon Chinook (predominantly chum) salmon an IPA is subject to a restrictive opt-out biology, distribution, and stock bycatch in the pollock fishery that were allocation (also called a backstop cap). assessments by river system or region occurring despite PSC limits being Since implementation, all AFA vessels (see ADDRESSES). reached and the closures of the Chinook have participated in an IPA. Salmon Savings Area and Chum Salmon To ensure participants develop Importance of Salmon in Western Savings Area (72 FR 61070, October 29, effective IPAs, participants provide the Alaska 2007) and Amendment 91 to the FMP, Council and NMFS annual reports that The Council and NMFS have been which implemented a program to describe the efforts each IPA is taking to concerned about the potential impact of manage Chinook salmon bycatch that ensure that each vessel does its best to Chinook and chum salmon bycatch on provides incentives for each vessel to avoid Chinook salmon at all times while returns to western Alaska given the avoid Chinook salmon at all times (75 fishing for pollock and, that collectively, relatively large proportion of bycatch FR 53026, August 30, 2010). bycatch is minimized in each year. The from these river systems that occurs in Amendment 84 was implemented to IPA system is based on being flexible, the pollock fishery. Chinook salmon and enhance the effectiveness of salmon responsive, and able to be tailored by chum salmon support commercial, bycatch measures by exempting pollock each sector to fit its operational needs. subsistence, sport, and personal use vessels from Chinook Salmon Savings The IPAs that impose rewards for fisheries in their regions of origin. The Area and Chum Salmon Savings Area avoiding Chinook salmon bycatch, and/ Alaska Board of Fisheries adopts closures if they participate in an or penalties for failure to avoid Chinook regulations through a public process to intercooperative agreement (ICA) to salmon bycatch at the vessel level, conserve salmon and to allocate salmon reduce salmon bycatch. The ICA warrant setting the PSC limit at 60,000 to the various users. The State of Alaska allowed vessels participating in the Chinook salmon. While the IPAs Department of Fish and Game manages pollock fishery to use their internal provide an incentive to minimize the salmon commercial, subsistence, cooperative structure to reduce Chinook bycatch in all years to a level below the sport, and personal use fisheries. The salmon and non-Chinook salmon limit, a limit of 60,000 Chinook salmon

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 900 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

provides the industry the flexibility to and incorporate measures to avoid both salmon species. The chum salmon harvest the pollock TAC in high- chum salmon into the IPAs. In specific requirements in the abundance years when bycatch is particular, the Council expressed that it implementing regulations for extremely difficult to avoid. remains extremely important to ensure Amendment 84 sometimes prevent Under Amendment 91, the 47,591 that the Chinook salmon bycatch fishery participants from making Chinook salmon PSC limit applies fleet- program is working as intended and to decisions to avoid Chinook salmon wide if the industry does not form any evaluate whether the incentives are when the vessels are encountering both IPAs. This PSC limit was the strong in times of historically low chum salmon and Chinook salmon. approximate 10-year average of Chinook Chinook salmon abundance. Thus the Amendment 110 would incorporate salmon bycatch from 1997 to 2006. The management measures included in chum salmon avoidance into the IPAs 47,591 PSC limit limits Chinook salmon Amendment 110 focus on retaining the established under Amendment 91. bycatch in the pollock fishery if no incentives to avoid Chinook salmon Chum salmon would no longer be other incentives, namely IPAs, are bycatch at all levels of abundance as managed under Amendment 84. operating to minimize bycatch below intended by Amendment 91. However, Amendment 110 would this level. The Council also expressed that it maintain the current non-Chinook Both PSC limits are divided between remains extremely important to provide salmon PSC limit of 42,000 fish and the the A and B seasons and allocated to the incentives to avoid Alaska-origin closure of the Chum Salmon Savings AFA sectors, inshore cooperatives, and chum salmon while maintaining the Area to pollock fishing when the PSC CDQ groups as transferable PSC flexibility to avoid Chinook salmon. The limit has been reached. Vessels that allocations. Transferability of the PSC Council’s action is designed to consider participate in an IPA would be exempt mitigates the variation in the encounter the importance of continued production from the Chum Salmon Savings Area rates of salmon bycatch among sectors, of critical chum salmon runs in western closure. The purpose of maintaining the inshore cooperatives, and CDQ groups, Alaska by focusing on bycatch non-Chinook salmon PSC limit and the in a given season. It allows eligible avoidance of Alaskan chum salmon Chum Salmon Savings Area closure is to participants to obtain a larger portion of runs. These runs have indicated a provide additional incentives for vessels the PSC allocation in order to harvest history of volatility in run sizes and an to join an IPA and as back-stop chum their pollock allocation or to transfer historic importance in the subsistence salmon measures for those vessels that surplus PSC allocation to other entities. lifestyle of Alaskans. Additional choose not to participate in an IPA. When a transferable PSC allocation is protections to other chum stocks outside Incorporating chum salmon into the reached, the affected sector, inshore of Alaska are embedded in the Council’s IPAs meets the purpose and need for cooperative, or CDQ group must stop objective to avoid the high bycatch of this action by providing measures to fishing for pollock for the remainder of chum salmon overall, recognizing that prevent high chum salmon bycatch, the season even if its pollock allocation most non-Alaska chum salmon are while allowing for participants in the has not been fully harvested. likely from Asian hatcheries. pollock fishery the flexibility to avoid The sector-level performance standard Amendment 110, if approved, Alaska chum stocks and to adapt is an additional tool to ensure that the would— quickly to changing conditions through IPA is effective and that sectors do not • Incorporate chum salmon their coordinated management under fully harvest the Chinook salmon PSC avoidance into the IPAs established the IPAs. In doing so, the Council allocations under the 60,000 Chinook under Amendment 91 to the FMP and intended to strike an appropriate salmon PSC limit in most years. For a remove the non-Chinook salmon balance between regulatory sector to continue to receive Chinook bycatch reduction ICA program requirements and adaptive management salmon PSC allocations under the previously established under for chum salmon bycatch. 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit, that Amendment 84 to the FMP; Modify the IPAs To Increase the sector may not exceed its annual • modify the requirements for the Incentives To Avoid Chinook Salmon threshold amount in any three years content of the IPAs to increase the within seven consecutive years. If a incentives for fishermen to avoid Amendment 110 would modify the sector fails this performance standard, it Chinook salmon; and IPAs to increase the incentives for will permanently be allocated a portion • reduce the Chinook salmon PSC fishermen to avoid Chinook salmon. of the 47,591 Chinook salmon PSC limit. limit and performance standard in years The Council and NMFS recognize that The risk of bearing the potential adverse with low Chinook salmon abundance. the IPAs were effective at providing economic impacts of a reduction from incentives for each vessel to avoid Incorporate Chum Salmon Avoidance the 60,000 PSC limit to the 47,591 PSC Chinook salmon, but that additional Into the Incentive Plan Agreements limit creates incentives for fishery measures are necessary to address participants to cooperate in an effective Currently, Chinook salmon and chum higher Chinook salmon PSC rates IPA. salmon bycatch are managed under two observed during October (the last month different programs (Amendment 84 and when the pollock fishery is authorized Amendment 110 Management Measures Amendment 91). This has created to operate) and to address concerns with In April 2015, the Council inefficiencies and does not allow individual vessels that consistently have recommended Amendment 110 to the participants in the pollock fishery the significantly higher Chinook salmon FMP to create a comprehensive salmon flexibility to modify their harvest PSC rates relative to other vessels bycatch avoidance program for the patterns and practices to effectively fishing at the same time. The Council pollock fishery that works more minimize both Chinook salmon and and NMFS wanted to ensure the use of effectively than the current salmon chum salmon bycatch. Adding chum salmon excluder devices (i.e., gear bycatch programs to avoid Chinook salmon measures to the IPAs would modifications that are designed to salmon bycatch and Alaska-origin chum make salmon bycatch management more exclude salmon bycatch while retaining salmon bycatch. Amendment 110 would effective, comprehensive, and efficient pollock) and a rolling hotspot program. modify the existing Chinook salmon by increasing flexibility to respond to The new provisions described below are bycatch program to make it more changing conditions and providing intended to provide an opportunity for effective at avoiding Chinook salmon greater incentives to reduce bycatch of IPAs to increase their responsiveness in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 901

October, and improve performance of lower performance standard and low bycatch in years of low abundance and individual vessels. PSC limit would apply. to set a maximum permissible PSC limit In low Chinook salmon abundance that reduces the risk of adverse impact Reduce the Chinook Salmon years, NMFS would set the performance on stocks in western Alaska during Performance Standard and PSC Limit in standard at 33,318 Chinook salmon and periods of low abundance. Years of Low Chinook Salmon the PSC limit at 45,000 Chinook salmon. Abundance NMFS is soliciting public comments NMFS would publish the lower PSC on proposed Amendment 110 through limit and performance standard in the Amendment 110 would add a new the end of the comment period (see annual harvest specifications. In years lower Chinook salmon PSC limit and DATES). NMFS intends to publish in the when abundance is above 250,000 performance standard for the pollock Federal Register and seek public Chinook salmon, NMFS would manage fishery in years of low Chinook salmon comment on a proposed rule that would under the current 47,591 Chinook abundance. The Council and NMFS implement Amendment 110, following salmon performance standard and considered a lower performance NMFS’ evaluation of the proposed rule 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit standard and PSC limit would be under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. All established under Amendment 91. appropriate at low levels of Chinook The inclusion of a lower PSC limit comments received by the end of the salmon abundance in western Alaska to and performance standard is based on comment period on Amendment 110, accommodate the fact that most of the the need for additional incentives to whether specifically directed to the Chinook salmon bycatch comes from reduce bycatch when Chinook salmon FMP amendment or the proposed rule, western Alaska. These provisions work stocks are critically low in order to will be considered in the approval/ in conjunction with the change to the minimize the impact of the pollock disapproval decision on Amendment IPA requirements to ensure that fishery on the salmon stocks. Any 110. Comments received after that date Chinook salmon bycatch is avoided at additional fish returning to Alaska will not be considered in the approval/ all times, particularly at low abundance rivers improves the ability to meet the disapproval decision on Amendment levels. escapement goals, which is necessary 110. To be considered, comments must Each year NMFS would determine for long-term sustainability of Chinook be received, not just postmarked or whether Chinook salmon abundance salmon and the people reliant on otherwise transmitted, by the last day of was low based on information provided salmon fisheries. While the performance the comment period. by the State of Alaska. Annually, the standard is the operational limit in the Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. State would provide an index of IPAs, reducing the 60,000 PSC limit is Dated: January 5, 2016. abundance based on the post-season in- also appropriate given the potential for river Chinook salmon run size for the decreased bycatch reduction incentives Emily H. Menashes, Kuskokwim, Unalakleet, and Upper should a sector exceed its performance Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Yukon aggregate stock grouping. When standard before the PSC limit is Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. this index is less than or equal to reached. The reduced PSC limit is [FR Doc. 2016–00150 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] 250,000 Chinook salmon, then the new intended to encourage vessels to avoid BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:59 Jan 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\08JAP1.SGM 08JAP1 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 902

Notices Federal Register Vol. 81, No. 5

Friday, January 8, 2016

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station APHIS has received a petition (APHIS contains documents other than rules or 3A–03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Petition Number 15–300–01p) from the proposed rules that are applicable to the Riverdale, MD 20737–1238. Scotts Company of Marysville, OH, and public. Notices of hearings and investigations, Supporting documents and any Monsanto Company of St. Louis, MO committee meetings, agency decisions and comments we receive on this docket (Scotts/Monsanto), seeking a rulings, delegations of authority, filing of may be viewed at http:// petitions and applications and agency determination of nonregulated status of statements of organization and functions are www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail; creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera examples of documents appearing in this D=APHIS-2015-0096 or in our reading L.) designated as event ASR368, which section. room, which is located in Room 1141 of has been genetically engineered for the USDA South Building, 14th Street resistance to the herbicide glyphosate. and Independence Avenue SW., The Scotts/Monsanto petition states that DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Washington, DC. Normal reading room information collected during field trials hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday and laboratory analyses indicates that Animal and Plant Health Inspection through Friday, except holidays. To be ASR368 bentgrass is not likely to be a Service sure someone is there to help you, plant pest and therefore should not be [Docket No. APHIS–2015–0096] please call (202) 799–7039 before a regulated article under APHIS’ coming. regulations in 7 CFR part 340. The Scotts Co. and Monsanto Co.; The petition is also available on the As described in the petition, ASR368 Availability of Petition for APHIS Web site at: http:// bentgrass contains the cp4 epsps gene www.aphis.usda.gov/biotechnology/ from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4 that Determination of Nonregulated Status _ _ of Creeping Bentgrass Genetically petitions table pending.shtml under confers resistance to the herbicide Engineered for Resistance to APHIS petition 15–300–01p. glyphosate. ASR368 bentgrass is Glyphosate FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. currently regulated under 7 CFR part John Turner, Director, Environmental 340. Interstate movements and field AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Risk Analysis Programs, Biotechnology tests of ASR368 bentgrass have been Inspection Service, USDA. Regulatory Services, APHIS, 4700 River conducted under notifications ACTION: Notice. Road, Unit 147, Riverdale, MD 20737– acknowledged by APHIS. 1236; (301) 851–3954, email: Field tests conducted under APHIS SUMMARY: We are advising the public [email protected]. To obtain oversight allowed for evaluation in a that the Animal and Plant Health copies of the petition, contact Ms. Cindy natural agricultural setting while Inspection Service has received a Eck at (301) 851–3892, email: imposing measures to minimize the risk petition from the Scotts Company and [email protected]. of persistence in the environment after Monsanto Company seeking a completion of the tests. Data are SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the determination of nonregulated status of gathered on multiple parameters and authority of the plant pest provisions of creeping bentgrass designated as event used by the applicant to evaluate the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701 ASR368, which has been genetically agronomic characteristics and product et seq.), the regulations in 7 CFR part engineered for resistance to the performance. These and other data are 340, ‘‘Introduction of Organisms and herbicide glyphosate. The petition has used by APHIS to determine if the new Products Altered or Produced Through been submitted in accordance with our variety poses a plant pest risk. regulations concerning the introduction Genetic Engineering Which Are Plant Paragraph (d) of § 340.6 provides that of certain genetically engineered Pests or Which There Is Reason to APHIS will publish a notice in the organisms and products. We are making Believe Are Plant Pests,’’ regulate, Federal Register providing 60 days for the Scotts Company and Monsanto among other things, the introduction public comment for petitions for a Company petition available for review (importation, interstate movement, or determination of nonregulated status. and comment to help us identify release into the environment) of On March 6, 2012, we published in the potential environmental and organisms and products altered or Federal Register (77 FR 13258–13260, interrelated economic issues and produced through genetic engineering Docket No. APHIS–2011–0129) a that are plant pests or that there is impacts that the Animal and Plant notice 1 describing our process for reason to believe are plant pests. Such Health Inspection Service may soliciting public comment when genetically engineered (GE) organisms determine should be considered in our considering petitions for determinations and products are considered ‘‘regulated evaluation of the petition. of nonregulated status for GE organisms. articles.’’ In that notice we indicated that APHIS DATES: We will consider all comments The regulations in § 340.6(a) provide would accept written comments that we receive on or before March 8, that any person may submit a petition regarding a petition once APHIS 2016. to the Animal and Plant Health deemed it complete. ADDRESSES Inspection Service (APHIS) seeking a : You may submit comments In accordance with § 340.6(d) of the determination that an article should not by either of the following methods: regulations and our process for • be regulated under 7 CFR part 340. Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to soliciting public input when Paragraphs (b) and (c) of § 340.6 http://www.regulations.gov/# considering petitions for determinations !docketDetail;D=APHIS-2015-0096. describe the form that a petition for a • Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: determination of nonregulated status 1 To view the notice, go to http:// Send your comment to Docket No. must take and the information that must www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS- APHIS–2015–0096, Regulatory Analysis be included in the petition. 2011-0129.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 903

of nonregulated status for GE organisms, Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781– number of people who wish to speak. we are publishing this notice to inform 7786; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and Speakers should assume that their the public that APHIS will accept 371.3. presentations will be limited to three written comments regarding the petition Done in Washington, DC, this 4th day of minutes or less, but commenters may for a determination of nonregulated January 2016. submit written statements for the status from interested or affected Michael C. Gregoire, record. persons for a period of 60 days from the Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Contact Person for Further Information date of this notice. The petition is Health Inspection Service. available for public review and [FR Doc. 2016–00160 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Shauna Lawhorne, Public Affairs comment, and copies are available as BILLING CODE 3410–34–P Specialist, [email protected] or (202) 261– indicated under ADDRESSES and FOR 7600. Further information about this FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT above. public meeting can be found on the CSB We are interested in receiving CHEMICAL SAFETY AND HAZARD Web site at: www.csb.gov. comments regarding potential INVESTIGATION BOARD Dated: January 6, 2016. environmental and interrelated Kara A. Wenzel, economic issues and impacts that Sunshine Act Meeting Acting General Counsel, Chemical Safety and APHIS may determine should be Hazard Investigation Board. considered in our evaluation of the TIME AND DATE: January 13, 2016, 5:00 petition. We are particularly interested p.m. PST. [FR Doc. 2016–00298 Filed 1–6–16; 4:15 pm] in receiving comments regarding PLACE: City Hall, Council Chamber, BILLING CODE 6350–01–P biological, cultural, or ecological issues, 3031 Torrance Blvd., Torrance, CA and we encourage the submission of 90503. scientific data, studies, or research to STATUS: Open to the public. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE support your comments. We also Matters To Be Considered request that, when possible, International Trade Administration commenters provide relevant The Chemical Safety and Hazard information regarding specific localities Investigation Board (CSB) will convene [A–570–970] or regions as creeping bentgrass growth, a public meeting on January 13, 2016, starting at 5:00 p.m. PST at Torrance crop management, and crop utilization Multilayered Wood Flooring From the City Hall Council Chamber, 3031 may vary considerably by geographic People’s Republic of China: Torrance Blvd., Torrance, CA 90503. region. Preliminary Results of Antidumping The Board will discuss its investigation After the comment period closes, Duty Administrative Review; 2013– of the incident at the ExxonMobil APHIS will review all written comments 2014 received during the comment period Refinery on February 18, 2015. CSB and any other relevant information. Any Staff will present interim findings to the AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, substantive issues identified by APHIS Board. Following the staff presentation, International Trade Administration, based on our review of the petition and the Board will hear from a panel of Department of Commerce. our evaluation and analysis of experts on process safety management SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce comments will be considered in the (PSM) reform in the State of California. (‘‘the Department’’) is conducting an development of our decisionmaking Additional Information administrative review of the documents. As part of our The meeting is free and open to the antidumping duty order on multilayered decisionmaking process regarding a GE public. If you require a translator or wood flooring (‘‘MLWF’’) from the organism’s regulatory status, APHIS interpreter, please notify the individual People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). prepares a plant pest risk assessment to listed below as the ‘‘Contact Person for The period of review (‘‘POR’’) is assess its plant pest risk and the Further Information,’’ at least three December 1, 2013, through November appropriate environmental business days prior to the meeting. 30, 2014. The review covers two documentation—either an This meeting will be webcast for those mandatory respondents, Fine Furniture environmental assessment (EA) or an who cannot attend in person. Please (Shanghai) Limited (‘‘Fine Furniture’’) environmental impact statement (EIS)— visit www.csb.gov for access to the live and Dalian Penghong Floor Products in accordance with the National webcast. Co., Ltd. (‘‘Dalian Penghong’’). We Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), to The CSB is an independent federal preliminarily find that both respondents provide the Agency with a review and agency charged with investigating made sales of subject merchandise at analysis of any potential environmental accidents and hazards that result, or less than normal value (‘‘NV’’). impacts associated with the petition may result, in the catastrophic release of DATES: Effective date: January 8, 2016. request. For petitions for which APHIS extremely hazardous substances. The FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit prepares an EA, APHIS will follow our agency’s Board Members are appointed published process for soliciting public Astvatsatrian or William Horn AD/CVD by the President and confirmed by the Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and comment (see footnote 1) and publish a Senate. CSB investigations look into all separate notice in the Federal Register Compliance, International Trade aspects of chemical accidents and Administration, Department of announcing the availability of APHIS’ hazards, including physical causes such EA and plant pest risk assessment. Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue as equipment failure as well as NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: Should APHIS determine that an EIS inadequacies in regulations, industry (202) 482–6412 and (202) 482–2615. is necessary, APHIS will complete the standards, and safety management NEPA EIS process in accordance with systems. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Council on Environmental Quality Scope of the Order regulations (40 CFR part 1500–1508) Public Comment and APHIS’ NEPA implementing The time provided for public The merchandise covered by the order regulations (7 CFR part 372). statements will depend upon the includes MLWF, subject to certain

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 904 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

exceptions.1 Imports of the subject Methodology Preliminary Results of Review merchandise are provided for under the The Department preliminarily finds following subheadings of the The Department has conducted this review in accordance with section that nineteen companies subject to this Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the review did not establish eligibility for a 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as United States (‘‘HTSUS’’): ’’): separate rate. As such, we preliminarily amended (‘‘the Act’’). Export prices and 4412.31.0520; 4412.31.0540; determine they are part of the PRC-wide constructed export prices have been 4412.31.0560; 4412.31.2510; entity.3 Because no party requested a calculated in accordance with section 4412.31.2520; 4412.31.3175; review of the PRC-wide entity and the 772 of the Act. Because the PRC is a 4412.31.4040; 4412.31.4050; Department no longer considers the non-market economy (‘‘NME’’) within 4412.31.4060; 4412.31.4070; PRC-wide entity as an exporter the meaning of section 771(18) of the conditionally subject to administrative 4412.31.4075; 4412.31.4080; Act, normal value (‘‘NV’’) has been 4412.31.5125; 4412.31.5135; reviews,4 we did not conduct a review calculated in accordance with section of the PRC-wide entity. Thus, the rate 4412.31.5155; 4412.31.5165; 773(c) of the Act. 4412.31.5175; 4412.31.6000; for the PRC-wide entity is not subject to 4412.31.9100; 4412.32.0520; For a full description of the change as a result of this review. For companies subject to this review 4412.32.0540; 4412.32.0560; methodology underlying our conclusions, please see the Preliminary that have established their entitlement 4412.32.0565; 4412.32.0570; Decision Memorandum, hereby adopted to a separate rate, the Department 4412.32.2510; 4412.32.2520; by this notice. The Preliminary Decision preliminarily determines that the 4412.32.2525; 4412.32.2530; Memorandum is a public document and following weighted-average dumping 4412.32.3125; 4412.32.3135; is on file electronically via Enforcement margins exist for the POR from 4412.32.3155; 4412.32.3165; and Compliance’s Antidumping and December 1, 2013, through November 4412.32.3175; 4412.32.3185; Countervailing Duty Centralized 30, 2014: 5 4412.32.5600; 4412.39.1000; Electronic Service System (‘‘ACCESS’’). 4412.39.3000; 4412.39.4011; ACCESS is available to registered users 3 The following companies were named in the 4412.39.4012; 4412.39.4019; Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty at http://access.trade.gov. The Administrative Reviews, 80 FR 6041 (February 4, 4412.39.4031; 4412.39.4032; Preliminary Decision Memorandum is 2014), but did not submit a certification of no 4412.39.4039; 4412.39.4051; also available in the Central Records shipment, separate rate application or separate rate 4412.39.4052; 4412.39.4059; Unit, Room B8024 of the main certification; therefore they are part of the PRC-wide 4412.39.4061; 4412.39.4062; entity: Anhui Suzhou Dongda Wood Co., Ltd.; Department of Commerce building. In Baiying Furniture Manufacturer Co., Ltd.; Cheng 4412.39.4069; 4412.39.5010; addition, a complete version of the Hang Wood Co., Ltd.; Dalian Huilong Wooden 4412.39.5030; 4412.39.5050; Preliminary Decision Memorandum can Products Co., Ltd.; Dalian Jiuyuan Wood Industry 4412.94.1030; 4412.94.1050; Co., Ltd.; Fu Lik Timber (HK) Co., Ltd.; Guangzhou be accessed directly at http:// Homebon Timber Manufacturing Co., Ltd.; HaiLin 4412.94.3105; 4412.94.3111; enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. XinCheng Wooden Products, Ltd.; Hangzhou 4412.94.3121; 4412.94.3131; The signed Preliminary Decision Dazhuang Floor Co., Ltd (dba Dasso Industrial 4412.94.3141; 4412.94.3160; Memorandum and the electronic Group Co., Ltd); Linyi Anying Wood Co., Ltd.; Qingdao Barry Flooring Co., Ltd. (Qingdao Barry); 4412.94.3171; 4412.94.4100; versions of the Preliminary Decision Shanghai Anxin (Weiguang) Timber Co., Ltd.; 4412.94.5100; 4412.94.6000; Memorandum are identical in content. Vicwood Industry (Suzhou) Co., Ltd.; Xiamen Yung 4412.94.7000; 4412.94.8000; De Ornament Co., Ltd.; Yingyi-Nature (Kunshan) Affiliation and Collapsing Wood Industry Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang AnJi XinFeng 4412.94.9000; 4412.94.9500; Bamboo & Wood Industry Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang 4412.99.0600; 4412.99.1020; Based on the evidence presented in Desheng Wood Industry Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang Haoyun 4412.99.1030; 4412.99.1040; Wooden Co., Ltd.; and Zhejiang Shiyou Timber Co., Dalian Penghong’s questionnaire Ltd. We note that Qingdao Barry is currently subject 4412.99.3110; 4412.99.3120; responses, we preliminarily find (1) that to a new shipper review that covers the same POR 4412.99.3130; 4412.99.3140; Dalian Penghong is affiliated with a as this administrative review. The only sale(s) made 4412.99.3150; 4412.99.3160; certain glue producer within the by Qingdao Barry during that period are being reviewed in the new shipper review. As a result, the 4412.99.3170; 4412.99.4100; meaning of sections 771(33)(A), (F), and Department may rescind this administrative review 4412.99.5100; 4412.99.5105; (G) of the Act; and (2) that Dalian as to Qingdao Barry in the final results if there are 4412.99.5115; 4412.99.5710; Penghong and Dalian Shumaike Floor no reviewable entries that remain subject to this 4412.99.6000; 4412.99.7000; Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shumaike’’) administrative review. 4 See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement 4412.99.8000; 4412.99.9000; are affiliated within the meaning of of Change in Department Practice for Respondent 4412.99.9500; 4418.71.2000; section 773(33)(F) of the Act. Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and 4418.71.9000; 4418.72.2000; Additionally, we are preliminarily Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy treating Dalian Penghong and Shumaike Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 4418.72.9500; and 9801.00.2500. FR 65963, 65969–70 (November 4, 2013). as a single entity for antidumping duty While HTSUS subheadings are 5 In addition to the companies listed in the table, purposes, within the meaning of 19 CFR provided for convenience and customs certain companies certified that they did not ship 351.401(f), because we find that those subject merchandise to the United States during the purposes, the written description of the two affiliated companies have a high POR. The Department confirmed these certifications subject merchandise is dispositive. of no shipments with U.S. Customs and Border level of common ownership, production Protection (‘‘CBP’’); therefore, the following facilities for similar or identical companies will maintain their rate from the most 1 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy products that would not require recent segment in which they participated: Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Changbai Mountain Development and Protection Countervailing Duty Operations to Paul Piquado, substantial retooling to restructure Zone Hongtu Wood Industrial Co., Ltd.; Dalian T- Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and manufacturing priorities, and that there Boom Wood Products Co., Ltd.; Hangzhou Compliance, regarding ‘‘Decision Memorandum for is a significant potential for Zhengtian Industrial Co., Ltd.; Jiangsu Guyu Preliminary Results of 2013–2014 Antidumping manipulation of price or production.2 International Trading Co., Ltd.; Jiangsu Mingle Duty Administrative Review: Multilayered Wood Flooring Co., Ltd.; Linyi Bonn Flooring Flooring from the People’s Republic of China,’’ Manufacturing Co., Ltd.; Shanghai Eswell Timber (‘‘Preliminary Decision Memorandum’’), issued and 2 See Dalian Penghong Floor Products Co., Ltd., Co., Ltd.; Shenyang Senwang Wooden Industry Co., dated concurrently with this notice, for a complete Preliminary Affiliation and Single Entity Ltd.; Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export Co., Ltd.; description of the Scope of the Order. Memorandum dated concurrently with this Notice. and Zhejiang Fuerjia Wooden Co., Ltd.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 905

Weighted-average Exporter dumping margin

Fine Furniture (Shanghai) Limited ...... 13.34 Dalian Penghong Floor Products Co., Ltd/Dalian Shumaike Floor Manufacturing Co., Ltd 6 ...... 0.00 A&W (Shanghai) Woods Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Anhui Longhua Bamboo Product Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Armstrong Wood Products (Kunshan) Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Baishan Huafeng Wood Product Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Benxi Wood Company ...... 13.34 Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Chinafloors Timber (China) Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Dalian Dajen Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Dalian Huade Wood Product Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Dalian Kemian Wood Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Dalian Xinjinghua Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Dasso Industrial Group Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics, LLC ...... 13.34 Dunhua City Dexin Wood Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Dunhua City Hongyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Dun Hua City Jisen Wood Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Dunhua City Wanrong Wood Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Dun Hua Sen Tai Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Dunhua Shengda Wood Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Fusong Jinlong Wooden Group Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Fusong Qianqiu Wooden Product Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 GTP International Ltd ...... 13.34 Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Guangzhou Panyu Kangda Board Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Guangzhou Panyu Southern Star Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 HaiLin LinJing Wooden Products, Ltd ...... 13.34 Hangzhou Hanje Tec Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Henan Xingwangjia Technology Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Hunchun Forest Wolf Wooden Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Hunchun Xingjia Wooden Flooring Inc ...... 13.34 Huzhou Chenghang Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Huzhou Fulinmen Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Huzhou Fuma Wood Co., Ltd 7 ...... 13.34 Huzhou Jesonwood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Huzhou Ruifeng Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Huzhou Sunergy World Trade Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Jiafeng Wood (Suzhou) Co., Ltd 8 ...... 13.34 Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Jiangsu Simba Flooring Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Jiangsu Yuhui International Trade Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Jiashan HuiJiaLe Decoration Material Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Jiaxing Hengtong Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Jilin Forest Industry Jinqiao Flooring Group Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Jilin Xinyuan Wooden Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Karly Wood Product Limited ...... 13.34 Kemian Wood Industry (Kunshan) Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Les Planchers Mercier, Inc ...... 13.34 Linyi Youyou Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 MuDanJiang Bosen Wood Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Nakahiro Jyou Sei Furniture (Dalian) Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Nanjing Minglin Wooden Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Ningbo Tianyi Bamboo & Wood Products Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Pinge Timber Manufacturing (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Power Dekor Group Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Puli Trading Limited ...... 13.34 Shanghai Lairunde Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Shanghai Lizhong Wood Products Co., Ltd/The Lizhong Wood Industry Limited Company of Shanghai 9 ...... 13.34 Shanghai New Sihe Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Shanghai Shenlin Corporation ...... 13.34 Shenyang Haobainian Wooden Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Shenzhenshi Huanwei Woods Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Sino-Maple (JiangSu) Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Suzhou Dongda Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Xuzhou Antop International Trade Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Xuzhou Shenghe Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Yekalon Industry, Inc ...... 13.34 Yixing Lion-King Timber Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Zhejiang Biyork Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Zhejiang Dadongwu Green Home Wood Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Zhejiang Fudeli Timber Industry Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Zhejiang Fuma Warm Technology Co., Ltd ...... 13.34

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 906 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Weighted-average Exporter dumping margin

Zhejiang Longsen Lumbering Co., Ltd ...... 13.34 Zhejiang Shuimojiangnan New Material Technology Co., Ltd ...... 13.34

should be limited to five pages total, review, the Department will calculate an including footnotes. Interested parties importer- (or customer-) specific Disclosure and Public Comment who wish to request a hearing must assessment rate on the basis of the ratio The Department intends to disclose submit a written request to the Assistant of the total amount of antidumping calculations performed for these Secretary for Enforcement and duties calculated for the importer’s preliminary results to the parties within Compliance, U.S. Department of examined sales and the total entered five days of the date of publication of Commerce, within 30 days after the date value of sales, in accordance with 19 this notice.10 Interested parties may of publication of this notice.14 Requests CFR 351.212(b)(1). In these preliminary submit a case brief no later than 30 days should contain the party’s name, results, the Department applied the after the date of publication of these address, and telephone number, the assessment rate calculation method preliminary results of review.11 Rebuttal number of participants, and a list of the adopted in the Final Modification for briefs may be filed no later than five issues to be discussed. If a request for Reviews.18 Where either the days after the deadline for filing case a hearing is made, the Department respondent’s weighted-average dumping briefs and may respond only to intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. margin is zero or de minimis, or an arguments raised in the case briefs.12 A Department of Commerce, 14th Street importer- (or customer-) specific table of contents, list of authorities used, and Constitution Avenue NW., assessment rate is zero or de minimis, and an executive summary of issues Washington, DC 20230, at a time to be we will instruct CBP to liquidate the should accompany any briefs submitted determined.15 Parties should confirm by appropriate entries without regard to to the Department.13 This summary telephone the date, time, and location of antidumping duties.19 We intend to the hearing two days before the instruct CBP to liquidate entries 6 We note that the record reflects that Dalian scheduled date. containing subject merchandise Penghong and Shumaike were not affiliated until All submissions, with limited April 2014 (i.e., approximately 4 months into the exported by the PRC-wide entity at the POR). Because the record does not support treating exceptions, must be filed electronically current rate for the PRC-wide entity Dalian Penghong as a single entity with Shumaike using ACCESS. An electronically filed (which, as noted above, is not subject to prior to the date of affiliation (i.e., April 2014), document must be received successfully change in this review). separate assessment rates will apply for the period from 11/30/2013 through 3/31/2014. In particular, in its entirety by 5 p.m. Eastern Time On October 24, 2011, the Department the assessment rate for any entries by Shumaike (‘‘ET’’) on the due date. Documents announced a refinement to its will be 13.34 percent (the rate applicable to excepted from the electronic submission assessment practice in NME unexamined separate rate companies) and the requirements must be filed manually antidumping duty cases.20 Pursuant to assessment rate for any entries by Dalian Penghong will be 0.00. (i.e., in paper form) with the APO/ this refinement in practice, for 7 On July 13, 2015, the Department determined Dockets Unit in Room 1870 and merchandise that was not reported in that Zhejiang Fuma Warm Technology Co., Ltd. is stamped with the date and time of the U.S. sales databases submitted by an the successor-in-interest to Huzhou Fuma Wood receipt by 5 p.m. ET on the due date.16 exporter individually examined during Co., Ltd. See Multilayered Wood Flooring From the Unless extended, the Department People’s Republic of China: Final Results of this review, but that entered under the Changed Circumstances Review, 80 FR 39998 (July intends to issue the final results of this case number of that exporter (i.e., at the 13, 2015). Because Huzhou Fuma Wood Co., Ltd. administrative review, which will individually-examined exporter’s cash no longer exists as a legal entity, the rate assigned include the results of its analysis of deposit rate), the Department will to Huzhou Fuma Wood Co., Ltd. will apply for assessment purposes only. issues raised in any briefs, within 120 instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at 8 On November 16, 2015, the Department days of publication of these preliminary the PRC-wide rate. Additionally, determined that Sino-Maple (JiangSu) Co., Ltd. is results, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) pursuant to this refinement, if the the successor-in-interest to Jiafeng Wood (Suzhou) of the Act. Department determines that an exporter Co., Ltd. See Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Assessment Rates under review had no shipments of the Changed Circumstances Review, 80 FR 70756 subject merchandise, any suspended (November 16, 2015). Because Jiafeng Wood Upon issuance of the final results, the entries that entered under that (Suzhou) Co., Ltd. no longer exists as a legal entity, Department will determine, and CBP exporter’s case number will be the rate assigned to Jiafeng Wood (Suzhou) Co., Ltd. shall assess, antidumping duties on all liquidated at the PRC-wide rate. will apply for assessment purposes only. appropriate entries covered by this 9 On September 30, 2014, the Department 17 Cash Deposit Requirements determined that Linyi Youyou Wood Co., Ltd. is the review. The Department intends to successor-in-interest to Shanghai Lizhong Wood issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 The following cash deposit Products Co., Ltd./The Lizhong Wood Industry days after the publication date of the requirements will be effective upon Limited Company of Shanghai. See Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People’s Republic of final results of this review. For any publication of the final results of this China: Final Results of Changed Circumstances individually examined respondent administrative review for shipments of Review, 79 FR 58740 (September 30, 2014). Because whose weighted-average dumping Shanghai Lizhong Wood Products Co., Ltd./The margin is above de minimis (i.e., 0.50 18 See Antidumping Proceeding Calculation of the Lizhong Wood Industry Limited Company of percent) in the final results of this Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Shanghai no longer exists as a legal entity, the rate Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty assigned to Shanghai Lizhong Wood Products Co., Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 Ltd./The Lizhong Wood Industry Limited Company 14 See 19 CFR 351.310(c). (February 14, 2012) (‘‘Final Modification for of Shanghai will apply for assessment purposes 15 See 19 CFR 351.310(d). Reviews’’). only. 16 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 19 See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). 10 See 19 CFR 351.224(b). Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; 20 See Non-Market Economy Antidumping 11 See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii). Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 12 See 19 CFR 351.309(d). 39263 (July 6, 2011). FR 65694 (October 24, 2011), for a full discussion 13 See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2). 17 See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). of this practice.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 907

the subject merchandise from the PRC 13. U.S. Price reviews of the antidumping duty orders entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 14. Value Added Tax on coated paper from Indonesia and the for consumption on or after the 15. Normal Value PRC pursuant to section 751(c) of the publication date, as provided by section 16. Factor Valuations Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 17. Adjustment Under Section 777(A)(f) of 2 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the the Act Act). On October 14, 2015, the companies listed above the cash deposit 18. Currency Conversion Department received a Notice of Intent rate will be their respective rate 19. Recommendation to Participate in these reviews from established in the final results of this [FR Doc. 2016–00180 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Verso Corporation (Verso), S.D. Warren review, except if the rate is zero or de BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Company d/b/a Sappi North America minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent), then (Sappi), Appleton Coated LLC the cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for (Appleton) and the United Steel, Paper previously investigated PRC and non- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, PRC exporters not listed above that have Energy, Allied Industrial and Service separate rates, the cash deposit rate will International Trade Administration Workers International Union, AFL–CIO, continue to be the exporter-specific rate [A–560–823, A–570–958] CLC (USW) (collectively, ‘‘the published for the most recent period; (3) petitioners’’), within the deadline for all PRC exporters of subject Certain Coated Paper Suitable for specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). merchandise which have not been High-Quality Print Graphics Using Verso, Sappi and Appleton claimed found to be entitled to a separate rate, Sheet-Fed Presses From Indonesia interested party status under section the cash deposit rate will be that for the and the People’s Republic of China: 771(9)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR PRC-wide entity; and (4) for all non-PRC Final Results of Expedited First Sunset 351.102(b)(29)(v), as domestic producers exporters of subject merchandise which Reviews of the Antidumping Duty of a domestic like product in the United have not received their own rate, the Orders States. USW claimed interested party cash deposit rate will be the rate status under section 771(9)(D) of the Act applicable to the PRC exporter that AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, and 19 CFR 351.102(b)(29)(vi), as a supplied that non-PRC exporter. These International Trade Administration, certified union or recognized union that deposit requirements, when imposed, Department of Commerce. represents workers engaged in the SUMMARY: shall remain in effect until further As a result of these sunset manufacturing of a domestic like notice. reviews, the Department of Commerce product in the United States. On (the Department) finds that revocation October 30, 2015, we received complete Notification to Importers of the antidumping duty orders on substantive responses from the certain coated paper suitable for high- This notice also serves as a petitioners within the 30-day deadline quality print graphics using sheet-fed preliminary reminder to importers of specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).3 presses (coated paper) from Indonesia their responsibility under 19 CFR We received no substantive responses and the People’s Republic of China 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate from any respondent interested parties. (PRC) would be likely to lead to regarding the reimbursement of As a result, pursuant to section continuation or recurrence of dumping antidumping duties prior to liquidation 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR at the levels indicated in the ‘‘Final of the relevant entries during this 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the Department Results of Sunset Reviews’’ section of review period. Failure to comply with conducted expedited (120-day) sunset this notice. this requirement could result in the reviews of these orders. Department’s presumption that DATES: Effective date: January 8, 2016. reimbursement of antidumping duties FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scope of the Orders occurred and the subsequent assessment Terre Keaton Stefanova or Brian Smith, The merchandise subject to these of double antidumping duties. AD/CVD Operations, Office II, orders is coated paper. The merchandise Notification to Interested Parties Enforcement and Compliance, subject to these orders are provided for International Trade Administration, under subheadings: 4810.14.11, We are issuing and publishing these U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 4810.14.1900, 4810.14.2010, results in accordance with sections Street & Constitution Avenue NW., 4810.14.2090, 4810.14.5000, 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 4810.14.6000, 4810.14.70, 4810.19.1100, CFR 351.213. 482–1280 or (202) 482–1766, 4810.19.1900, 4810.19.2010, Dated: December 31, 2015. respectively. 4810.19.2090, 4810.22.1000, 4810.22.50, Paul Piquado, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 4810.22.6000, 4810.22.70, 4810.29.1000, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 4810.29.5000, 4810.29.6000, 4810.29.70, Compliance. Background 4810.32, 4810.39 and 4810.92 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in On November 17, 2010, the United States (HTSUS). Although the the Preliminary Decision Memorandum Department published the antidumping duty orders on coated paper from 1. Summary Indonesia and the PRC.1 On October 1, 2 See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews, 2. Background 2015, the Department published the 80 FR 59133 (October 1, 2015). 3 3. Period of Review notice of initiation of the first sunset See October 30, 2015, filings from the 4. Extension of Preliminary Results petitioners regarding ‘‘1st Sunset Review of 5. Scope of the Order Antidumping Order on Certain Coated Paper 6. Selection of Respondents 1 See Certain Coated Paper Suitable for High- Suitable for High-Quality Print Graphics Using 7. Non-Market Economy Country Quality Print Graphics Using Sheet-Fed Presses Sheet-Fed Presses from Indonesia: Substantive 8. Separate Rate From Indonesia: Antidumping Duty Order, 75 FR Response to Notice of Initiation’’ (Indonesia 70205 (November 17, 2010); and Certain Coated Substantive Response), and 1st Sunset Review of 9. Surrogate Country and Surrogate Value Paper Suitable for High-Quality Print Graphics Antidumping Order on Certain Coated Paper Data Using Sheet-Fed Presses From the People’s Republic Suitable for High-Quality Print Graphics Using 10. Date of Sale of China: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Sheet-Fed Presses from the People’s Republic of 11. Fair Value Comparisons Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order, China: Substantive Response to Notice of Initiation 12. Affiliation and Single Entity Status 75 FR 70203 (November 17, 2010) (Orders). (PRC Substantive Response).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 908 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

HTSUS subheadings are provided for their responsibility concerning the Co., Ltd., (collectively, JA Solar) convenience and customs purposes, our return or destruction of proprietary received countervailable subsidies written description of the scope of these information disclosed under APO in during the POR. Interested parties are orders is dispositive.4 accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. invited to comment on these Timely notification of the return or preliminary results. Analysis of Comments Received destruction of APO materials or DATES: Effective date: January 8, 2016. All issues raised in these reviews, conversion to judicial protective order is FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: including the likelihood of continuation hereby requested. Failure to comply Cynthia Baker or Gene Calvert, AD/CVD or recurrence of dumping in the event with the regulations and terms of an Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and of revocation and the magnitude of the APO is a violation which is subject to Compliance, International Trade margins likely to prevail if the orders sanction. Administration, U.S. Department of were revoked, are addressed in the We are issuing and publishing these Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution accompanying Issues and Decision results and notice in accordance with Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; Memorandum, which is hereby adopted sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of telephone: (202) 482–6251, and (202) by this notice. The Issues and Decision the Act, 19 CFR 351.218 and 19 CFR 482–3586, respectively. Memorandum is a public document and 351.221(c)(5)(ii). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: is on file electronically via Enforcement Dated: January 4, 2016. and Compliance’s Antidumping and Paul Piquado, Scope of the Order Countervailing Duty Centralized Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and The merchandise subject to the CVD Electronic Service System (ACCESS). Compliance. ACCESS is available to registered users order is crystalline silicon photovoltaic at http://access.trade.gov, and to all Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in cells, and modules, laminates, and parties in the Central Records Unit, the Issues and Decision Memorandum panels, consisting of crystalline silicon Room B8024 of the main Department of photovoltaic cells, whether or not I. Summary partially or fully assembled into other Commerce building. In addition, a II. Background complete version of the Issues and III. Scope of the Orders products, including, but not limited to, Decision Memorandum can be accessed IV. History of the Orders modules, laminates, panels, and directly on the Internet at http:// V. Legal Framework building integrated materials. A full enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed VI. Discussion of the Issues description of the scope of the order is A. Likelihood of Continuation or Issues and Decision Memorandum and contained in the Department Recurrence of Dumping memorandum, ‘‘Decision Memorandum the electronic version of the Issues and B. Magnitude of the Margins Likely To Decision Memorandum are identical in for the Preliminary Results of the Prevail Countervailing Duty Administrative content. VII. Final Results of Sunset Reviews VIII. Recommendation Review of Crystalline Silicon Final Results of Sunset Reviews Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not [FR Doc. 2016–00179 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Assembled Into Modules, from the Pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 752(c)(1) and (3) of the Act, we People’s Republic of China; 2013,’’ determine that revocation of the dated concurrently with this notice antidumping duty orders on coated DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (Preliminary Decision Memorandum) paper from Indonesia and the PRC and hereby adopted by this notice. would be likely to lead to continuation International Trade Administration The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and or recurrence of dumping up to the [C–570–980] following weighted-average margin is on file electronically via Enforcement percentages: Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, and Compliance’s Antidumping and Whether or Not Assembled Into Countervailing Duty Centralized Weighted- Modules, From the People’s Republic Electronic Service System (ACCESS). average Country of China: Preliminary Results of ACCESS is available to registered users margin at http://access.trade.gov and in the (percent) Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013; and Partial Rescission Central Records Unit, located in Room Indonesia ...... 20.13 of Countervailing Duty Administrative B8024 of the main Department of PRC ...... 135.84 Review Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Notification to Interested Parties AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, Decision Memorandum can be accessed International Trade Administration, directly at http://www.trade.gov/frn/ This notice serves as the only Department of Commerce. index.html. The signed Preliminary reminder to parties subject to an SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce Decision Memorandum and the administrative protective order (APO) of (the Department) is conducting the electronic version of the Preliminary second administrative review of the Decision Memorandum are identical in 4 A full description of the scope of these orders is contained in the memorandum to Paul Piquado, countervailing duty (CVD) order on content. Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, Compliance, from Christian Marsh, Deputy whether or not assembled into modules Methodology Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and (solar cells), from the People’s Republic The Department is conducting this Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the of China (PRC). The period of review administrative review in accordance Expedited First Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping (POR) is January 1, 2013, through with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Duty Orders on Certain Coated Paper Suitable for December 31, 2013. We preliminarily Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For High-Quality Print Graphics Using Sheet-Fed determine that JA Solar Technology each of the subsidy programs found Presses from Indonesia and the People’s Republic of China’’ (Issues and Decision Memorandum), Yangzhou Co., Ltd. and its cross-owned countervailable, we preliminarily find dated concurrently with these results and hereby affiliates, including JingAo Solar Co., that there is a subsidy, (i.e., a financial adopted by this notice. Ltd. and Shanghai JA Solar Technology contribution from an authority that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 909

gives rise to a benefit to the recipient) sole mandatory respondent, we assigned amounts shown above for each of the and that the subsidy is specific.1 For a to Trina Solar and Suntech, the rate respective companies shown above, on full description of the methodology calculated for JA Solar. shipments of subject merchandise underlying all of the Department’s entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, Preliminary Results of Review conclusions, including our reliance, in for consumption on or after the date of part, on adverse facts available pursuant As a result of this review, we publication of the final results of this to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act, see preliminarily determine the review. For all non-reviewed firms, we the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. countervailable subsidy rates to be: will instruct CBP to continue to collect A list of topics discussed in the cash deposits at the most-recent Preliminary Decision Memorandum is Subsidy rate company-specific or all others rate Company (percent) provided at Appendix I to this notice. applicable to the company, as Partial Rescission of Review JA Solar Technology 19.62 percent. appropriate. These cash deposit Yangzhou Co., Ltd. and its requirements, when imposed, shall Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the cross-owned affiliates 4. remain in effect until further notice. Department will rescind an Changzhou Trina Solar En- 19.62 percent. These preliminary results are issued administrative review, in whole or in ergy Co., Ltd. and published in accordance with part, if the parties that requested a Wuxi Suntech Power Co., Ltd 19.62 percent. sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the review withdraw the request within 90 Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4). days of the date of publication of the Disclosure and Public Comment notice of initiation. For those companies Dated: December 31, 2015. named in the Initiation Notice 2 for The Department intends to disclose to Paul Piquado, which all review requests were timely interested parties the calculations Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and withdrawn, we are rescinding this performed in reaching these preliminary Compliance. administrative review in accordance results within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance Appendix I—List of Topics Discussed in with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1). These the Preliminary Decision Memorandum companies are listed at Appendix II to with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested this notice. For these companies, parties may submit case briefs, rebuttal I. Summary briefs, and hearing requests.5 For a II. Background countervailing duties shall be assessed III. Subsidies Valuation at rates equal to the rates of cash schedule of the deadlines for filing case briefs, rebuttal briefs, and hearing IV. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and deposits for estimated countervailing Adverse Inferences duties required at the time of entry, or requests, see the Preliminary Decision V. Analysis of Programs withdrawn from warehouse, for Memorandum. VI. Verification consumption, during the period January Unless the deadline is extended VII. Disclosure and Public Comment 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013, in pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the VIII. Conclusion accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(2). Act, we intend to issue the final results of this administrative review, including Appendix II—Rescinded Companies Companies Not Selected for Individual the results of our analysis of issues 1. Yingli Energy (China) Company Limited Review raised in any written briefs, not later 2. Yingli Green Energy Holding Company There are two companies for which a than 120 days after the date of Limited publication of this notice. 3. Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy review was requested and not Resources Co., Ltd. rescinded, and which were not selected Assessment Rates 4. Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic Technology as mandatory respondents: Changzhou Co. Ltd. Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. (Trina Upon issuance of the final results, the 5. Beijing Tianneng Yingli New Energy Solar) and Wuxi Suntech Power Co., Department shall determine, and U.S. Resources Co. Ltd. Ltd. (Suntech).3 Because JA Solar is the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 6. Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co., shall assess, countervailing duties on all Ltd. 1 See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act appropriate entries covered by this 7. Hengshui Yingli New Energy Resources regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) review. We intend to issue instructions Co., Ltd. of the Act regarding benefit; and section 771(5A) of to CBP 15 days after publication of the 8. Lixian Yingli New Energy Resources Co., the Act regarding specificity. final results of this review. Ltd. 2 See Initiation of Antidumping and 9. Tianjin Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 80 FR Cash Deposit Instructions Ltd. 6041 (February 4, 2015) (Initiation Notice). 10. Yingli Green Energy International 3 We note that untimely requests for withdrawal Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Trading Company Limited of review were also submitted on behalf of Act, the Department also intends to 11. Yingli Green Energy Americas, Inc. Shanghai JA Solar Technology Co., Ltd., and JingAo instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of 12. Era Solar Co., Ltd. Solar Co., Ltd. However, we have preliminarily 13. Canadian Solar, Inc. determined that these companies are cross-owned estimated countervailing duties, in the with the mandatory respondent, JA Solar 14. Canadian Solar International Limited Technology Yangzhou Co., Ltd., under 19 CFR Guiguang); Yangguang Guifeng Electronic 15. Canadian Solar Manufacturing 351.525(b)(6)(vi), and are, thereby, subject to the Technology Co., Ltd.; Ninjing Jingxing Electronic (Changshu) Inc. review. See Preliminary Decision Memorandum. Materials Co., Ltd.; Ningjin Saimei Ganglong 16. Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang) 4 Cross-owned affiliates are: JingAo Solar Co., Electronic Materials Co., Ltd.; Jingwei Electronic Inc. Ltd.; JA Solar Technology Yangzhou Co., Ltd.; Jing Material Co., Ltd.; Ningjin Changlong Electronic 17. Canadian Solar (USA) Inc. Hai Yang Semiconductor Material (Donghai) Co., Materials Manufacturing Co.; Ningjin Jingfeng 18. CSG PVTech Co., Ltd. Ltd.; Donghai JA Solar Technology Co., Ltd.; JA Electronic Materials Co., Ltd.; Ningjin County 19. Changzhou NESL Solartech Co., Ltd. (Hefei) Renewable Energy Co., Ltd. (JA Hefei); Hefei Jingyuan New Energy Investment Co., Ltd. (Ninjing 20. DelSolar Co., Ltd. County Jingyuan); Xingtai Jinglong Electronic JA Solar Technology Co., Ltd.; Solar Silicon Valley 21. Dongfang Electric (Yixing) MAGI Solar Electronic Science and Technology Co., Ltd.; Hebei Materials Co., Ltd.; Hebei Yujing Electronic Science Ningjin Songgong Semiconductor Co., Ltd.; and Technology Co., Ltd.; Hebei Ningtong Power Technology Co., Ltd. Shanghai JA Solar Technology Co., Ltd.; Ningjin Electronic Materials Co., Ltd.; and Ningjing 22. ET Solar Energy Limited Songgong Electronic Materials Co., Ltd.; JingLong Sunshine New Energy Co., Ltd. See Preliminary 23. Hengdian Group DMEGC Magnetics Co., Industry and Commerce Group Co., Ltd.; Ningjin Decision Memorandum. Ltd. Guiguang Electronic Investment Co., Ltd (Ningjin 5 See 19 CFR 351.309(c)–(d), 19 CFR 351.310(c). 24. Himin Clean Energy Holdings Co., Ltd.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 910 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

25. Innovosolar Agency: National Oceanic and Affected Public: Business or other for- 26. Jiawei Solarchina Co., Ltd. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). profit organizations. 27. Jinko Solar Co., Ltd. Title: Vessel Monitoring System 28. Jinko Solar Import and Export Co, Ltd. Frequency: Annually and on occasion. 29. Jinko Solar International Limited Requirements under the Western and Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. Central Pacific Fisheries Convention. 30. Jiangsu Green Power PV Co., Ltd. This information collection request 31. Jiangsu Sunlink PV Technology Co., Ltd. OMB Control Number: 0648–0596. 32. Konca Solar Cell Co., Ltd. Form Number(s): None. may be viewed at reginfo.gov. Follow 33. Kuttler Automation Systems (Suzhou) Type of Request: Regular (extension of the instructions to view Department of Co., Ltd. a currently approved information Commerce collections currently under 34. LDK Solar Hi-Tech (Suzhou) Co., Ltd. collection). review by OMB. 35. LDK Solar Hi-Tech (Nanchang) Co., Ltd. Written comments and 36. Lightway Green New Energy Co., Ltd. Number of Respondents: 23. 37. Leye Photovoltaic Science Tech. Average Hours per Response: VMS recommendations for the proposed 38. Magi Solar Technology unit purchase and installation, 1 hr; information collection should be sent 39. Motech (Suzhou) Renewable Energy Co., activation reports, 5 min; on/off reports, within 30 days of publication of this Ltd. 5 min; VMS unit maintenance, 1 hr. notice to OIRA_Submission@ 40. Ningbo ETDZ Holdings, Ltd. Burden Hours: 57. omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395–5806. 41. Ningbo Ulica Solar Science & Technology Needs and Uses: This request is for an Co., Ltd. Dated: January 5, 2016. 42. Perlight Solar Co., Ltd. extension of a currently approved Sarah Brabson, 43. ReneSola J iangsu Ltd. information collection. National Marine NOAA PRA Clearance Officer. 44. Renesola Zhejiang Ltd. Fisheries Service (NMFS) has issued [FR Doc. 2016–00146 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] 45. Sumec Hardware & Tools Co., Ltd. regulations under authority of the BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 46. Solarbest Energy-Tech (Zhejiang) Co., Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Ltd. Convention Implementation Act 47. Shenglong PV-Tech (WCPFCIA; 16 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.) to 48. ShunFeng PV DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 49. Sopray Energy Co., Ltd. carry out the obligations of the United 50. Luoyang Suntech Power Co., Ltd. States under the Convention on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 51. Suntech Power Co., Ltd. Conservation and Management of Administration 52. Shenzhen Suntech Power Co., Ltd. Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the 53. Suzhou Shenglong PV-Tech Co., Ltd. Western and Central Pacific Ocean Proposed Information Collection; 54. Tianwei New Energy (Chengdu) PV (Convention), including implementing Comment Request; Socioeconomics of Module Co., Ltd. the decisions of the Commission for the Commercial Fishers and For Hire 55. Upsolar Group, Co. Ltd. Conservation and Management of Diving and Fishing Operations in the 56. Wanxiang Import & Export Co., Ltd. Flower Garden Banks National Marine 57. Yangzhou Rietech Renewal Energy Co., Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Ltd. Western and Central Pacific Ocean Sanctuary 58. Yangzhou Suntech Power Co., Ltd. (Commission). The regulations include a 59. Wuxi Sunshine Power Co., Ltd. requirement for the owners and AGENCY: National Oceanic and 60. Zhiheng Solar Inc. operators of U.S. vessels that fish for Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 61. Zhejiang ZG-Cells Co., Ltd. highly migratory species on the high Commerce. 62. Zhejiang Xinshun Guangfu Science and seas in the Convention Area to carry and Technology Co., Ltd. ACTION: Notice. 63. Zhejiang Jiutai New Energy Co., Ltd. operate near real-time satellite-based 64. Zhejiang Shuqimeng Photovoltaic position-fixing transmitters (‘‘VMS SUMMARY: The Department of Technology Co., Ltd. units’’) at all times except when the Commerce, as part of its continuing 65. Zhenjiang Rietech New Energy Science & vessel is in port. As part of this effort to reduce paperwork and Technology Co., Ltd. requirement, vessel owners and respondent burden, invites the general 66. Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science & operators must transmit: (1) ‘‘on/off public and other Federal agencies to Technology Co., Ltd. reports’’ to NMFS whenever the VMS 67. tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. take this opportunity to comment on 68. Shanghai BYD Company Limited unit is turned off while the vessel is in proposed and/or continuing information 69. BYD (Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd. port, (2) ‘‘activation reports’’ to NMFS collections, as required by the 70. Ningbo Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance prior to the first use of a VMS unit, and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Co., Ltd. (3) automatic ‘‘position reports’’ from DATES: Written comments must be the VMS unit to NOAA and the [FR Doc. 2016–00182 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] submitted on or before March 8, 2016. BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Commission as part of a vessel monitoring system (VMS) operated by ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments the Commission (50 CFR 300.45). Under to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE this information collection, it is Paperwork Clearance Officer, expected that vessel owners and Department of Commerce, Room 6616, National Oceanic and Atmospheric operators would also need to purchase, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Administration install, and occasionally maintain the Washington, DC 20230 (or via the VMS units. Internet at [email protected]). Submission for OMB Review; The information collected from the Comment Request FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: vessel position reports is used by NOAA Requests for additional information or The Department of Commerce will and the Commission to help ensure copies of the information collection submit to the Office of Management and compliance with domestic laws and the instrument and instructions should be Budget (OMB) for clearance the Commission’s conservation and directed to Dr. Vernon R. Leeworthy following proposal for collection of management measures, and are (240) 533–0647 or information under the provisions of the necessary in order to the United Stated [email protected]. Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. to satisfy its obligations under the Chapter 35). Convention. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 911

I. Abstract perceptions of sanctuary management DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE strategies and regulations. This request is for reinstatement with In 2011–2012, the for-hire dive and National Oceanic and Atmospheric change of a currently approved Administration information collection. fishing industry interviews were completed. The commercial fisheries RIN 0648–XE391 The National Marine Sanctuaries Act interviews were completed in 2013. (16 U.S.C. 1431, et seq.) authorizes the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management The FGBNMS management and SAC use of research and monitoring within Council; Public Meeting National Marine Sanctuaries (NMS). In now want to evaluate moving the scope 1996, the Flower Gardens Bank National of boundary expansion eastward; this AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Marine Sanctuary (FGBNMS) was added will require us to gather the same Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and to the system of NMS via 15 CFR part information for the three user groups in Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 922, subpart L. In 2001, Stetson Bank areas east of the original data collection. Commerce. was added in a revision of 15 CFR part II. Method of Collection ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. 922. SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery The National Marine Sanctuaries Act Interviews will be conducted face-to- face and recorded on paper forms. Management Council (Council) will (NMSA) specifies that each NMS should hold a four-day meeting to consider revise their management plans on a five- III. Data actions affecting the Gulf of Mexico year cycle. The FGBNMS has begun the fisheries in the exclusive economic zone management plan review process. The OMB Control Number: 0648–0597. (EEZ). NMSA also allows for the creation of Form Number: None. DATES: Sanctuary Advisory Councils (SACs). The meeting will be held on SACs are comprised of representatives Type of Review: Regular submission Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and of all NMS stakeholders. Management (reinstatement with change of a Thursday, January 25–28, 2016, starting Plan Review (MPR) is a public process currently approved collection). at 8:30 a.m. daily. and the SACs, along with a series of Affected Public: Business or other for- ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at public meetings, are used to help scope profit organizations. the Perdido Beach Resort, 27200 Perdido Beach Boulevard, Orange out issues in revising the management Estimated Number of Respondents: Beach, AL 36561; telephone: (251) 981– plans and regulations. SAC Working 27. Groups are often used to evaluate 9811. Estimated Time per Response: Three Council address: Gulf of Mexico management or regulatory alternatives. hours per interview. In the current MPR for the FGBNMS, Fishery Management Council, 2203 N. two major issues have emerged: Estimated Total Annual Burden Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa, FL Boundary expansion and research-only Hours: 81. 33607; telephone: (813) 348–1630. areas. In addition, several new or Estimated Total Annual Cost to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: modified regulations are being Public: $0 in recordkeeping/reporting Douglas Gregory, Executive Director, considered to meet specific needs for costs. Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management diver safety and resource protection (no Council; telephone: (813) 348–1630. IV. Request for Comments anchoring/mooring buoy use SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: requirement and a more stringent Comments are invited on: (a) Whether Agenda pollution discharge regulation). the proposed collection of information To address each one these issues, a is necessary for the proper performance Monday, January 25, 2016; 8:30 a.m.–5 socioeconomic panel composed of of the functions of the agency, including p.m. NOAA staff and social scientists from whether the information shall have The Gulf Council will begin with other agencies, or from universities, practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the updates and presentations from developed information and tools to agency’s estimate of the burden management committees. The Joint assess the socioeconomic impacts of (including hours and cost) of the Administrative Policy & Budget management strategies and regulatory proposed collection of information; (c) Management Committee will review the alternatives. The information and tools ways to enhance the quality, utility, and Ad Hoc Advisory Panels and developed in this process will also clarity of the information to be appointment terms. Under other provide the necessary information for collected; and (d) ways to minimize the business, the committee will hear an meeting agency requirements for burden of the collection of information update on the Advisory Panel socioeconomic impact analyses under on respondents, including through the background checks by the Gulf States. the National Environmental Policy Act use of automated collection techniques The Data Collection Committee will (NEPA), Executive Order 12086 or other forms of information receive a presentation on transition (Regulatory Impact Review) and an technology. considerations for Charter Vessel Initial and Final Regulatory Flexibility Comments submitted in response to Electronic Reporting, review Final Analyses (impacts on small businesses). this notice will be summarized and/or Action—Electronic Charter Vessel Our initial plan, as the first step in the included in the request for OMB Reporting Amendment and public assessment process, was to interview approval of this information collection; comments. The Shrimp Management three key sanctuary user groups— they also will become a matter of public Committee will discuss final action on commercial fishers, for-hire recreational record. Shrimp Amendment 17A—Addressing dive operations and for-hire recreational the Expiration of the Shrimp Permit fishing operations (charter and party/ Dated: January 4, 2016. Moratorium. They will receive a head boat operations)—with questions Sarah Brabson, summary from the public hearings and focusing on: (1) General information, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer. written comments; review draft codified economic information and trip costs and [FR Doc. 2016–00145 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] text; and have a discussion on NOAA’s (2) knowledge, attitudes and BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P Turtle Excluder Device (TED)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 912 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Enforcement Boarding Form. After testimony (1:30 p.m.–5:30 p.m.) on Kathy Pereira (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 lunch, the Reef Fish Management Final Action Reef Fish Amendment days prior to the meeting date. Committee will review the Scientific 39—Regional Management of Dated: January 5, 2016. and Statistical Committee (SSC) Recreational Red Snapper, Final Action Jeffrey N. Lonergan, Summary Report, and discuss Draft Reef Generic Electronic Charter Vessel Fish Amendment 43—To Add West Reporting Amendment, and for Final Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. Florida Hogfish Stock to Fishery Action Shrimp Amendment 17A— Management Unit (FMU) and establish Addressing the Expiration of the Shrimp [FR Doc. 2016–00140 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Annual Catch Limits (ACL). They will Permit Moratorium; and hold an open BILLING CODE 3510–22–P also review a draft framework action to public comment period regarding any modify gear restrictions for yellowtail other fishery issues or concern. People DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE snapper; review the scoping document wishing to speak before the Council for Amendment 33—Reef Fish Limited should complete a public comment card National Oceanic and Atmospheric Access Privilege Program, and discuss prior to the comment period. Administration Amendment 36—Red Snapper Thursday, January 28, 2016; 8:30 a.m.– Individual Fishing Quotas (IFQ) RIN 0648–XE386 4 p.m. Modifications. The Council will receive committee New England Fishery Management Tuesday, January 26, 2016; 8:30 a.m.–5 reports from the Administrative Policy/ Council; Public Meeting p.m. Budget, Mackerel, Data Collection, AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries The Reef Fish Management Shrimp, and Reef Fish Management Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Committee will discuss taking final Committees; and, vote on Exempted Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), action on Reef Fish Amendment 39— Fishing Permits (EFP) applications, if Commerce. Regional Management of Recreational any. Lastly, the Council will discuss Red Snapper; and, review draft Other Business items; and receive ACTION: Notice of public meeting. Amendment 41—Red Snapper summary reports from supporting SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management for Federally Permitted agencies: South Atlantic Council, Gulf Management Council (Council, NEFMC) Charter Vessels and draft Amendment States Marine Fisheries Commission, will hold a three-day meeting to 42—Federal Reef Fish Headboat U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife consider actions affecting New England Management. After lunch, the Service, and Department of State. fisheries in the exclusive economic zone committee will discuss draft Options— (EEZ). Red Snapper Recreational annual catch Meeting Adjourns target (ACT) Adjustment and National The timing and order in which agenda DATES: The meeting will be held on Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) season items are addressed may change as Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, projection and probability methodology. required to effectively address the issue. January 26, 27, and 28, 2016, starting at The Reef Fish Management Committee The latest version will be posted on the 9 a.m. on January 26, and at 8:30 a.m. will discuss gray triggerfish acceptable Council’s file server, which can be on both January 27 and 28. biological catch (ABC) accessed by going to the Council’s Web ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at recommendations and provide guidance site at http://www.gulfcouncil.org and the Sheraton Portsmouth Harborside to staff on the rebuilding plan clicking on FTP Server under Quick Hotel, 250 Market Street, Portsmouth, parameters. Finally, the Reef Fish Links. For meeting materials, select the NH 03801; telephone: (603) 431–2300, Management Committee will discuss the ‘‘Briefing Books/Briefing Book 2016–01’’ or online at Ad Hoc Private Recreational Advisory folder on Gulf Council file server. The www.sheratonportsmouth.com/. Panel, and review any other business. username and password are both Council address: New England ‘‘gulfguest’’. The meetings will be Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Wednesday, January 27, 2016; 8:30 webcast over the internet. A link to the Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950; a.m.–5:30 p.m. webcast will be available on the telephone: (978) 465–0492. The Mackerel Management Council’s Web site, http:// FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Committee will review the Joint Public www.gulfcouncil.org. Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, Hearing Draft for Coastal Migratory Although other non-emergency issues New England Fishery Management Pelagics (CMP) Amendment 26— not contained in this agenda may come Council; telephone: (978) 465–0492, ext. Changes in Allocations, Stock before this Council for discussion, those 113. Boundaries and Sale Provisions for Gulf issues may not be the subjects of formal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of Mexico and Atlantic Migratory action during this meeting. Council Groups of King Mackerel; and review action will be restricted to those issues Agenda the CMP Advisory Panel specifically listed in this notice and any Tuesday, January 26, 2016 recommendations. issues arising after publication of this The Full Council will convene mid- notice that require emergency action After introductions and any morning with a Call to Order, under section 305(c) of the Magnuson- announcements, the Council meeting Announcements and Introductions; Stevens Act, provided that the public will open with brief reports from the Adoption of Agenda and Approval of has been notified of the Council’s intent NEFMC Chairman and Executive Minutes; and review Exempt Fishing to take final action to address the Director, the NOAA Regional Permit (EFPs) Applications, if any. The emergency. Administrator for the Greater Atlantic Council will then receive presentations Region, Northeast Fisheries Science on Landing Summaries, Illegal Special Accommodations Center and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Unreported and Unregulated Fishing This meeting is physically accessible Management Council liaisons, NOAA and Seafood Traceability, and NOAA’s to people with disabilities. Requests for General Counsel and Office of Law Catch Share Review Guidelines. After sign language interpretation or other Enforcement representatives, and staff lunch, the Council will receive public auxiliary aids should be directed to from the Atlantic States Marine

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 913

Fisheries Commission and the U.S Coast appropriate. During the Groundfish Dated: January 5, 2016. Guard. Following these reports, the Committee’s report, the Council expects Jeffrey N. Lonergan, Council will receive an update on plans to take final action on the 2016–18 Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable for a February sea scallop workshop fishery specifications for witch flounder Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. being held to explore concerns about and receive an update on the [FR Doc. 2016–00141 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] inshore scallop fishing in the Northeast. development of measures to address its BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Next, the public will have an the 2016 groundfish priorities. These opportunity to make brief comments on include potential changes to the at-sea items that are relevant to Council monitoring program and the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE business but otherwise not listed on the management process for recreational published agenda. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Following a lunch break, the fishing. The day will conclude with a Administration review of NOAA’s Draft Catch Share Council’s Risk Policy Working Group RIN 0648–XE387 will provide an update on finalizing Guidance document and approval of what is being termed a ‘‘roadmap’’ that NEFMC comments on the draft. South Atlantic Fishery Management contains guidance on the Thursday, January 28, 2015 Council; Public Meetings implementation of the NEFMC’s recently approved risk policy. The The final meeting day will begin with AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Atlantic Herring Committee will then an overview of the Northeast Regional Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), provide a briefing on the following: (a) Planning Body’s (RPB) Regional Ocean Commerce. The development of Amendment 8 to Plan, followed by Council discussion of ACTION: Notice of Public Hearings/ the Atlantic Herring Fishery the plan and other work products Scoping and Advisory Panel Meeting. Management Plan (FMP), an action that developed by the RPB. The Small Mesh will the focus on long-term harvest Multispecies Committee will present an SUMMARY: The South Atlantic Fishery strategies for Atlantic herring, including overview of the scoping comments Management Council (SAFMC) will an acceptable biological catch control received for Amendment 22 to the hold a series of public hearings/scoping rule that explicitly accounts for Northeast Multispecies FMP and ask for meetings pertaining to Amendments 41 herring’s role in the ecosystem, and the and 37 to the Snapper Grouper Fishery issue of localized depletion; (b) revising approval of the range of issues to be Management Plan (FMP) for the South the Georges Bank haddock catch cap addressed in the action. The major topic Atlantic, and Atlantic Generic accountability measure through a under consideration is the development Charterboat/Headboat Reporting framework adjustment to the Herring of a limited access program for the small Amendment, and Amendment 26 to the FMP; and (c) the use of portside data in mesh fishery, which is comprised of Coastal Migratory Pelagic (mackerel) river herring/shad catch cap monitoring. whiting (silver and offshore hake) and red hake. The Council also will consider Fishery Management Plan for the Gulf of Wednesday, January 27, 2016 Northeast Regional Coordinating Mexico and South Atlantic. Scoping comments will be accepted for Snapper The second day of the meeting will Council-recommended changes to the Grouper Amendment 41 addressing begin with an overview to be provided Stock Assessment Workshop/Stock by NOAA Fisheries on its Fishery management measures for mutton Assessment Review Committee process. snapper. Public Hearings will be held Dependent Data Project, to be followed The Council meeting will adjourn after by a Council and public comments on for Snapper Grouper Amendment 37 its members address any other pertaining to management measures for the topic. The Observer Policy outstanding Council business. Committee will report on its hogfish, the Atlantic Charterboat/ development of an Industry-Funded Although other non-emergency issues Headboat Reporting Amendment, and Monitoring Amendment (IFM). At this not contained in this agenda may come Mackerel Amendment 26 addressing meeting, the committee will review a before this Council for discussion, those management measures for king mackerel draft environmental assessment and issues may not be the subject of formal in the Gulf of Mexico and South select preferred alternatives for the action during this meeting. Council Atlantic. Note that the Florida Fish and omnibus elements of the action for action will be restricted to those issues Wildlife Conservation Commission purposes of public review. They specifically listed in this notice and any (FWC) will solicit public input on include: Standard cost responsibilities, issues arising after publication of this mutton snapper management measures framework provisions for IFM programs, notice that require emergency action for Florida State waters during selected service provider requirements, a under section 305(c) of the Magnuson- public hearing/scoping meetings held in prioritization process to allocate federal Stevens Act, provided that the public Florida (see DATES and SUPPLEMENTARY funding, and a monitoring set-aside has been notified of the Council’s intent INFORMATION). The Council will also hold a meeting of its Mackerel Advisory option. The Council is expected to to take final action to address the Panel in conjunction with the public select preferred alternatives for the emergency. herring and mackerel alternatives in this hearing/scoping meeting scheduled in draft amendment at its April 2016 Special Accommodations Cocoa Beach, FL. meeting. DATES: The series of public hearings/ After a lunch break, the Scientific and This meeting is physically accessible scoping meetings will be held from Statistical Committee (SSC) will present to people with disabilities. Requests for January 25–February 8, 2016. The its recommendations, if any, for a sign language interpretation or other public hearing/scoping meetings will be revised overfishing limit and an auxiliary aids should be directed to held from 4 p.m. until 7 p.m. with the acceptable biological catch for witch Thomas A. Nies (see ADDRESSES) at least exception of the public hearing/scoping flounder for fishing years 2016–18. The 5 days prior to the meeting date. meeting in Morehead City that will Council will receive an update on Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. begin at 5 p.m. and a public hearing via additional topics discussed by the SSC webinar that will begin at 6 p.m. The at their January 20 meeting, as meeting of the Mackerel Advisory Panel

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 914 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

will be held from 12 p.m. until 4 p.m. Limit (ACL) and Optimum Yield (OY) Mackerel Advisory Panel Meeting on February 3, 2016 in Cocoa Beach, FL. and recreational Annual Catch Target. The Council will hold a meeting of its See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. The amendment also includes options King and Spanish Mackerel Advisory Registration is required for the public to modify the recreational bag limit. Panel in conjunction with the public hearing/scoping meeting via webinar. Public hearings are being held for the hearing scheduled for February 3, 2016, Registration information will be posted following amendments: from 12 p.m. until 4 p.m. The advisory on the SAFMC Web site at 1. Atlantic Generic Charter/For-Hire panel will review Coastal Migratory www.safmc.net as it becomes available. Reporting Amendment to the South Pelagic Amendment 26 and the Atlantic ADDRESSES: See SUPPLEMENTARY Atlantic Snapper Grouper, Atlantic Generic For-Hire/Charterboat Reporting INFORMATION for specific meeting Dolphin Wahoo and Coastal Migratory Amendment and provide locations. Pelagic fisheries. The amendment recommendations. Council address: South Atlantic includes actions to require mandatory Written comments on the Fishery Management Council, 4055 electronic reporting for charter (six- amendments may be directed to Gregg Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N. pack) vessels and modifies existing Waugh, Executive Director, SAFMC (see Charleston, SC 29405. reporting requirements for headboats. ADDRESSES) or via email to: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim The reporting requirements would affect [email protected]. Note that email Iverson, Public Information Officer, vessels involved in the South Atlantic comments should specify the name of SAFMC; phone: (843) 571–4366 or toll Snapper Grouper fishery, Dolphin the specific amendment(s) in the free: (866) SAFMC–10; fax: (843) 769– Wahoo fishery, and Coastal Migratory Subject Line of the email according to 4520; email: [email protected]. Pelagic fishery along the Atlantic coast. the comment being submitted. Public SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 2. Amendment 37 to the Snapper hearing and scoping comments for the public hearing/scoping meetings will be Grouper FMP addressing hogfish. The amendments will be accepted until 5 held on the following dates and amendment includes actions to modify p.m. on February 10, 2016. Copies of the locations: the management boundary between the public hearing documents for each 1. January 25, 2016—Richmond Hill City South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico, amendment will be posted on the Center, 520 Cedar Street, Richmond Hill, GA establish two separate stocks in the Council’s Web site at www.safmc.net 31324; phone: (912) 445–0043. South Atlantic with a ‘‘Georgia/North when they become available. 2. January 26, 2016—Hilton Garden Inn Carolina’’ stock and a ‘‘Florida Keys/ Charleston Airport, 5265 International East Florida’’ stock for management Special Accommodations Boulevard, North Charleston, SC 29418; purposes, specify the MSY, MSST, These meetings are physically phone: (843) 308–9330. ACLs and ACTs for both stocks and accessible to people with disabilities. 3. January 27, 2016—Murrells Inlet establish a rebuilding plan for the Requests for auxiliary aids should be Community Center, 4450 Murrells Inlet Road, Florida Keys/East Florida stock. The directed to the council office (see Murrells Inlet, SC 29576; phone: (843) 651– ADDRESSES) 3 days prior to the meeting. 7373. rebuilding plan includes measures to 4. January 28, 2016—NC Division of increase the minimum size limit, Note: The times and sequence specified in Marine Fisheries, Central District Office, establish a commercial trip limit, reduce this agenda are subject to change. 5285 Highway 70 West, Morehead City, NC the recreational bag limit, and establish 28557; phone: (252) 726–7021. a recreational fishing season. The Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 5. February 1, 2016—Hilton Garden Inn, amendment would also establish Dated: January 5, 2016. 180 SW 18th Avenue, Dania Beach, FL Accountability Measures for both Jeffrey N. Lonergan, 33004; phone: (954) 924–9204. This hearing stocks. will be held in conjunction with FWC. Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable 6. February 2, 2016—Hawks Cay Resort, 61 3. Coastal Migratory Pelagic Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. Hawks Cay Blvd., Duck Key, FL 33050; Amendment 26 addresses management [FR Doc. 2016–00142 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] phone: (305) 743–7000. This hearing will be measures for Atlantic and Gulf of BILLING CODE 3510–22–P held in conjunction with FWC. Mexico king mackerel. Actions in the 7. February 3, 2016—Marriott Beachside amendment include modifying the Hotel, 3841 N. Roosevelt Blvd., Key West, FL management/stock boundary for Gulf DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 33040; phone: (305) 296–8100. This hearing and Atlantic migratory groups of king will be held in conjunction with FWC. mackerel, updating the biological National Oceanic and Atmospheric 8. February 3, 2016—International Palms reference points and revising the ABC, Administration Resort & Conference Center, 1300 North A1A, Cocoa Beach, FL 32931; phone: (321) 783– OY, ACLs and recreational ACT for Atlantic Group king mackerel, creating Proposed Information Collection; 2271. A meeting of the Council’s King and Comment Request; Fisheries Spanish Mackerel Advisory Panel will be an incidental catch allowance of held in conjunction with this public hearing. Atlantic group king mackerel caught in Certificate of Origin 9. February 8, 2016—Public hearings via the shark gillnet fishery, establishing AGENCY: National Oceanic and webinar beginning at 6 p.m. for the Atlantic split season commercial quotas for Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Charter/For-Hire Reporting Amendment and harvest of Atlantic group king mackerel Commerce. Coastal Migratory Pelagic Amendment 26. in the Southern Zone, and establishing ACTION: Notice. The Council is soliciting public boundaries and trip limits for a [new] scoping comments on proposed Florida East Coast management zone for SUMMARY: The Department of measures in Amendment 41 to the Atlantic group king mackerel. The Commerce, as part of its continuing Snapper Grouper FMP addressing amendment includes the following effort to reduce paperwork and mutton snapper. The measures are actions specific to Gulf group king respondent burden, invites the general based on a recent stock assessment for mackerel: Update biological reference public and other Federal agencies to mutton snapper and include specifying points and revise the ACL, revise the take this opportunity to comment on the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY), commercial zone quotas, revise the proposed and/or continuing information Maximum Stock Size Threshold recreational and commercial allocation, collections, as required by the (MSST), revising the Annual Catch and modify recreational bag limit. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 915

DATES: Written comments must be proposed collection of information; (c) Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification submitted on or before March 8, 2016. ways to enhance the quality, utility, and I certify that the following action will not ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments clarity of the information to be have a significant impact on a substantial to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental collected; and (d) ways to minimize the number of small entities. The major factors Paperwork Clearance Officer, burden of the collection of information considered for this certification were: Department of Commerce, Room 6616, on respondents, including through the 1. The action will not result in any 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., use of automated collection techniques additional reporting, recordkeeping or other Washington, DC 20230 (or via the or other forms of information compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organization that will Internet at [email protected]). technology. Comments submitted in response to provide the service to the Government. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2. The action will result in authorizing Requests for additional information or this notice will be summarized and/or small entities to provide the service to the copies of the information collection included in the request for OMB Government. instrument and instructions should be approval of this information collection; 3. There are no known regulatory directed to Daniel Studt, (562) 980– they also will become a matter of public alternatives which would accomplish the 4073, or [email protected]. record. objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501–8506) in connection with the Dated: January 4, 2016. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: service proposed for addition to the Sarah Brabson, I. Abstract Procurement List. NOAA PRA Clearance Officer. End of Certification This request is for an extension of a [FR Doc. 2016–00144 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] current information collection. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Accordingly, the following service is The information required by the added to the Procurement List: International Dolphin Conservation Service: Program Act, amendment to the Marine Service Type: Custodial Service Mammal Protection Act, is needed to: COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM Service is Mandatory For: U.S. Air (1) Document the dolphin-safe status of PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR Force, Area C, Wright Patterson Air tuna import shipments; (2) verify that SEVERELY DISABLED Force Base, OH import shipments of fish were not Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: harvested by large scale, high seas Procurement List; Addition Goodwill Easter Seals Miami Valley, driftnets; and (3) verify that tuna was Dayton, OH not harvested by an embargoed nation AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From Contracting Activity: FA8601 AFLCMC or one that is otherwise prohibited from People Who Are Blind or Severely PZIO, Wright Patterson AFB, OH exporting tuna to the United States. Disabled. Barry S. Lineback, Forms are submitted by importers and ACTION: Addition to the Procurement processors. List. Director, Business Operations. [FR Doc. 2016–00197 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] II. Method of Collection SUMMARY: This action adds a service to BILLING CODE 6353–01–P Respondents have a choice of either the Procurement List that will be electronic or paper forms. Methods of provided by nonprofit agency submittal include a secure file transfer employing persons who are blind or COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM protocol Web site for electronic forms, have other severe disabilities. PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR or postal mail. DATES: Effective: February 7, 2016. SEVERELY DISABLED III. Data ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase Procurement List; Additions and From People Who Are Blind or Severely Deletions OMB Control Number: 0648–0335. Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite Form Number(s): NOAA Form 370. 715, Arlington, Virginia, 22202–4149. AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From Type of Review: Regular submission FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: People Who Are Blind or Severely (extension of a current information Disabled. collection). Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703) 603–7740, Fax: (703) 603–0655, or email ACTION: Additions to and Deletions from Affected Public: Business or other for- the Procurement List. profit organizations. [email protected]. Estimated Number of Respondents: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: This action adds services to 430. Addition the Procurement List that will be Estimated Time per Response: 25 provided by nonprofit agencies minutes. On 11/20/2015 (80 FR 72710–72711), employing persons who are blind or Estimated Total Annual Burden the Committee for Purchase From have other severe disabilities, and Hours: 5,417. People Who Are Blind or Severely deletes products from the Procurement Estimated Total Annual Cost to Disabled published notice of proposed List previously furnished by such Public: $4,745. additions to the Procurement List. agencies. After consideration of the material IV. Request for Comments presented to it concerning capability of DATES: Effective Date: 2/7/2016. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether qualified nonprofit agencies to furnish ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase the proposed collection of information the service and impact of the addition From People Who Are Blind or Severely is necessary for the proper performance on the current or most recent Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite of the functions of the agency, including contractors, the Committee has 715, Arlington, Virginia, 22202–4149. whether the information shall have determined that the service listed below FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the is suitable for procurement by the Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703) agency’s estimate of the burden Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 603–7740, Fax: (703) 603–0655, or email (including hours and cost) of the 8501–8506 and 41 CFR 51–2.4. [email protected].

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 916 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: National Guard, 330 Camp Street, COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM Providence, RI Additions PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR Mandatory Source(s) Of Supply: Industries SEVERELY DISABLED On 1/16/2015 (80 FR 2400–2401) and for the Blind, Inc., West Allis, WI 10/2/2015 (80 FR 59740–59741, the Contracting Activity: Dept of the Army, Procurement List; Proposed Addition Committee for Purchase From People W7NY USPFO Activity RI ARNG East, and Deletions Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled Greenwich, RI AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From published notices of proposed additions Deletions People Who Are Blind or Severely to the Procurement List. After consideration of the material On 12/4/2015 (80 FR 75857–75858), the Disabled. presented to it concerning capability of Committee for Purchase From People Who ACTION: Proposed Addition to and qualified nonprofit agencies to provide Are Blind or Severely Disabled published Deletions from the Procurement List. notice of proposed deletions from the the services and impact of the additions SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing on the current or most recent Procurement List. After consideration of the relevant matter to add a product to the Procurement List contractors, the Committee has that will be furnished by a nonprofit determined that the services listed presented, the Committee has determined that the products listed below are no longer agency employing persons who are below are suitable for procurement by blind or have other severe disabilities, the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 8501–8506 and and deletes products previously 8501–8506 and 41 CFR 51–2.4. 41 CFR 51–2.4. furnished by such agencies. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification Comments Must Be Received on or Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification Before: 2/7/2016. I certify that the following action will I certify that the following action will not ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase not have a significant impact on a have a significant impact on a substantial From People Who Are Blind or Severely substantial number of small entities. number of small entities. The major factors Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite The major factors considered for this considered for this certification were: 715, Arlington, Virginia, 22202–4149. certification were: 1. The action will not result in additional FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR TO SUBMIT 1. The action will not result in any reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance additional reporting, recordkeeping or COMMENTS CONTACT: Barry S. Lineback, requirements for small entities. Telephone: (703) 603–7740, Fax: (703) other compliance requirements for small 2. The action may result in authorizing entities other than the small 603–0655, or email small entities to furnish the products to the [email protected]. organizations that will provide the Government. services to the Government. 3. There are no known regulatory SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 2. The action will result in alternatives which would accomplish the This notice is published pursuant to authorizing small entities to provide the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act (41 41 U.S.C. 8503 (a)(2) and 41 CFR 51–2.3. services to the Government. U.S.C. 8501–8506) in connection with the Its purpose is to provide interested 3. There are no known regulatory products deleted from the Procurement List. persons an opportunity to submit alternatives which would accomplish comments on the proposed actions. End of Certification the objectives of the Javits-Wagner- Addition O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501–8506) in Accordingly, the following products are connection with the services proposed deleted from the Procurement List: If the Committee approves the for addition to the Procurement List. proposed addition, the entities of the Products Federal Government identified in this End of Certification NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 5340–01–218– notice will be required to procure the Accordingly, the following services 8346—Bracket, Angle, Aviation product listed below from the nonprofit are added to the Procurement List: Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Herkimer agency employing persons who are County Chapter, NYSARC, Herkimer, NY blind or have other severe disabilities. Services Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics The following product is proposed for Service Type: Custodial Service Agency Troop Support addition to the Procurement List for Service is Mandatory For: NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 4935–00–824– production by the nonprofit agency DoDEA, Domestic Dependent Elementary 5469—Strap Set, Webbing listed: and Secondary Schools: Andersen Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Huntsville Elementary and Middle Schools, Rehabilitation Foundation, Huntsville, Product Andersen AFB, 1600 Ponape Avenue, AL NSN(s)—Product Name(s): MR 381—Gift Yigo, GU Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics Box, Sweet Treat, Christmas District Superintendent’s Office, Naval Agency Troop Support Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Winston- Hospital Base, 101 Johnson Road, Agana NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 6545–00–139– Salem Industries for the Blind, Inc., Heights, GU 3671—Kit, Survival, 6545–01–521– Winston-Salem, NC Guam High School, Naval Hospital Base, Mandatory Purchase For: Military 401 Stitt Street, Agana Heights, GU 8530—Kit, Survival Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Opportunity commissaries and exchanges in Commander William C. McCool accordance with the Code of Federal Resources, Inc., Missoula, MT Elementary/Middle School, US Naval Regulations, Chapter 51, 51–6.4. Base Guam, 311 Amaryllis Avenue, Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics Contracting Activity: Defense Commissary Sumay, GU Agency Troop Support Agency Mandatory Source(s) Of Supply: iCAN Distribution: C-List Resources, Inc., Dededo, GU Barry S. Lineback, Contracting Activity: Dept of Defense Deletions Director, Business Operations. Education Activity (DODEA), DODDS The following products are proposed for Pacific Director’s Office APO, AP [FR Doc. 2016–00152 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] deletion from the Procurement List: Service Type: Furniture Design and BILLING CODE 6353–01–P Configuration Service Products Service is Mandatory For: Rhode Island NSN(s)—Product Name(s):

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 917

7510–01–600–8033—Dated 2015 18-month Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: The Chicago ACTION: Notice. Paper Wall Planner, 24″ × 37″ Lighthouse for People Who Are Blind or 7510–01–600–8044—Dated 2015 12-Month 2- Visually Impaired, Chicago, IL SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is Sided Laminated Wall Planner, 24″ × 37″ Contracting Activity: General Services Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: The Chicago Administration, New York, NY publishing the unclassified text of a Lighthouse for People Who Are Blind or NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 4240–00–803– section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. Visually Impaired, Chicago, IL 5839—Bag, Waterproof This is published to fulfill the Contracting Activity: General Services Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Winston- requirements of section 155 of Public Administration, FSS Household and Salem Industries for the Blind, Inc., Law 104–164 dated July 21, 1996. Industrial Furniture, Arlington, VA Winston-Salem, NC NSN(s)—Product Name(s): Contracting Activity: W40M Northern Region FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 7510–01–600–7560—Monthly Wall Contract Ofc, Fort Belvoir, VA Sarah A. Ragan or Heather N. Harwell, Calendar, Dated 2015, Jan–Dec, 8– Barry S. Lineback, DSCA/LMO, (703) 604–1546/(703) 607– 1⁄2″×11″ 7530–01–600–7569—Daily Desk Planner, Director, Business Operations. 5339. Dated 2015, Wire bound, Non-refillable, [FR Doc. 2016–00151 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] The following is a copy of a letter to Black Cover BILLING CODE 6353–01–P the Speaker of the House of 7510–01–600–7574—Wall Calendar, Dated ″ × ″ Representatives, Transmittal 16–10 with 2015, Wire Bound w/Hanger, 12 17 attached Policy Justification. 7530–01–600–7603—Monthly Desk Planner, Dated 2015, Wire Bound, Non- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Dated: January 5, 2016. refillable, Black Cover Aaron Siegel, 7530–01–600–7613—Weekly Desk Planner, Office of the Secretary Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Dated 2015, Wire Bound, Non-refillable, [Transmittal No. 16–10] Black Cover Officer, Department of Defense. 7530–01–600–7628—Weekly Planner 36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification BILLING CODE 5001–06–P Book, Dated 2015, 5″ × 8″ 7510–01–600–7631—Wall Calendar, Dated AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense 2015, Wire Bound w/hanger, 15.5″ × 22″ Security Cooperation Agency.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 918 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

BILLING CODE 5001–06–C (iii) Description and Quantity or Three (3) Infrared Signature Transmittal No. 16–10 Quantities of Articles or Services under Suppression Systems Consideration for Purchase: This request also includes the Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Major Defense Equipment (MDE): following Non-Major Defense Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the Three (3) CH–47F Chinook Helicopters Arms Export Control Act, as amended Six (6) T55–GA–714A Aircraft Turbine Equipment; AN/APX–123A Engines Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) (i) Prospective Purchaser: Government Three (3) Force XXI Battle Command, Transponders, Defense Advanced of Australia Brigade & Below (FBCB2)/Blue Force Global Positioning System (GPS) (ii) Total Estimated Value: Tracker (BFT) Receiver (DAGR), AN/ARC–201D Major Defense Equipment* .. $105 million Three (3) Common Missile Warning SINCGARS Airborne Radio Systems, Other ...... $ 75 million Systems (CMWS) AN/ARC–220 High Frequency Airborne Three (3) Honeywell H–764 Embedded Communication Systems, AN/ARC– Total ...... $180 million Global Positioning/Inertial Navigation 231(V)(C) Airborne VHF/UHF/LOS Systems SATCOM Communications Systems,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 EN08JA16.004 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 919

KY–100 Secure Communication Publications, Contractor and U.S. Friend or Foe (IFF) will be the APX– Systems, KIV–77 Common IFF Government Technical Services. 123A, which provides the additional Cryptographic Computers, AN/AVS–6 The total estimated value of MDE is functionality of Mode 5 capability. Aviator’s Night Vision Systems, AN/ $105 million. The total overall Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE) ARN–147 Very High Frequency (VHF) estimated value is $180 million. will not be provided on this LOA. Omni Ranging/Instrument Landing This proposed sale will enhance the Support and fielding for the CH–47Fs System Receiver, AN/PYQ–10(C) foreign policy and national security and installed CAAS would require one Simple Key Loaders, AN/ARN–153 objectives of the United States by copy of technical documentation, along Tactical Airborne Navigation (TACAN) helping to improve the security of a with a Contractor Field Representative. System, Spare Parts, Tools, Ground strategic partner which has been, and 2. The AN/APX–123A, Identification Support Equipment, Technical continues to be an important force for Friend or Foe (IFF) Transponder is a Publications, Contractor and U.S. political stability and economic progress space diversity transponder and is Government Technical Services. within the Pacific region and globally. installed on several military platforms. (iv) Military Department: Army, VAF The proposed sale of the CH–47F When installed in conjunction with (v) Prior Related Cases, if any: UDK— aircraft will improve Australia’s heavy platform antennas and the Remote $353M—May 2010 lift capability. Australia will use the Control Unit (RCU) (or other appropriate (vi) Sales Commission, Fee, etc., Paid, enhanced capability to strengthen its control unit), the transponder provides Offered, or Agreed to be Paid: None homeland defense and deter regional identification, altitude and surveillance (vii) Sensitivity of Technology threats. The CH–47F aircraft will reporting in response to interrogations Contained in the Defense Article or replace Australia’s retiring CH–47D from airborne, ground-based and/or Defense Services Proposed to be Sold: aircraft. Australia will have no difficulty surface interrogators. The transponder See Annex attached absorbing these aircraft into its armed provides operational capabilities for (viii) Date Report Delivered to forces. Mark XII IFF capabilities of Modes 1, 2, Congress: 18 DEC 2015 The proposed sale of this equipment 3/A, C, 4, 5 capable and Mode S (levels *as defined in Section 47(6) of the and support will not alter the basic 1, 2, and 3 capable). Additionally, the Arms Export Control Act. military balance in the region. AN/APX–123A also provides automated The principal contractor will be the ID, position and latitude of the aircraft, Policy Justification Boeing Helicopter Company of and unencrypted Automatic Dependent Australia—CH–47F—Aircraft Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. There are Surveillance Broadcast (ADS–B) and is no known offset agreements at this time The Government of Australia has compatible with the Traffic Alert and associated with this proposed sale. requested a possible sale of: Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) II Implementation of this sale will not equipment. The AN/APX–123A is Major Defense Equipment (MDE): require the assignment of any additional classified SECRET when loaded with Three (3) CH–47F Chinook Helicopters U.S. or contractor representatives to software. Six (6) T55–GA–714A Aircraft Turbine Australia. 3. The AN/ARC–201D is a tactical Engines There will be no adverse impact on airborne military VHF radio system Three (3) Force XXI Battle Command, U.S. defense readiness as a result of this consisting of Receiver-Transmitter, Brigade & Below (FBCB2)/Blue Force proposed sale. Radio RT–1478D/ARC–201D(V), Battery Tracker (BFT) Transmittal No. 16–10 Box CY–8515/ARC–201(V) and; Three (3) Common Missile Warning Mounting Base MT–7101/ARC–201D(V). Systems (CMWS) Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of This radio system is capable of secure Three (3) Honeywell H–764 Embedded Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the COMSEC, anti-jam, voice and data Global Positioning/Inertial Navigation Arms Export Control Act communications in any of 2320 Systems Annex channels and two frequency-hopping Three (3) Infrared Signature (FH) modes. The radio is interconnected Suppression Systems Item No. vii and interoperated with the aircraft’s This request also includes the (vii) Sensitivity of Technology MIL–STD–1553B bus controller following Non-Major Defense 1. The CH–47F aircraft, which equipment. The AN/ARC–201D is Equipment; AN/APX–123A includes two T55–GA–714A engines, classified SECRET when loaded with Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) has been identified as Major Defense software. Transponders, Defense Advanced Equipment (MDE). The CH–47F is a 4. The AN/ARC–220 is a Global Positioning System (GPS) medium lift, newly manufactured rotary multifunctional, fully digital signal Receiver (DAGR), AN/ARC–201D winged aircraft. The CH–47F has the processing (DSP) high frequency (HF) SINCGARS Airborne Radio Systems, Common Avionics Architecture System radio intended for airborne applications. AN/ARC–220 High Frequency Airborne (CAAS) cockpit, which provides aircraft Advanced communications features Communication Systems, AN/ARC– system, flight, mission, and made possible by DSP technology 231(V)(C) Airborne VHF/UHF/LOS communication management systems. include embedded Automatic Link SATCOM Communications Systems, The Navigation System will have two Establishment (ALE), Serial Tone Data KY–100 Secure Communication Embedded GPS/INS (EGIs), two Digital Modem, and Anti-jam Electronic Systems, KIV–77 Common IFF Advanced Flight Control System Counter-Counter Measures (ECCM) Cryptographic Computers, AN/AVS–6 (DAFCS), one ARN–149 Automatic functions. The AN/ARC–220 Advanced Aviator’s Night Vision Systems, AN/ Direction Finder, one ARN–147 (VOR/ HF Aircraft Communications System is ARN–147 Very High Frequency (VHF) ILS marker Beacon System), one ARN– applicable for a variety of tactical rotary- Omni Ranging/Instrument Landing 153 TACAN, two air data computers, wing and fixed-wing airborne System Receiver, AN/PYQ–10(C) one Radar Altimeter system. The applications. In addition to offering Simple Key Loaders, AN/ARN–153 communications suite is as follows: enhanced voice communications Tactical Airborne Navigation (TACAN) Two each AN/ARC–231 Multi-mode capabilities, the AN/ARC–220 is an System, Spare Parts, Tools, Ground radios, and two each AN/ARC–201D advanced data communications system Support Equipment, Technical SINCGARS radios. The Identification capable of providing reliable digital

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 920 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

connectivity. The AN/ARC–220 is determined. Therefore the assumption is are severe. Should a fill device or classified SECRET when loaded with that they may contain sensitive cryptographic asset with the software. technology. accompanying radio system become 5. The AN/ARC–231(V)(C) is a secure 8. The Embedded GPS/INS (EGI) unit compromised, it would enable an communication system that provides CN–1689-(H–764GU) contains sensitive adversary to intercept our Line-of-Sight (LOS) communications GPS technology. The EGI+429 is a self- communications, both verbal and and Beyond Line-of-Sight (BLOS) contained, all-attitude navigation encrypted until the COMSEC keys were satellite communications (SATCOM), as system providing outputs of linear and changed. well Voice and data communications angular acceleration, linear and angular 15. A determination has been made capabilities. In addition to Satellite velocity, position, attitude (roll, pitch), that the recipient country can provide Communications, the AN/ARC– platform azimuth, magnetic and true the same degree of protection for the 231(V)(C) provides Secure/Electronic heading, altitude, body angular rates, sensitive technology being released as CounterCounter Measures (ECCM) time tags, and Universal Time the U.S. Government. This sale is communications Single Channel Coordinated (UTC) synchronized time. necessary in furtherance of the U.S. Ground and Airborne System The EGI is UNCLASSIFIED/Missile foreign policy and national security (SINCGARS) and HAVE QUICK (HQ) Technology Regime (MTCR) Controlled. objectives outlined in the Policy waveforms. The AN/ARC–231(V)(C) is 9. The AN/ARN–149, Automatic Justification. classified SECRET when loaded with Direction Finder (ADF) Receiver, is a 16. All defense articles and services software. low frequency radio that provides listed in this transmittal have been 6. The TSEC KY–100 is COMSEC automatic compass bearing on any radio authorized for release and export to the equipment that has sensitive technology signal within the frequency range of 100 Government of Australia. and is classified SECRET if software fill to 2199.5 kHz as well as navigation where a commercial AM broadcast [FR Doc. 2016–00148 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] is installed. A separate case with NSA BILLING CODE 5001–06–P would be required to procure this signal is the only available navigation equipment. The KY–100 is classified aid. The AN/ARN–149 is SECRET when loaded with software. UNCLASSIFIED. 10. The AN/ARN–153, Tactical DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 7. Blue Force Tracker—Aviation Airborne Navigation (TACAN) System, (BFT–A) within the Force XXI Battle Office of the Secretary is a full featured navigational system Command Brigade & Below program, that supports four modes of operation: BFT–AVN is a network system with [Transmittal No. 0A–16] receive mode; transmit receive mode; varied configurations utilizing air-to-air receive mode; and air-to-air 36(b)(5)(C) Arms Sales Notification integrated UHF/VHF/FM voice/data transmit-receive mode. The ARN–153 is communications and GPS positioning UNCLASSIFIED. AGENCY: Defense Security Cooperation data that allow integration into various 11. The AN/ARN–147, Very High Agency, Department of Defense. Army, joint, and coalition rotary and Frequency (VHF) Omni Ranging/ ACTION: Notice. fixed-wing aircraft types. The system Instrument Landing System Receiver provides commanders, staffs, and other that provides internal MIL–STD–1553B SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is key personnel situational awareness of capability and is MIL–E–5400 class II publishing the unclassified text of a aviation assets, including Unmanned qualified. The ARN–147 is section 36(b)(5)(C) arms sales Aerial Vehicles. With BFT–AVN, UNCLASSIFIED. notification. This is published to fulfill aircrews are able to view positions of 12. The KIV–77, is a Common Crypto the requirements of section 155 of friendly forces as well as enemy Applique for Identification, Friend or Public Law 104–164 dated July 21, locations. The system also enables Foe (IFF) that provides Mode 4/5 1996. rapid, dynamic tasking and re-tasking of capability. The KIV–77 is SECRET when those assets to accomplish aviation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: loaded with software. Sarah A. Ragan or Heather N. Harwell, missions in complex environments. 13. The AN/PYQ–10 (C) Simple Key DSCA/LMO, (703) 604–1546/(703) 607– Another key capability of BFT–AVN is Loader (SKL) is a ruggedized, portable, 5339. the ability to send and receive data and hand-held fill device used for securely The following is a copy of a letter to messages beyond line-of-sight, receiving, storing, and transferring the Speaker of the House of overcoming the communication electronic key material and data Representatives, Transmittal 0A–16 challenges of distance and terrain. The between compatible end cryptographic with attached Policy Justification. BFT–A is UNCLASSIFIED. units (ECU) and communications Note: The following items are not equipment. The AN/PYQ–10(C) is Dated: January 4, 2016. identified in the CH–47F Security SECRET when loaded with software. Aaron Siegel, Classification Guide and sensitive 14. The ramifications of this Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison technology classification could not be technology in the hands of an adversary Officer, Department of Defense.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 921

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P of the possible sale under Section program support. The estimated total Transmittal No. 0A–16 36(b)(l) of the Arms Export Control Act cost was $1.2 billion. Major Defense of one (1) AN/FPS–132 Block 5 Early Equipment (MDE) constituted $800 REPORT OF ENHANCEMENT OR Warning Radar (EWR) to include a million of the total. UPGRADE OF SENSITIVITY OF TECHNOLOGY OR CAPABILITY (SEC. Prime Mission Equipment package; This transmittal reports the 36(B)(5)(C), AECA) technical and support facilities; replacement of the original AN/FPS–132 communication equipment; encryption (i) Purchaser: Government of Qatar Block 5 EWR with the AN/FPS–132 devices; spare and repair parts; support Block 15 EWR. The Block 15 EWR has (ii) Sec. 36(b)(l), AECA Transmittal and test equipment, publications and No.: 13–33 an increased maximum range. technical documentation; personnel Date: 29 July 2013 Upgrading the status of this equipment Military Department: Air Force training and training equipment; U.S. will result in an estimated net increase (iii) Description: On 29 July 2013, Government and contractor engineering, in MDE cost of $800 million. The Congress was notified by Congressional technical, and logistics support services; revised estimated total value is $2 certification transmittal number 13–33, and related elements of logistics and billion, with the revised MDE value

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 EN08JA16.002 922 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

constituting $1.6 billion of this new used in the development of a system Defense University. Limited space made total. with similar or advanced capabilities. available for observers will be allocated (iv) Significance: The EWR will be a [FR Doc. 2016–00110 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] on a first come, first served basis. component of Qatar’s planned air and BILLING CODE 5001–06–C Pursuant to 41 CFR 102–3.105(j) and missile defense system, which includes 102–3.140, and section 10(a)(3) of the the Terminal High Altitude Area Federal Advisory Committee Act of Defense (THAAD) and Patriot missile DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 1972, written statements to the defense systems. The EWR will provide committee may be submitted to the sensor data and advanced warning of Office of the Secretary committee at any time or in response to incoming missiles. The Block 15 system a stated planned meeting agenda by Notification of an Open Meeting of the employs three electronically steered FAX or email to the point of contact National Defense University Board of phased array radar faces to provide 360 person listed in FOR FURTHER Visitors (BOV) degree azimuth coverage. The Block 15 INFORMATION CONTACT. (Subject Line: system is also capable of reporting AGENCY: National Defense University, Comment/Statement to the NDU BOV). airborne tracks. DoD. Dated: January 5, 2016. (v) Justification: This proposed sale ACTION: Notice of open meeting. Aaron Siegel, contributes to the foreign policy and Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison SUMMARY: national security of the United States by The Department of Defense is Officer, Department of Defense. helping to improve the security of a publishing this notice to announce that [FR Doc. 2016–00193 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 a.m.] friendly country. Qatar is an important the following Federal Advisory force for political stability and economic Committee meeting of the National BILLING CODE 5001–06–P progress in the Persian Gulf region. This Defense University Board of Visitors proposed sale strengthens U.S. efforts to (BOV) will take place. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE promote regional stability by enhancing DATES: The meeting will be held on the defense to a key United States ally. Thursday, January 28, 2016 from 12:00 Office of the Secretary The proposed sale strengthens Qatar’s p.m. to 4:30 p.m. and will continue on capability to counter current and future Friday, January 29, 2016, from 8:00 a.m. [Transmittal No. 0B–16] threats in the region and reduce to 11:15 a.m. dependence on United States forces. ADDRESSES: The Board of Visitors 36(b)(5)(C) Arms Sales Notification Qatar should have no difficulty meeting will be held at Marshall Hall, integrating this radar into its defense Building 62, Room 155B, the National AGENCY: Defense Security Cooperation systems. Defense University, 300 5th Avenue Agency, Department of Defense. (vi) Date Report Delivered to SW., Fort McNair, Washington, DC ACTION: Notice. Congress: 08 DEC 2015 20319–5066. (vii) Sensitivity of Technology: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is 1. The AN/FPS–132 Block 15 point of contact for this notice of open publishing the unclassified text of a supports Missile Defense, Space meeting is Ms. Joycelyn Stevens at (202) section 36(b)(5)(C) arms sales Situational Awareness, and Missile 685–0079, Fax (202) 685–3920 or notification. This is published to fulfill Warning mission areas. The Block 15 [email protected]. the requirements of section 155 of system employs 3 electronically steered SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Public Law 104–164 dated July 21, phased array radar faces to provide 360 meeting is being held under the 1996. degree azimuth coverage. The Block 15 provisions of the Federal Advisory FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: system is capable of detecting ballistic Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C. Sarah A. Ragan or Heather N. Harwell, missiles up to a maximum range of Appendix, as amended), the DSCA/LMO, (703) 604–1546/(703) 607– 5,000 km. The AN/FPS–132 Block 15 Government in the Sunshine Act of 5339. hardware is UNCLASSIFIED. The AN/ 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and The following is a copy of a letter to FPS–132 Block 15 software and the data 41 CFR 102–3.150. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. the Speaker of the House of produced are classified SECRET REL 552b and 41 CFR 102–3.140 through Representatives, Transmittal 0B–16 with QATAR. 102–3.165, and the availability of space, attached Policy Justification. 2. If a technologically advanced this meeting is open to the public. adversary were to obtain knowledge of The future agenda will include Dated: January 5, 2016. the specific hardware or software in this discussion on accreditation compliance, Aaron Siegel, proposed sale, the information could be organizational management, strategic Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison used to develop countermeasures that planning, resource management, and Officer, Department of Defense. might reduce system effectiveness or be other matters of interest to the National BILLING CODE 5001–06–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:32 Jan 15, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 923

Transmittal No. 0B–16 of the possible sale under Section Flare Cartridges. Also included are REPORT OF ENHANCEMENT OR 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act spare and repair parts, configuration UPGRADE OF SENSITIVITY OF of 6 Lockheed Martin C–130J United updates, communications security TECHNOLOGY OR CAPABILITY (SEC. States Air Force (USAF) baseline aircraft equipment and radios, integration 36(B)(5)(C), AECA) including: USAF baseline equipment, 6 studies, support equipment, Rolls Royce AE 2100D3 spare engines, publications and technical (i) Purchaser: Government of India 8 AN/AAR–47 Missile Warning Systems documentation, technical services, (ii) Sec. 36(b)(l), AECA Transmittal (two spares), 8 AN/ALR–56M Advanced personnel training and training No.: 11–44 Radar Warning Receivers (two spares), 8 equipment, foreign liaison office Date: 26 October 2011 AN/ALE–47 Counter-Measures support, Field Service Representatives’ Military Department: Air Force Dispensing Systems (two spares), 8 services, U.S. Government and (iii) Description: On 26 October 2011, AAQ–22 Star SAFIRE III Special contractor engineering and logistics Congress was notified by Congressional Operations Suites (two spares), 8 ARC– personnel services, and other related certification transmittal number 11–44, 210 Radios (non-COMSEC), and 3200 elements of logistics support. The

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 EN08JA16.003 924 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

estimated Major Defense Equipment is hereby given of the Board’s closed DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (MDE) was $650 million, non-MDE was meeting described below. [Docket No.: ED–2016–ICCD–0003] $550 million, with a total estimated cost DATES: of $1.2 billion. 2:00 p.m.–3:00 p.m., January 27, 2016. Agency Information Collection This transmittal reports the inclusion Activities; Comment Request; Loan of the following quantity of items: ADDRESSES: Defense Nuclear Facilities Cancellation in the Federal Perkins Major Defense Equipment: one (1) Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW., Loan Program Lockheed Martin C–130J USAF baseline Washington, DC 20004. aircraft with four (4) Rolls Royce AE AGENCY: Federal Student Aid (FSA), 2100D3 engines. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Department of Education (ED). Non-MDE: one (1) AN/AAR–47 Mark Welch, General Manager, Defense ACTION: Notice. Missile Warning System, one (1) AN/ Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 ALR–56M Advanced Radar Warning Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 700, SUMMARY: In accordance with the Receiver, one (1) AN/ALE–47 Counter- Washington, DC 20004–2901, (800) 788– Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Measures Dispensing System, one (1) 4016. This is a toll-free number. U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is AAQ–22 Star SAFIRE III Special proposing an extension of an existing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Operations Suite, and one (1) ARC–210 information collection. meeting will be closed to the public. No Radio (non-COMSEC). DATES: Interested persons are invited to participation from the public will be Adding an additional aircraft to this submit comments on or before March 8, case results in a net MDE increase of considered during the meeting. 2016. $107 million, and a non-MDE increase Status ADDRESSES: To access and review all the of $29 million. The revised estimated documents related to the information total value is $1.336 billion, with the Closed. During the closed meeting, collection listed in this notice, please revised MDE value constituting $757 the Board Members will discuss issues use http://www.regulations.gov by million of this new total. dealing with potential searching the Docket ID number ED– (iv) Significance: The Government of Recommendations to the Secretary of 2016–ICCD–0003. Comments submitted India has requested the purchase of an Energy. The Board is invoking the in response to this notice should be additional C–130J aircraft. India exemption to close a meeting described submitted electronically through the purchased six (6) C–130J aircraft in in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3) and (9)(B) and 10 Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// 2008. In April 2014, one (1) of the six CFR 1704.4(c) and (h). The Board has www.regulations.gov by selecting the (6) original aircraft was lost in a crash. determined that it is necessary to close Docket ID number or via postal mail, The potential sale of one (1) additional the meeting since conducting an open commercial delivery, or hand delivery. C–130J allows India to replace the lost meeting is likely to disclose matters that Please note that comments submitted by aircraft. are specifically exempted from fax or email and those submitted after (v) Justification: This proposed sale disclosure by statute, and/or be likely to the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for will contribute to the foreign policy and significantly frustrate implementation of information or comments submitted by national security of the United States by a proposed agency action. In this case, helping to strengthen the U.S.-India postal mail or delivery should be the deliberations will pertain to strategic relationship and to improve the addressed to the Director of the potential Board Recommendations capabilities of a major South Asian Information Collection Clearance which, under 42 U.S.C. 2286d(b) and partner which has been, and continues Division, U.S. Department of Education, to be, an important force for economic (h)(3), may not be made publicly 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room progress and stability in South Asia. available until after they have been 2E103, Washington, DC 20202–4537. The proposed sale provides India with received by the Secretary of Energy or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional airlift capability for military the President, respectively. specific questions related to collection transport, humanitarian assistance, and MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The meeting activities, please contact Beth disaster relief. will proceed in accordance with the Grebeldinger, 202–377–4018. (vi) Date Report Delivered to closed meeting agenda which is posted SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Congress: 02 DEC 2015 on the Board’s public Web site at Department of Education (ED), in [FR Doc. 2016–00115 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] www.dnfsb.gov. Technical staff may accordance with the Paperwork BILLING CODE 5001–06–C present information to the Board. The Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. Board Members are expected to conduct 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general deliberations regarding potential public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES Recommendations to the Secretary of Energy. revised, and continuing collections of SAFETY BOARD information. This helps the Department Dated: January 6, 2016. Sunshine Act Notice assess the impact of its information Joyce L. Connery, collection requirements and minimize AGENCY: Defense Nuclear Facilities Chairman. the public’s reporting burden. It also Safety Board. [FR Doc. 2016–00315 Filed 1–6–16; 4:15 pm] helps the public understand the ACTION: Notice of closed meeting. BILLING CODE 3670–01–P Department’s information collection requirements and provide the requested SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of data in the desired format. ED is the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 soliciting comments on the proposed U.S.C. 552b), and the Defense Nuclear information collection request (ICR) that Facilities Safety Board’s (Board) is described below. The Department of regulations implementing the Education is especially interested in Government in the Sunshine Act, notice public comment addressing the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 925

following issues: (1) Is this collection Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). operate, and maintain a new natural gas necessary to the proper functions of the Protests will be considered by the pipeline in Presidio County, Texas. Department; (2) will this information be Commission in determining the The EA assesses the potential processed and used in a timely manner; appropriate action to be taken, but will environmental effects of the (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; not serve to make protestants parties to construction and operation of the (4) how might the Department enhance the proceeding. Any person wishing to Project in accordance with the the quality, utility, and clarity of the become a party must file a notice of requirements of the National information to be collected; and (5) how intervention or motion to intervene, as Environmental Policy Act of 1969. The might the Department minimize the appropriate. Such notices, motions, or FERC staff concludes that approval of burden of this collection on the protests must be filed on or before the the proposed Project, with appropriate respondents, including through the use comment date. On or before the mitigating measures, would not of information technology. Please note comment date, it is not necessary to constitute a major federal action that written comments received in serve motions to intervene or protests significantly affecting the quality of the response to this notice will be on persons other than the Applicant. human environment. considered public records. The Commission encourages The proposed Presidio Border Title of Collection: Loan Cancellation electronic submission of protests and Crossing Project would involve in the Federal Perkins Loan Program. interventions in lieu of paper using the construction of approximately 1,093 feet OMB Control Number: 1845–0100. ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. of FERC-jurisdictional 42-inch-diameter Type of Review: An extension of an Persons unable to file electronically pipeline, installed beneath the Rio existing information collection. should submit an original and 5 copies Grande River. The new pipeline would Respondents/Affected Public: of the protest or intervention to the transport natural gas to a new delivery Individuals or Households, Private Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, interconnect with pipeline facilities Sector, State, Local and Tribal 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC owned by an affiliate of Trans-Pecos at Government. 20426. the United States-Mexico border for expanding electric generation and Total Estimated Number of Annual This filing is accessible on-line at Responses: 116,872. industrial market needs in Mexico. http://www.ferc.gov, using the The FERC staff mailed copies of the Total Estimated Number of Annual ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for Burden Hours: 43,832. EA to federal, state, and local review in the Commission’s Public government representatives and Abstract: This is a request for an Reference Room in Washington, DC. agencies; elected officials; extension of the OMB approval for the There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the environmental and public interest record-keeping requirements contained Web site that enables subscribers to groups; Native American tribes; in 34 CFR 674.53, 674.56, 674.57, receive email notification when a potentially affected landowners and 674.58 and 674.59. The information document is added to a subscribed other interested individuals and groups; collections in these regulations are docket(s). For assistance with any FERC and newspapers and libraries in the necessary to determine Federal Perkins Online service, please email Project area. In addition, the EA is Loan (Perkins Loan) Program borrower’s [email protected], or call available for public viewing on the eligibility to receive program benefits (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call FERC’s Web site (www.ferc.gov) using and to prevent fraud and abuse of (202) 502–8659. the eLibrary link. A limited number of program funds. Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern copies of the EA are also available for Dated: January 5, 2016. Time on January 14, 2016. distribution and public inspection at: Kate Mullan, Dated: December 31, 2015. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Acting Director, Information Collection Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Public Reference Room, 888 First Street Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Deputy Secretary. NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, Officer, Office of Management. (202) 502–8371. [FR Doc. 2016–00099 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2016–00138 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Any person wishing to comment on BILLING CODE 6717–01–P BILLING CODE 4000–01–P the EA may do so. Your comments should focus on the potential DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY environmental effects, reasonable DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY alternatives, and measures to avoid or Federal Energy Regulatory lessen environmental impacts. The more Federal Energy Regulatory Commission specific your comments, the more useful Commission they will be. To ensure that your comments are properly recorded and [Docket No. NJ16–6–000] [Docket No. CP15–500–000] considered prior to a Commission City of Colton, California; Notice of Trans-Pecos Pipeline, LLC; Notice of decision on the proposal, it is important Filing Availability of the Environmental that the FERC receives your comments Assessment for the Proposed Presidio in Washington, DC on or before Take notice that on December 24, Border Crossing Project February 3, 2016. 2015, City of Colton, California For your convenience, there are three submitted its tariff filing: City of Colton The staff of the Federal Energy methods you can use to submit your 2015 Transmission Revenue Balancing Regulatory Commission (FERC or comments to the Commission. In all Account Adjustment and Existing Commission) has prepared an instances, please reference the project Transmission Contracts Update to be Environmental Assessment (EA) of the docket number (CP15–500–000) with effective 1/1/2016. Presidio Border Crossing Project your submission. The Commission Any person desiring to intervene or to (Project) proposed by Trans-Pecos encourages electronic filing of protest this filing must file in Pipeline, LLC (Trans-Pecos) in the comments and has dedicated eFiling accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of above-referenced docket. Trans-Pecos expert staff available to assist you at the Commission’s Rules of Practice and requests authorization to construct, 202–502–8258 or [email protected].

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 926 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

(1) You may file your comments In addition, the Commission offers a Deadline for filing comments, motions electronically by using the eComment free service called eSubscription, which to intervene, competing applications feature, which is located on the allows you to keep track of all formal (without notices of intent), or notices of Commission’s Web site at www.ferc.gov issuances and submittals in specific intent to file competing applications: 60 under the link to Documents and dockets. This can reduce the amount of days from the issuance of this notice. Filings. An eComment is an easy time you spend researching proceedings Competing applications and notices of method for interested persons to submit by automatically providing you with intent must meet the requirements of 18 text-only comments on a project; notification of these filings, document CFR 4.36. The Commission strongly (2) You may file your comments summaries, and direct links to the encourages electronic filing. Please file electronically by using the eFiling documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs- comments, motions to intervene, notices feature, which is located on the filing/esubscription.asp. of intent, and competing applications Commission’s Web site at www.ferc.gov Dated: January 4, 2016. using the Commission’s eFiling system under the link to Documents and Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ Filings. With eFiling you can provide Deputy Secretary. efiling.asp. Commenters can submit comments in a variety of formats by [FR Doc. 2016–00119 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] brief comments up to 6,000 characters, attaching them as a file with your BILLING CODE 6717–01–P without prior registration, using the submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on eComment system at http:// www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ ‘‘eRegister.’’ You will be asked to select DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY the type of filing you are making. A ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end comment on a particular project is Federal Energy Regulatory of your comments. For assistance, considered a ‘‘Comment on a Filing’’; or Commission (3) You may file a paper copy of your please contact FERC Online Support at comments at the following address: [Project No. 14716–000] [email protected], (866) 208–3676 (toll free), or (202) 502–8659 Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Water District No. 1 of Johnson Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please County, KS; Notice of Preliminary send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, Permit Application Accepted for Filing Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 DC 20426. and Soliciting Comments, Motions To First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Any person seeking to become a party Intervene, and Competing Applications to the proceeding must file a motion to The first page of any filing should intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the On September 30, 2015, Water District include docket number P–14716–000. Commission’s Rules of Practice and No. 1 of Johnson County, KS filed an More information about this project, 1 Procedures (18 CFR 385.214). Only application for a preliminary permit including a copy of the application, can intervenors have the right to seek under section 4(f) of the Federal Power be viewed or printed on the ‘‘eLibrary’’ rehearing of the Commission’s decision. Act proposing to study the feasibility of link of Commission’s Web site at The Commission grants affected the proposed WaterOne Kansas River http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ landowners and others with Hydroelectric Project No. 14716–000, to elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number environmental concerns intervenor be located at the existing WaterOne (P–14716) in the docket number field to status upon showing good cause by Kansas River Weir on the Kansas River, access the document. For assistance, stating that they have a clear and direct near the town of Kanas City, in interest in this proceeding which no Wyandotte County, Kansas. The contact FERC Online Support. other party can adequately represent. WaterOne Kansas River Weir is owned Dated: December 31, 2015. Simply filing environmental comments by the Water District No.1 of Johnson Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., will not give you intervenor status, but County, KS. Deputy Secretary. you do not need intervenor status to The proposed project would consist [FR Doc. 2016–00100 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] have your comments considered. of: (1) An existing 1,284-foot-long weir Additional information about the structure comprised of eighteen 54-foot- BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Project is available from the diameter substrate filled, concrete Commission’s Office of External Affairs, capped cells; (2) a new 42-foot-long, 72- at 1–866–208–FERC (3372) or on the foot-wide reinforced concrete FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the powerhouse containing two 550- eLibrary link. Click on the eLibrary link, kilowatt vertical Kaplan hydropower click on ‘‘General Search,’’ and enter the turbine-generators having a total docket number excluding the last three combined generating capacity of 1.1 digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., megawatts; (3) a new 20-foot-long by 20- CP15–500). Be sure you have selected foot-wide switchyard containing a 480 an appropriate date range. For volt(V) to 2,400V step-up transformer; assistance, please contact FERC Online (4) a new 400 to 500-foot-long, 2,400V Support at [email protected] underground transmission line; and (5) or toll free at 1–866–208–3676, or for appurtenant facilities. The project TTY, contact 1–202–502–8659. The would have an estimated annual eLibrary link also provides access to the generation of 7,700,000 kilowatt-hours. texts of formal documents issued by the Applicant Contact: Mr. Michael J. Commission, such as orders, notices, Armstrong, 10747 Renner Boulevard, and rulemakings. Lenexa, KS 66219; telephone (913) 895– 5500. 1 See the previous discussion on the methods for FERC Contact: Tyrone A. Williams, filing comments. (202) 502–6331.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 927

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Persons unable to file electronically 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC Federal Energy Regulatory should submit an original and 5 copies 20426. Commission of the protest or intervention to the This filing is accessible on-line at [Docket No. EL11–66–000] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, http://www.ferc.gov, using the 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for Martha Coakley, Massachusetts 20426. review in the Commission’s Public Attorney General; Connecticut Public This filing is accessible on-line at Reference Room in Washington, DC. Utilities Regulatory Authority; http://www.ferc.gov, using the There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the Massachusetts Department of Public ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for Web site that enables subscribers to Utilities; New Hampshire Public electronic review in the Commission’s receive email notification when a Utilities Commission; Connecticut Public Reference Room in Washington, document is added to a subscribed Office of Consumer Counsel; Maine DC. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Office of the Public Advocate; George the Web site that enables subscribers to Online service, please email Jepsen, Connecticut Attorney General; receive email notification when a [email protected], or call New Hampshire Office of Consumer document is added to a subscribed (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Advocate; Rhode Island Division of docket(s). For assistance with any FERC (202) 502–8659. Public Utilities and Carriers; Vermont Online service, please email Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Department of Public Service; [email protected], or call Time on January 21, 2016. Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Dated: January 4, 2016. Electric Company; Associated (202) 502–8659. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Industries of Massachusetts; The Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Deputy Secretary. Energy Consortium; Power Options, Time on January 21, 2016. [FR Doc. 2016–00126 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Inc.; and the Industrial Energy Dated: December 31, 2015. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Consumer Group, v. Bangor Hydro- Electric Company; Central Maine Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary. Power Company; New England Power DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Company d/b/a National Grid; New [FR Doc. 2016–00097 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Hampshire Transmission LLC d/b/a BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Federal Energy Regulatory NextEra; NSTAR Electric and Gas Commission Corporation; Northeast Utilities [Docket No. NJ16–5–000] Service Company; The United DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Illuminating Company; Unitil Energy Federal Energy Regulatory City of Anaheim, California; Notice of Systems, Inc. and Fitchburg Gas and Commission Filing Electric Light Company; Vermont Transco, LLC, Notice of Filing [EL16–26–000] Take notice that on December 22, 2015, City of Anaheim, California Take notice that on December 31, Missouri Joint Municipal Electric Utility submitted its tariff filing: City of 2015, Central Maine Power Company Commission; Notice of Filing Anaheim 2016 Transmission Revenue submitted tariff filing per: Refund Balancing Account Adjustment to be Report to be effective N/A, pursuant to Take notice that on December 31, effective 1/1/2016. the Commission’s Opinion No. 531–A, 2015, the Missouri Joint Municipal Any person desiring to intervene or to issued on October 16, 2014.1 Electric Utility Commission submitted a protest this filing must file in Any person desiring to intervene or to Reactive Compensation Rate Filing. accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of protest this filing must file in Any person desiring to intervene or to the Commission’s Rules of Practice and accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of protest this filing must file in Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). the Commission’s Rules of Practice and accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of Protests will be considered by the Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Commission in determining the Protests will be considered by the Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). appropriate action to be taken, but will Commission in determining the Protests will be considered by the not serve to make protestants parties to appropriate action to be taken, but will Commission in determining the the proceeding. Any person wishing to not serve to make protestants parties to appropriate action to be taken, but will become a party must file a notice of the proceeding. Any person wishing to not serve to make protestants parties to intervention or motion to intervene, as become a party must file a notice of the proceeding. Any person wishing to appropriate. Such notices, motions, or intervention or motion to intervene, as become a party must file a notice of protests must be filed on or before the appropriate. Such notices, motions, or intervention or motion to intervene, as comment date. Anyone filing a motion protests must be filed on or before the appropriate. Such notices, motions, or to intervene or protest must serve a copy comment date. Anyone filing a motion protests must be filed on or before the of that document on the Applicant and to intervene or protest must serve a copy comment date. On or before the all the parties in this proceeding. of that document on the Applicant and comment date, it is not necessary to The Commission encourages all the parties in this proceeding. serve motions to intervene or protests electronic submission of protests and The Commission encourages on persons other than the Applicant. interventions in lieu of paper using the electronic submission of protests and The Commission encourages ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. interventions in lieu of paper using the electronic submission of protests and Persons unable to file electronically interventions in lieu of paper using the should submit an original and 5 copies 1 Martha Coakley, Mass. Attorney Gen., et al. v. ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. of the protest or intervention to the Bangor Hydro-Elec. Co., et al., Opinion No. 531, 147 FERC ¶ 61,234 (2014) (Opinion No. 531), order on Persons unable to file electronically Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, paper hearing, Opinion No. 531–A, 149 FERC ¶ should submit an original and 5 copies 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 61,032 (2014) (Opinion No. 531–A). of the protest or intervention to the 20426.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 928 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

This filing is accessible on-line at Any person desiring to intervene or to ER11–2062–019; ER11–2508–018; http://www.ferc.gov, using the protest this filing must file in ER11–4307–019; ER12–261–018; ER10– ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of 2368–007; ER11–2107–010; ER11–2108– electronic review in the Commission’s the Commission’s Rules of Practice and 010; ER10–2888–019; ER11–4308–019; Public Reference Room in Washington, Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). ER11–2805–018; ER10–2382–008; DC. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on Protests will be considered by the ER10–2357–008; ER10–2369–007; the Web site that enables subscribers to Commission in determining the ER10–2361–008. receive email notification when a appropriate action to be taken, but will Applicants: NRG Power Marketing document is added to a subscribed not serve to make protestants parties to LLC, Boston Energy Trading and docket(s). For assistance with any FERC the proceeding. Any person wishing to Marketing LLC, Broken Bow Wind, LLC, Online service, please email become a party must file a notice of CP Power Sales Nineteen, L.L.C., CP [email protected], or call intervention or motion to intervene, as Power Sales Twenty, L.L.C., Crofton (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call appropriate. Such notices, motions, or Bluffs Wind, LLC, Elkhorn Ridge Wind, (202) 502–8659. protests must be filed on or before the LLC, Energy Plus Holdings LLC, GenOn Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern comment date. Anyone filing a motion Energy Management, LLC, Green Time on January 12, 2016. to intervene or protest must serve a copy Mountain Energy Company, Dated: December 31, 2015. of that document on the Applicant and Independence Energy Group LLC, Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., all the parties in this proceeding. Laredo Ridge Wind, LLC, North Deputy Secretary. The Commission encourages Community Turbines LLC, North Wind electronic submission of protests and [FR Doc. 2016–00098 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Turbines LLC, Norwalk Power LLC, interventions in lieu of paper using the Reliant Energy Northeast LLC, RRI BILLING CODE 6717–01–P ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. Energy Services, LLC, San Juan Mesa Persons unable to file electronically Wind Project, LLC, Sleeping Bear, LLC, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY should submit an original and 5 copies Taloga Wind, LLC, Wildorado Wind, of the protest or intervention to the LLC. Federal Energy Regulatory Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Description: Updated Market Power Commission 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC Analysis for the Southwest Power Pool 20426. Region of NRG SPP MBR Sellers. [Docket No. EL11–66–000] This filing is accessible online at Filed Date: 12/31/15. Martha Coakley, Massachusetts http://www.ferc.gov, using the Accession Number: 20151231–5100. Attorney General; Connecticut Public ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. Utilities Regulatory Authority; electronic review in the Commission’s Docket Numbers: ER10–2721–006. Massachusetts Department of Public Public Reference Room in Washington, Applicants: El Paso Electric Company. Utilities; New Hampshire Public DC. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on Description: Updated Market Power Utilities Commission; Connecticut the Web site that enables subscribers to Analysis of El Paso Electric Company Office of Consumer Counsel; Maine receive email notification when a (Volume1 of 2). Office of the Public Advocate; George document is added to a subscribed Filed Date: 12/31/15. Jepsen, Connecticut Attorney General; docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Accession Number: 20151231–5101. New Hampshire Office of Consumer Online service, please email Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. Advocate; Rhode Island Division of [email protected], or call Docket Numbers: ER10–2805–005; Public Utilities and Carriers; Vermont (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call ER10–2564–006; ER10–2600–006; Department of Public Service; (202) 502–8659. ER10–2289–006. Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Applicants: Central Hudson Gas & Electric Company; Associated Time on January 21, 2016. Electric Corporation, Tucson Electric Industries of Massachusetts; The Dated: January 4, 2016. Power Company, UNS Electric, Inc., Energy Consortium; Power Options, Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., UniSource Energy Development Inc.; and the Industrial Energy Deputy Secretary. Company. Consumer Group, v. Bangor Hydro- [FR Doc. 2016–00122 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Description: Triennial Market Power Electric Company; Central Maine BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Update for the Southwest Region of the Power Company; New England Power Fortis, Inc. subsidiaries. Company d/b/a National Grid; New Filed Date: 12/31/15. Hampshire Transmission LLC d/b/a DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Accession Number: 20151231–5159. NextEra; NSTAR Electric and Gas Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. Corporation; Northeast Utilities Federal Energy Regulatory Docket Numbers: ER10–2984–022. Service Company; The United Commission Applicants: Merrill Lynch Illuminating Company; Unitil Energy Commodities, Inc. Systems, Inc. and Fitchburg Gas and Combined Notice of Filings #2 Description: Notice of Non-Material Electric Light Company; Vermont Take notice that the Commission Change in Status of Merrill Lynch Transco, LLC; Notice of Filing received the following electric rate Commodities, Inc. Take notice that December 31, 2015, filings: Filed Date: 12/31/15. NSTAR Electric Company submitted Accession Number: 20151231–5110. Docket Numbers: ER10–2265–010; Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/16. tariff filing per: Refund Report to be ER14–1818–010; ER12–1238–007; effective N/A, pursuant to the ER10–2338–012; ER10–2340–012; Docket Numbers: ER10–3310–011; Commission’s Opinion No. 531–A, ER12–1239–007; ER10–2385–008; ER15–2013–003; ER14–1439–005; issued on October 16, 2014.1 ER11–2489–008; ER12–2639 –006. FERC ¶ 61,234 (2014) (Opinion No. 531), order on Applicants: New Harquahala 1 Martha Coakley, Mass. Attorney Gen., et al. v. paper hearing, Opinion No. 531–A, 149 FERC ¶ Generating Company, LLC, Talen Bangor Hydro-Elec. Co., et al., Opinion No. 531, 147 61,032 (2014) (Opinion No. 531–A). Energy Marketing, LLC, TrailStone

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 929

Power, LLC, Hatchet Ridge Wind, LLC, other information, call (866) 208–3676 LLC, NRG Solar Avra Valley LLC, NRG Ocotillo Express LLC. (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Solar Blythe LLC, NRG Solar Borrego I Description: Updated Market Power Dated: December 31, 2015. LLC, NRG Solar Roadrunner LLC, NRG Analysis for the Southwest Region of Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Sterlington Power LLC, NRG Wholesale New Harquahala Generating Company, Generation LP, Oswego Harbor Power Deputy Secretary. LLC, et al. LLC, Pinnacle Wind, LLC, Reliant Filed Date: 12/30/15. [FR Doc. 2016–00095 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Energy Northeast LLC, RRI Energy Accession Number: 20151230–5385. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Services, LLC, Saguaro Power Company, Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. a Limited Partnership, San Juan Mesa Wind Project, LLC, Sand Drag LLC, Docket Numbers: ER15–1737–001. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Sierra Wind, LLC, Sleeping Bear, LLC, Inc. Federal Energy Regulatory Solar Partners I, LLC, Solar Partners II, Description: Compliance filing: 2nd Commission LLC, Solar Partners VIII, LLC, Spring Comp. Filing in ER15–1737 Revising Canyon Energy II LLC, Spring Canyon Westar Energy’s Formula Rate Protocols Combined Notice of Filings #1 Energy III LLC, Sun City Project LLC, to be effective 3/1/2015. Sunrise Power Company, LLC, TAIR Filed Date: 12/31/15. Take notice that the Commission Windfarm, LLC, Taloga Wind, LLC, Accession Number: 20151231–5095. received the following electric rate Vienna Power LLC, Walnut Creek Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/16. filings: Energy, LLC, Watson Cogeneration Docket Numbers: ER15–1738–001. Docket Numbers: ER10–1107–005. Company, Wildorado Wind, LLC. Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Description: Notice of Change in Inc. Company. Status of NRG MBR Sellers [Part 3 of 3]. Description: Compliance filing: 2nd Description: Updated Market Power Filed Date: 12/30/15. Compliance Filing in ER15–1738 Analysis for the Southwest Region of Accession Number: 20151230–5355. Revising KCP&L–GMO’s Formula Rate Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/20/16. Protocols to be effective 3/1/2015. Filed Date: 12/31/15. Docket Numbers: ER12–2499–014; Filed Date: 12/31/15. Accession Number: 20151231–5083. ER12–2498–014; ER13–764–014; ER11– Accession Number: 20151231–5107. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. 4055–006; ER12–1566–008; ER14–1548– Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/16. Docket Numbers: ER10–2739–012; 006; ER12–1470–006; ER11–3987–009; Docket Numbers: ER15–1739–001. ER14–2499–003; ER10–2755–010; ER10–1290–007; ER14–474–005; ER14– Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, ER10–2751–007; ER10–2743–007. 1775–004; ER10–3026–006. Inc. Applicants: LS Power Marketing, LLC, Applicants: Alpaugh North, LLC, Description: Compliance filing: 2nd Oneta Power, LLC, Las Vegas Power Alpaugh 50, LLC, CED White River Compliance Filing in ER15–1739 Company, LLC, Renaissance Power, Solar, LLC, Copper Mountain Solar 1, Revising KCP&L’s Formula Rate L.L.C., Bluegrass Generation Company, LLC, Copper Mountain Solar 2, LLC, Protocols to be effective 3/1/2015. L.L.C. Copper Mountain Solar 3, LLC, Energia Filed Date: 12/31/15. Description: Updated Market Power Sierra Juarez U.S., LLC, Mesquite Solar Accession Number: 20151231–5160. Analysis in Southwest Power Pool 1, LLC, San Diego Gas & Electric Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/16. Region of the LS Power Development, Company, Sempra Generation, LLC, SEP Docket Numbers: ER16–673–000. LLC subsidiaries. II, LLC, Termoelectrica U.S., LLC. Applicants: Sierra Pacific Power Filed Date: 12/30/15. Description: Updated Market Power Company, Nevada Power Company. Accession Number: 20151230–5329. Analysis for Southwest Region of the Description: Section 205(d) Rate Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. SDG&E Sellers. Filed Date: 12/30/15. Filing: Service Agreement No. 15–00086 Docket Numbers: ER10–2913–013; Accession Number: 20151230–5332. (NVE–NVE) to be effective 1/1/2016. ER13–1791–008; ER13–1746–011; Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. Filed Date: 12/31/15. ER13–1799–008; ER13–1801– 008; Accession Number: 20151231–5120. Docket Numbers: ER16–287–000. ER13–1802–008; ER10–2916–013; Applicants: BIF III Holtwood LLC. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/16. ER10–2915–013; ER12–1525–014; Description: Clarification to The filings are accessible in the ER12–2019–012; ER10–2266–005; November 6, 2015 BIF III Holtwood LLC Commission’s eLibrary system by ER12–2398–013; ER11–3459–013; tariff filing. clicking on the links or querying the ER10–2931–014; ER13–1965–011; Filed Date: 12/30/15. docket number. ER10–2969–013; ER11–4351–008; Accession Number: 20151230–5346. Any person desiring to intervene or ER11–4308–018; ER11– 2805–017; Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/20/16. protest in any of the above proceedings ER10–1580–015; ER10–2382–007; Docket Numbers: ER16–670–000. must file in accordance with Rules 211 ER11–2856–019; ER10–2356–007; Applicants: New England Power Pool and 214 of the Commission’s ER10–2357–007; ER13–2107–009; Participants Committee. Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and ER13–2020–009; ER13–2050–009; Description: Section 205(d) Rate 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern ER14–2820–007; ER14–2821–007; Filing: Dec 30 2015 Membership Filing time on the specified comment date. ER11–2857–019; ER10–2359–007; to be effective 1/1/2016. Protests may be considered, but ER10–2360–007; ER10–2369–006; Filed Date: 12/30/15. intervention is necessary to become a ER10–2947–013; ER10–2381–007; Accession Number: 20151230–5314. party to the proceeding. ER10–2575–007; ER10–2361–007. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/20/16. eFiling is encouraged. More detailed Applicants: NRG Energy Center Docket Numbers: ER16–671–000. information relating to filing Paxton LLC, NRG Florida LP, NRG Applicants: Golden Spread Electric requirements, interventions, protests, Marsh Landing LLC, NRG Potomac Cooperative, Inc. service, and qualifying facilities filings River LLC, NRG Power Midwest LP, Description: Market-Based Triennial can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ NRG REMA LLC, NRG Rockford LLC, Review Filing: Updated Market Power docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For NRG Rockford II LLC, NRG Solar Alpine Analysis to be effective 3/1/2014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 930 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Filed Date: 12/31/15. c. Date Filed: December 18, 2015 concrete penstock; (iii) a 40-foot-high, Accession Number: 20151231–5070. d. Applicant: Public Service Company 20-foot-wide stop log slot; (iv) a 29-foot- Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. of New Hampshire (PSNH) long, 29-foot-wide, 34-foot-high Docket Numbers: ER16–672–000. e. Name of Project: Eastman Falls concrete and masonry powerhouse Applicants: Golden Spread Panhandle Hydroelectric Project (Eastman Falls containing a single 1.8–MW turbine- Wind Ranch, LLC. Project) generator unit; and (v) a 23-foot-wide, Description: Market-Based Triennial f. Location: The existing project is 14.5-foot-high, 60-foot-long draft tube; Review Filing: Updated Market Power located on the Pemigewasset River in (5) generating facility No. 2 facility that Analysis to be effective 3/1/2014. Merrimack and Belknap Counties, New includes: (i) An intake structure with a Filed Date: 12/31/15. Hampshire. The project boundary 20-foot-high, 21-foot-wide headgate Accession Number: 20151231–5072. includes approximately 476 acres of with two 12.3-foot-wide, 9.3-foot-high Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. federal land. trashracks with 3.5-inch clear-bar The filings are accessible in the g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power spacing; (ii) a 20.8-foot-high, 22.4-foot- Commission’s eLibrary system by Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r) wide stop log slot; (iii) a 88-foot-long, clicking on the links or querying the h. Applicant Contact: Curtis R. 78-foot-wide, 56-foot-high concrete and docket number. Mooney, Project Manager, Public masonry powerhouse containing a Any person desiring to intervene or Service Company of New Hampshire, single 4.6 MW turbine-generator unit; protest in any of the above proceedings 780 North Commercial Street, P.O. Box (iv) a 23-foot-wide, 14.5-foot-high, 60- must file in accordance with Rules 211 330, Manchester, NH 03105–0330; foot-long draft tube; (6) a 100-foot-long, and 214 of the Commission’s Telephone: (603) 744–8855 or 2.4-kilovolt transmission line that Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and [email protected]. connects the turbine-generator units to 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern i. FERC Contact: Steve Kartalia, (202) the regional grid; and (7) appurtenant time on the specified comment date. 502–6131 or [email protected]. facilities. Protests may be considered, but j. This application is not ready for The Eastman Falls Project operates in intervention is necessary to become a environmental analysis at this time. a run-of-river mode. The existing license party to the proceeding. k. The Project Description: The (Article 401) requires that the project eFiling is encouraged. More detailed Eastman Falls Project has a total release a continuous minimum flow of information relating to filing installed capacity of 6.4-megawatts 410 cubic feet per second (cfs), or inflow requirements, interventions, protests, (MW). The project’s average annual (whichever is less). PSNH proposes to service, and qualifying facilities filings generation is 27,871 megawatt-hours. continue run-of-river operation and to can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ The power generated by the project is eliminate the requirement to release a docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For sold to PSNH’s electrical distribution minimum flow. other information, call (866) 208–3676 customers. l. Locations of the Application: A (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. The dam for the Eastman Falls Project copy of the application is available for is located approximately 1.5 miles Dated: December 31, 2015. review at the Commission in the Public downstream of the U.S. Army Corps of Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Reference Room or may be viewed on Engineers’ (Corps) Franklin Falls Flood Deputy Secretary. the Commission’s Web site at http:// Control Dam (Franklin Falls Dam). www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. [FR Doc. 2016–00094 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] While the project boundary for the Enter the docket number excluding the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Eastman Falls Project extends through last three digits in the docket number and upstream of Franklin Falls Dam, it field to access the document. For does not encompass Franklin Falls Dam DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY assistance, please contact FERC Online or any Corps facilities. Support at The existing project consists of: (1) A Federal Energy Regulatory [email protected], (866) 341-foot-long, 37-foot-high concrete Commission 208–3676 (toll free), or (202) 502–8659 gravity dam and spillway with a crest (TTY). A copy is also available for [Project No. 2457–041] elevation of 301 feet above mean sea inspection and reproduction at the level (msl) that includes: (i) 6-foot-high Public Service Company of New address in item (h) above. steel flashboards with a crest elevation Hampshire; Notice of Application of 307 feet msl; and (ii) a concrete waste m. You may also register online at Tendered for Filing With the gate structure that includes a 16-foot- http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ Commission and Establishing high, 30-foot-wide steel slide gate; (2) a esubscription.asp to be notified via Procedural Schedule for Licensing and 582-acre, 9-mile-long impoundment, email of new filings and issuances Deadline for Submission of Final with a normal maximum pool elevation related to this or other pending projects. Amendments of 307 feet msl; (3) a 342-foot-long, 8- For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. Take notice that the following foot-deep floating louver array; (4) hydroelectric application has been filed generating facility No. 1 that includes: n. Procedural Schedule: with the Commission and is available (i) A 12.5-foot-high, 15-foot-wide The application will be processed for public inspection. headgate structure with a 23.75-foot- according to the following preliminary a. Type of Application: New Major high, 17-foot-wide trashrack with 3.5- Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to License inch clear-bar spacing; (ii) a 12.5-foot- the schedule may be made as b. Project No.: 2457–041 high, 12.5-foot-wide, 21-foot-long appropriate.

Milestone Target date

Notice of Acceptance/Notice of Ready for Environmental Analysis ...... February 2016. Filing of recommendations, preliminary terms and conditions, and fishway prescriptions ...... April 2016. Commission issues Non-Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) ...... September 2016. Comments on EA ...... October 2016.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 931

Milestone Target date

Modified terms and conditions ...... December 2016.

o. Final amendments to the Any person desiring to intervene or to DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY application must be filed with the protest this filing must file in Commission no later than 30 days from accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of Federal Energy Regulatory the issuance date of the notice of ready the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Commission for environmental analysis. Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). [Docket No. EL11–66–000] Dated: January 4, 2016. Protests will be considered by the Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Commission in determining the Martha Coakley, Massachusetts Deputy Secretary. appropriate action to be taken, but will Attorney General; Connecticut Public [FR Doc. 2016–00127 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] not serve to make protestants parties to Utilities Regulatory Authority; BILLING CODE 6717–01–P the proceeding. Any person wishing to Massachusetts Department of Public become a party must file a notice of Utilities; New Hampshire Public intervention or motion to intervene, as Utilities Commission; Connecticut DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY appropriate. Such notices, motions, or Office of Consumer Counsel; Maine protests must be filed on or before the Office of the Public Advocate; George Federal Energy Regulatory comment date. Anyone filing a motion Jepsen, Connecticut Attorney General; Commission to intervene or protest must serve a copy New Hampshire Office of Consumer Advocate; Rhode Island Division of [Docket No. EL11–66–000] of that document on the Applicant and Public Utilities and Carriers; Vermont all the parties in this proceeding. Martha Coakley, Massachusetts Department of Public Service; Attorney General; Connecticut Public The Commission encourages Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Utilities Regulatory Authority; electronic submission of protests and Electric Company; Associated Massachusetts Department of Public interventions in lieu of paper using the Industries of Massachusetts; The Utilities; New Hampshire Public ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. Energy Consortium; Power Options, Utilities Commission; Connecticut Persons unable to file electronically Inc.; and the Industrial Energy Office of Consumer Counsel; Maine should submit an original and 5 copies Consumer Group, v. Bangor Hydro- Office of the Public Advocate; George of the protest or intervention to the Electric Company; Central Maine Jepsen, Connecticut Attorney General; Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Power Company; New England Power New Hampshire Office of Consumer 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC Company d/b/a National Grid; New Advocate; Rhode Island Division of 20426. Hampshire Transmission LLC d/b/a NextEra; NSTAR Electric and Gas Public Utilities and Carriers; Vermont This filing is accessible on-line at Department of Public Service; Corporation; Northeast Utilities http://www.ferc.gov, using the Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Service Company; The United ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for Electric Company; Associated Illuminating Company; Unitil Energy electronic review in the Commission’s Industries of Massachusetts; The Systems, Inc. and Fitchburg Gas and Energy Consortium; Power Options, Public Reference Room in Washington, Electric Light Company; Vermont Inc.; and the Industrial Energy DC. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on Transco, LLC; Notice of Filing Consumer Group, v. Bangor Hydro- the Web site that enables subscribers to Electric Company; Central Maine receive email notification when a Take notice that on December 31, Power Company; New England Power document is added to a subscribed 2015, New Hampshire Transmission, Company d/b/a National Grid; New docket(s). For assistance with any FERC LLC submitted tariff filing per: Refund Hampshire Transmission LLC d/b/a Online service, please email Report to be effective N/A, pursuant to [email protected], or call the Commission’s Opinion No. 531–A, NextEra; NSTAR Electric and Gas 1 Corporation; Northeast Utilities (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call issued on October 16, 2014. Service Company; The United (202) 502–8659. Any person desiring to intervene or to Illuminating Company; Unitil Energy protest this filing must file in Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of Systems, Inc. and Fitchburg Gas and Time on January 21, 2016. Electric Light Company; Vermont the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Transco, LLC; Notice of Filing Dated: January 4, 2016. Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Protests will be considered by the Take notice that on December 31, Commission in determining the Deputy Secretary. 2015, the Connecticut Light and Power appropriate action to be taken, but will Company, Public Service Company of [FR Doc. 2016–00121 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] not serve to make protestants parties to New Hampshire, and Western BILLING CODE 6717–01–P the proceeding. Any person wishing to Massachusetts Electric Company become a party must file a notice of submitted tariff filing per: Refund intervention or motion to intervene, as Report to be effective N/A, pursuant to appropriate. Such notices, motions, or the Commission’s Opinion No. 531–A, protests must be filed on or before the issued on October 16, 2014.1 comment date. Anyone filing a motion

1 Martha Coakley, Mass. Attorney Gen., et al. v. 1 Martha Coakley, Mass. Attorney Gen., et al. v. Bangor Hydro-Elec. Co., et al., Opinion No. 531, 147 Bangor Hydro-Elec. Co., et al., Opinion No. 531, 147 FERC ¶ 61,234 (2014) (Opinion No. 531), order on FERC ¶ 61,234 (2014) (Opinion No. 531), order on paper hearing, Opinion No. 531–A, 149 FERC ¶ paper hearing, Opinion No. 531–A, 149 FERC ¶ 61,032 (2014) (Opinion No. 531–A). 61,032 (2014) (Opinion No. 531–A).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 932 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

to intervene or protest must serve a copy DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. of that document on the Applicant and Persons unable to file electronically all the parties in this proceeding. Federal Energy Regulatory should submit an original and 5 copies Commission The Commission encourages of the protest or intervention to the electronic submission of protests and [Docket No. EL11–66–000] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC interventions in lieu of paper using the Martha Coakley, Massachusetts 20426. ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. Attorney General; Connecticut Public This filing is accessible online at Persons unable to file electronically Utilities Regulatory Authority; http://www.ferc.gov, using the should submit an original and 5 copies Massachusetts Department of Public ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for of the protest or intervention to the Utilities; New Hampshire Public electronic review in the Commission’s Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Utilities Commission; Connecticut Public Reference Room in Washington, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC Office of Consumer Counsel; Maine DC. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on 20426. Office of the Public Advocate; George the Web site that enables subscribers to This filing is accessible online at Jepsen, Connecticut Attorney General; receive email notification when a http://www.ferc.gov, using the New Hampshire Office of Consumer document is added to a subscribed ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for Advocate; Rhode Island Division of docket(s). For assistance with any FERC electronic review in the Commission’s Public Utilities and Carriers; Vermont Online service, please email Public Reference Room in Washington, Department of Public Service; [email protected], or call DC. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call the Web site that enables subscribers to Electric Company; Associated (202) 502–8659. Industries of Massachusetts; The Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern receive email notification when a Energy Consortium; Power Options, Time on January 21, 2016. document is added to a subscribed Inc.; and the Industrial Energy Dated: January 4, 2016. docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Consumer Group, v. Bangor Hydro- Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Online service, please email Electric Company; Central Maine [email protected], or call Power Company; New England Power Deputy Secretary. (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Company d/b/a National Grid; New [FR Doc. 2016–00123 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] (202) 502–8659. Hampshire Transmission LLC d/b/a BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern NextEra; NSTAR Electric and Gas Time on January 21, 2016. Corporation; Northeast Utilities Service Company; The United DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Dated: January 4, 2016. Illuminating Company; Unitil Energy Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Federal Energy Regulatory Systems, Inc. and Fitchburg Gas and Commission Deputy Secretary. Electric Light Company; Vermont [FR Doc. 2016–00124 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Transco, LLC; Notice of Filing Combined Notice of Filings BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Take notice that on December 31, Take notice that the Commission has 2015, The United Illuminating Company received the following Natural Gas submitted tariff filing per: Refund Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings: Report to be effective N/A, pursuant to the Commission’s Opinion No. 531–A, Filings Instituting Proceedings issued on October 16, 2014.1 Docket Numbers: RP16–326–000. Any person desiring to intervene or to Applicants: Tres Palacios Gas Storage protest this filing must file in LLC. accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of Description: Compliance filing per the Commission’s Rules of Practice and 154.203: Tres Palacios Gas Storage Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). LLC—Compliance with Order in Docket Protests will be considered by the No. RP15–1225 to be effective 1/29/ Commission in determining the 2016. appropriate action to be taken, but will Filed Date: 12/29/15. not serve to make protestants parties to Accession Number: 20151229–5101. the proceeding. Any person wishing to Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16. become a party must file a notice of Docket Numbers: RP16–327–000. intervention or motion to intervene, as Applicants: Transcontinental Gas appropriate. Such notices, motions, or Pipe Line Company, protests must be filed on or before the Description: Section 4(d) rate filing comment date. Anyone filing a motion per 154.204: Negotiated Rates— to intervene or protest must serve a copy Cherokee AGL—Replacement of that document on the Applicant and Shippers—Jan 2016 to be effective 1/1/ all the parties in this proceeding. 2016. The Commission encourages Filed Date: 12/29/15. electronic submission of protests and Accession Number: 20151229–5110. interventions in lieu of paper using the Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16. Docket Numbers: RP16–328–000. 1 Martha Coakley, Mass. Attorney Gen., et al. v. Applicants: Texas Eastern Bangor Hydro-Elec. Co., et al., Opinion No. 531, 147 FERC ¶ 61,234 (2014) (Opinion No. 531), order on Transmission, LP. paper hearing, Opinion No. 531–A, 149 FERC ¶ Description: Section 4(d) rate filing 61,032 (2014) (Opinion No. 531–A). per 154.204: Negotiated Rates—Chevron

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 933

TEAM 2014 Releases for 1–1–2016 to be Filed Date: 12/30/15. www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic effective 1/1/2016. Accession Number: 20151230–5307. service, persons with Internet access Filed Date: 12/29/15. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16. who will eFile a document and/or be Accession Number: 20151229–5204. The filings are accessible in the listed as a contact for an intervenor Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16. Commission’s eLibrary system by must create and validate an Docket Numbers: RP16–329–000. clicking on the links or querying the eRegistration account using the Applicants: Transwestern Pipeline docket number. eRegistration link. Select the eFiling Company, LLC. Any person desiring to intervene or link to log on and submit the Description: Section 4(d) rate filing protest in any of the above proceedings intervention or protests. per 154.204: Btu Provision to be must file in accordance with Rules 211 Persons unable to file electronically effective 2/1/2016. and 214 of the Commission’s should submit an original and 5 copies Filed Date: 12/30/15. Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and of the intervention or protest to the Accession Number: 20151230–5068. 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16. time on the specified comment date. 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC Docket Numbers: RP16–330–000. Protests may be considered, but 20426. Applicants: Transwestern Pipeline intervention is necessary to become a The filings in the above proceeding Company, LLC. party to the proceeding. are accessible in the Commission’s Description: Section 4(d) rate filing eFiling is encouraged. More detailed eLibrary system by clicking on the per 154.204: Flow Control Provision to information relating to filing appropriate link in the above list. They be effective 2/1/2016. requirements, interventions, protests, are also available for review in the Filed Date: 12/30/15. service, and qualifying facilities filings Commission’s Public Reference Room in Accession Number: 20151230–5077. can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ Washington, DC. There is an Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16. docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For eSubscription link on the Web site that Docket Numbers: RP16–331–000. other information, call (866) 208–3676 enables subscribers to receive email Applicants: Transwestern Pipeline (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. notification when a document is added Company, LLC. to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance Dated: December 31, 2015. Description: Compliance filing per with any FERC Online service, please 154.203: Baseline Filing Volume No. 1– Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., email [email protected] A to be effective 1/1/2016. Deputy Secretary call (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, Filed Date: 12/30/15. [FR Doc. 2016–00096 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] call (202) 502–8659. Accession Number: 20151230–5087. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16 on January 19, 2016. Docket Numbers: RP16–332–000. Dated: January 4, 2016. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Applicants: Transwestern Pipeline Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Company, LLC. Federal Energy Regulatory Deputy Secretary. Description: Section 4(d) rate filing Commission [FR Doc. 2016–00125 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] per 154.204: Update Non-Conforming BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Agreements List to be effective 1/1/ [Docket No. EL16–1–000] 2016. Heartland Consumers Power District; Filed Date: 12/30/15. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Accession Number: 20151230–5089. Notice of Filing Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16. Take notice that on December 29, Federal Energy Regulatory Docket Numbers: RP16–333–000. 2015, Heartland Consumers Power Commission Applicants: Iroquois Gas District submitted a response to the Transmission System, L.P. December 11, 2015 Deficiency Letter. Combined Notice of Filings #1 Description: Section 4(d) rate filing Any person desiring to intervene or to Take notice that the Commission per 154.204: 12/30/15 Negotiated protest in this proceeding must file in received the following electric rate Rates—MMGS Inc. (RTS) 7625–02 & –03 accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of filings: Amd 1 to be effective 12/1/2015. the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Docket Numbers: ER10–2400–006. Filed Date: 12/30/15. Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Applicants: Blue Canyon Windpower Accession Number: 20151230–5097. 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern LLC. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16. time on the specified comment date. Description: Updated Market Power Docket Numbers: RP16–334–000. Protests will be considered by the Analysis for the Southwest Power Pool Applicants: Texas Eastern Commission in determining the Region of Blue Canyon Windpower LLC. Transmission, LP. appropriate action to be taken, but will Filed Date: 12/31/15. Description: Section 4(d) rate filing not serve to make protestants parties to Accession Number: 20151231–5391. per 154.403: EPC FEB 2016 FILING to be the proceeding. Any person wishing to Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. effective 2/1/2016. become a party must file a notice of Docket Numbers: ER10–3232–004; Filed Date: 12/30/15. intervention or motion to intervene, as ER14–2871–007; ER16–182–002; ER10– Accession Number: 20151230–5135. appropriate. Such notices, motions, or 3244–009; ER10–3251–007; ER14–2382– Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16. protests must be filed on or before the 007; ER15–621–006; ER15–622–006; Docket Numbers: RP16–335–000. comment date. Anyone filing a motion ER15–463–006; ER16–72–002; ER15– Applicants: Colorado Interstate Gas to intervene or protest must serve a copy 110–006; ER13–1586–008; ER10–1992– Company, L.L.C. of that document on the Petitioner. 014. Description: Section 4(d) rate filing The Commission encourages Applicants: Wheelabrator Shasta per 154.601: Negotiated Rate TSA (High electronic submission of protests and Energy Company Inc., Cameron Ridge, Plains Gathering) to be effective 1/1/ interventions in lieu of paper, using the LLC, Cameron Ridge II, LLC, Coso 2016. FERC Online links at http:// Geothermal Power Holdings, LLC, Oak

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 934 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Creek Wind Power, LLC,ON Wind and 214 of the Commission’s Description: Compliance filing: Energy LLC, Pacific Crest Power, LLC, Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and Service Agreement No. 341—NITS with Ridgetop Energy, LLC, San Gorgonio 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern ED3 to be effective 5/31/2015. Westwinds II, LLC, San Gorgonio time on the specified comment date. Filed Date: 1/4/16. Westwinds II—Windustries,,Terra-Gen Protests may be considered, but Accession Number: 20160104–5339. Energy Services, LLC,TGP Energy intervention is necessary to become a Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16. Management, LLC, Victory Garden party to the proceeding. Phase IV, LLC. eFiling is encouraged. More detailed Docket Numbers: ER16–677–000. Description: Triennial Market Power information relating to filing Applicants: PJM Interconnection, Analysis of the ECP MBR Sellers. requirements, interventions, protests, L.L.C. Filed Date: 12/31/15. service, and qualifying facilities filings Description: Section 205(d) Rate Accession Number: 20151231–5387. can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ Filing: Original Service Agreement No. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For 4322; Queue Z1–036 (ISA) to be Docket Numbers: ER15–1332–003; other information, call (866) 208–3676 effective 12/3/2015. ER10–2401–004; ER10–2402–004; (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Filed Date: 1/4/16. ER11–2414–001; ER10–2403–004; Dated: January 4, 2016. Accession Number: 20160104–5077. ER13–1816–003; ER15–1333–002. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16. Applicants: Arbuckle Mountain Wind Deputy Secretary. Farm LLC, Blue Canyon Windpower II Docket Numbers: ER16–679–000. [FR Doc. 2016–00117 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] LLC, Blue Canyon Windpower V LLC, Applicants: Northern States Power BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Blue Canyon Windpower VI LLC, Cloud Company, a Wisconsin corporation. County Wind Farm, LLC, Sustaining Description: Section 205(d) Rate Power Solutions LLC, Waverly Wind DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Filing: 2016–1–4_DPC Switching Farm LLC. Agrmt–0.0.0–Filing to be effective 3/5/ Description: Updated Market Power Federal Energy Regulatory 2016. Analysis for the Southwest Power Pool Commission Filed Date: 1/4/16 Region of Arbuckle Mountain Wind Farm LLC, et al. Combined Notice of Filings #2 Accession Number: 20160104–5346. Filed Date: 12/31/15. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16. Take notice that the Commission Accession Number: 20151231–5400. Docket Numbers: ER16–680–000. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. received the following electric rate filings: Applicants: PJM Interconnection, Docket Numbers: ER16–674–000. Docket Numbers: ER10–1585–009; L.L.C. Applicants: PJM Interconnection, ER10–1594–009; ER10–1597–005; Description: Tariff Cancellation: L.L.C. ER10–1617–009; ER10–1624–005; Notice of Cancellation of WMPA SA No. Description: Section 205(d) Rate ER12–60–011; ER10–1632–011; ER10– 3356, Queue No. W4–033 to be effective Filing: Original Service Agreement No. 1628–009. 12/8/2015. 4320; Queue AA1–109 (ISA) to be Applicants: Alabama Electric Filed Date: 1/4/16. effective 12/3/2015. Marketing, LLC, California Electric Filed Date: 12/31/15. Accession Number: 20160104–5386. Marketing, LLC, Kiowa Power Partners, Accession Number: 20151231–5169. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/16. L.L.C., New Mexico Electric Marketing, LLC, Tenaska Power Management, LLC, The filings are accessible in the Docket Numbers: ER16–675–000. Tenaska Power Services Co., Texas Commission’s eLibrary system by Applicants: Midcontinent Electric Marketing, LLC, Tenaska clicking on the links or querying the Independent System Operator, Inc. Gateway Partners, Ltd. docket number. Description: Section 205(d) Rate _ Description: Updated Market Power Any person desiring to intervene or Filing: 2015–12–31 Queue Reform Analysis in the Southwest Power Pool protest in any of the above proceedings Attachment X Filing to be effective 3/ region of the Tenaska MBR Sellers. must file in accordance with Rules 211 30/2016. Filed Date: 12/31/15 and 214 of the Commission’s Filed Date: 12/31/15. Accession Number: 20151231–5404. Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and Accession Number: 20151231–5238. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/29/16. Docket Numbers: ER10–2507–007. time on the specified comment date. Docket Numbers: ER16–676–000. Applicants: Westar Energy, Inc. Protests may be considered, but Applicants: PJM Interconnection, Description: Notice of Non-Material intervention is necessary to become a L.L.C. Change in Status of Westar Energy, Inc. party to the proceeding. Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filed Date: 1/4/16. eFiling is encouraged. More detailed Filing: Revisions to Schedule 12-Appdx Accession Number: 20160104–5264. information relating to filing & Appdx A re: 2016 RTEP Annual Cost Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16. requirements, interventions, protests, Allocations to be effective 1/1/2016. Docket Numbers: ER13–415–003. service, and qualifying facilities filings Filed Date: 12/31/15. Applicants: Anahau Energy, LLC. can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ Accession Number: 20151231–5261. Description: Triennial market power docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/16. update of Anahau Energy, LLC for SPP other information, call (866) 208–3676 The filings are accessible in the region. (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Commission’s eLibrary system by Filed Date: 12/31/15. clicking on the links or querying the Accession Number: 20151231–5406. Dated: January 4, 2016. docket number. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Any person desiring to intervene or Docket Numbers: ER15–710–004. Deputy Secretary. protest in any of the above proceedings Applicants: Arizona Public Service [FR Doc. 2016–00118 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] must file in accordance with Rules 211 Company. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 935

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Any person wishing to comment on will not give you intervenor status, but the EA may do so. Your comments you do not need intervenor status to Federal Energy Regulatory should focus on the potential have your comments considered. Commission environmental effects, reasonable Additional information about the alternatives, and measures to avoid or project is available from the [Docket No. CP15–503–000] lessen environmental impacts. The more Commission’s Office of External Affairs, specific your comments, the more useful at (866) 208–FERC, or on the FERC Web Comanche Trail Pipeline, LLC; Notice they will be. To ensure that the site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary of Availability of the Environmental Commission has the opportunity to link. Click on the eLibrary link, click on Assessment for the Proposed San consider your comments prior to ‘‘General Search,’’ and enter the docket Elizario Crossing Project making its decision on this project, it is number excluding the last three digits in The staff of the Federal Energy important that we receive your the Docket Number field (i.e., CP15– Regulatory Commission (FERC or comments in Washington, DC on or 503). Be sure you have selected an Commission) has prepared an before February 4, 2016. appropriate date range. For assistance, environmental assessment (EA) for the For your convenience, there are three please contact FERC Online Support at San Elizario Crossing Project (Project), methods you can use to file your [email protected] or toll free proposed by Comanche Trail Pipeline, comments to the Commission. In all at (866) 208–3676, or for TTY, contact LLC (Comanche Trail) in the above- instances, please reference the project (202) 502–8659. The eLibrary link also referenced docket. Comanche Trail docket number (CP15–503–000 with provides access to the texts of formal requests authorization to construct new your submission. The Commission documents issued by the Commission, border crossing pipeline facilities to encourages electronic filing of such as orders, notices, and export up to 1.1 billion cubic feet per comments and has expert staff available rulemakings. day of natural gas at the International to assist you at (202) 502–8258 or In addition, the Commission offers a Boundary between the United States [email protected]. free service called eSubscription which (1) You can file your comments and Mexico. The pipeline would be allows you to keep track of all formal electronically using the eComment installed via horizontal directional drill issuances and submittals in specific feature on the Commission’s Web site beneath the Rio Grande River. dockets. This can reduce the amount of (www.ferc.gov) under the link to The EA assesses the potential time you spend researching proceedings Documents and Filings. This is an easy environmental effects of the by automatically providing you with method for submitting brief, text-only construction and operation of the notification of these filings, document comments on a project; summaries, and direct links to the Project in accordance with the (2) You can also file your comments requirements of the National documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs- electronically using the eFiling feature filing/esubscription.asp. Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The on the Commission’s Web site FERC staff concludes that approval of (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Dated: January 4, 2016. the proposed project, with appropriate Documents and Filings. With eFiling, Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., mitigating measures, would not you can provide comments in a variety Deputy Secretary. constitute a major federal action of formats by attaching them as a file [FR Doc. 2016–00120 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] significantly affecting the quality of the with your submission. New eFiling BILLING CODE 6717–01–P human environment. users must first create an account by The proposed Project includes the clicking on ‘‘eRegister.’’ You must select installation of approximately 1,086 feet the type of filing you are making. If you of 42-inch-diameter pipeline. The new ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION are filing a comment on a particular AGENCY pipeline would transport gas to a new project, please select ‘‘Comment on a delivery interconnect with pipeline Filing’’; or [FRL–9941–12–Region 5] facilities owned by an affiliate of (3) You can file a paper copy of your Notification of a Public Meeting of the Comanche Trail at the United States- comments by mailing them to the Great Lakes Advisory Board Mexico border for expanding electric following address: Kimberly D. Bose, generation and industrial market needs Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory AGENCY: Environmental Protection in Mexico. Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room Agency (EPA). The FERC staff mailed copies of the 1A, Washington, DC 20426. ACTION: Notice. EA to federal, state, and local Any person seeking to become a party government representatives and to the proceeding must file a motion to SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection agencies; elected officials; intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Agency (EPA) announces a public environmental and public interest Commission’s Rules of Practice and meeting of the Great Lakes Advisory groups; Native American tribes; Procedures (18 CFR 385.214).1 Only Board (Board). The purpose of this potentially affected landowners and intervenors have the right to seek meeting is to discuss the Great Lakes other interested individuals and groups; rehearing of the Commission’s decision. Restoration Initiative (GLRI) covering newspapers and libraries in the project The Commission grants affected FY15–19 and other relevant matters. area; and parties to this proceeding. In landowners and others with addition, the EA is available for public DATES: The meeting will be held on environmental concerns intervenor Wednesday, January 27, 2016 from 10 viewing on the FERC’s Web site status upon showing good cause by (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. a.m. to 3 p.m. Central Time, 11 a.m. to stating that they have a clear and direct 4 p.m. Eastern Time. An opportunity A limited number of copies of the EA interest in this proceeding which no are available for distribution and public will be provided to the public to other party can adequately represent. comment. inspection at: Federal Energy Regulatory Simply filing environmental comments Commission Public Reference Room, ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, 1 See the previous discussion on the methods for 77 W. Jackson, 19th Floor, Chicago, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–8371. filing comments. Illinois. For those unable to attend in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 936 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

person, this meeting will also be copy via email. Commenters are Dated: January 5, 2016. available telephonically. The requested to provide two versions of Dawn Roberts, teleconference number is 877–226–9607 each document submitted: One each Management Analyst, NEPA Compliance and the conference ID number is with and without signatures because Division, Office of Federal Activities. 4218582837. only documents without signatures may [FR Doc. 2016–00165 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any be published on the GLRI Web page. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P member of the public wishing further Accessibility: For information on information regarding this meeting may access or services for individuals with contact Rita Cestaric, Designated disabilities, please contact the DFO at Federal Officer (DFO), by email at the phone number or email address FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM [email protected]. General noted above, preferably at least seven Formations of, Acquisitions by, and information on the GLRI and the Board days prior to the meeting, to give EPA Mergers of Bank Holding Companies can be found at http://glri.us/ as much time as possible to process public.html. your request. The companies listed in this notice SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dated: December 15, 2015. have applied to the Board for approval, Background: The Board is a federal Cameron Davis, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company advisory committee chartered under the Senior Advisor to the Administrator. Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) Federal Advisory Committee Act [FR Doc. 2016–00186 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part (FACA), Public Law 92–463. EPA BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 225), and all other applicable statutes established the Board in 2013 to provide and regulations to become a bank independent advice to the EPA holding company and/or to acquire the Administrator in her capacity as Chair ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION assets or the ownership of, control of, or of the federal Great Lakes Interagency AGENCY the power to vote shares of a bank or Task Force (IATF). The Board conducts bank holding company and all of the business in accordance with FACA and [ER–FRL–9024–8] banks and nonbanking companies related regulations. owned by the bank holding company, The Board consists of 16 members Environmental Impact Statements; including the companies listed below. appointed by EPA’s Administrator in Notice of Availability The applications listed below, as well her capacity as IATF Chair. Members as other related filings required by the serve as representatives of state, local Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Board, are available for immediate and tribal government, environmental Activities, General Information (202) inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank groups, agriculture, business, 564–7146 or http://www2.epa.gov/nepa. indicated. The applications will also be transportation, educational institutions, Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact available for inspection at the offices of and as technical experts. Statements (EISs) the Board of Governors. Interested Availability of Meeting Materials: The Filed 12/28/2015 Through 12/31/2015 persons may express their views in agenda and other materials in support of writing on the standards enumerated in the meeting will be available at http:// Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the glri.us/advisory/index.html. Notice proposal also involves the acquisition of Procedures for Providing Public Input: a nonbanking company, the review also Federal advisory committees provide Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act includes whether the acquisition of the independent advice to federal agencies. requires that EPA make public its nonbanking company complies with the Members of the public can submit comments on EISs issued by other standards in section 4 of the BHC Act relevant comments for consideration by Federal agencies. EPA’s comment letters (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise the Board. Input from the public to the on EISs are available at: https:// noted, nonbanking activities will be Board will have the most impact if it cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-nepa-public/ conducted throughout the United States. provides specific information for the action/eis/search. Unless otherwise noted, comments Board to consider. Members of the EIS No. 20150367, Final, NPS, NY, Fire regarding each of these applications public wishing to provide comments Island National Seashore Final White- must be received at the Reserve Bank should contact the DFO directly. tailed Deer Management Plan, Review Oral Statements: In general, indicated or the offices of the Board of Period Ends: 02/08/2016, Contact: individuals or groups requesting an oral Governors not later than February 4, Morgan Elmer 303–969–2317. presentation at this public meeting will 2016. be limited to three minutes per speaker, EIS No. 20150368, Draft, TVA, TN, A. Federal Reserve Bank of subject to the number of people wanting PROGRAMMATIC—Ash Minneapolis (Jacquelyn K. Brunmeier, to comment. Interested parties should Impoundment Closure, Comment Assistant Vice President) 90 Hennepin contact the DFO in writing (preferably Period Ends: 02/24/2016, Contact: Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota via email) at the contact information Ashley Farless 423–751–2361. 55480–0291: 1. Frandsen Financial Corporation, noted above by January 25, 2016 to be Amended Notices placed on the list of public speakers for Arden Hills, Minnesota; to acquire 100 the meeting. EIS No. 20150304, Draft, VA, SD, NHPA percent of the voting shares of Written Statements: Written Section 106 Consultation: Provincial Corp., and thereby indirectly statements must be received by January Reconfiguration of VA Black Hills acquire Provincial Bank, both in 25, 2016 so that the information may be Health Care System, Comment Period Lakeville, Minnesota. made available to the Board for Ends: 02/05/2016, Contact: Luke 2. Great Western Bancorp, Inc., Sioux consideration. Written statements Epperson 605–720–7170. Revision to Falls, South Dakota; to merge with HF should be supplied to the DFO in the FR Notice Published 11/06/2015; Financial Corp., and thereby indirectly following formats: One hard copy with Correction to Comment Period Ends acquire Home Federal Bank, both in original signature and one electronic should be 02/05/2016. Sioux Falls, South Dakota.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 937

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND the docket unchanged. Because your System, January 5, 2016. HUMAN SERVICES comment will be made public, you are Michael J. Lewandowski, solely responsible for ensuring that your Associate Secretary of the Board. Food and Drug Administration comment does not include any [FR Doc. 2016–00153 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] [Docket No. FDA–2015–D–5073] confidential information that you or a BILLING CODE 6210–01–P third party may not wish to be posted, Use of Nucleic Acid Tests To Reduce such as medical information, your or the Risk of Transmission of Hepatitis anyone else’s Social Security number, or DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND B Virus From Donors of Human Cells, confidential business information, such HUMAN SERVICES Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue- as a manufacturing process. Please note Based Products; Draft Guidance for that if you include your name, contact Centers for Disease Control and Industry; Availability information, or other information that Prevention identifies you in the body of your AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, comments, that information will be Disease, Disability, and Injury HHS. posted on http://www.regulations.gov. • Prevention and Control Special ACTION: Notice of availability. If you want to submit a comment Emphasis Panel (SEP): Initial Review with confidential information that you SUMMARY: The Food and Drug do not wish to be made available to the In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of Administration (FDA or Agency) is public, submit the comment as a the Federal Advisory Committee Act announcing the availability of a draft written/paper submission and in the (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease document entitled ‘‘Use of Nucleic Acid manner detailed (see ‘‘Written/Paper Control and Prevention (CDC) Tests to Reduce the Risk of Submissions’’ and ‘‘Instructions’’). announces the aforementioned meeting Transmission of Hepatitis B Virus from for the initial review of applications in Written/Paper Submissions Donors of Human Cells, Tissues, and response to Funding Opportunity Cellular and Tissue-Based Products; Submit written/paper submissions as Announcement (FOA) PAR15–352, Draft Guidance for Industry.’’ The draft follows: Occupational Safety and Health • guidance document provides Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for Training Project Grants. written/paper submissions): Division of Time and Date: 8:00 a.m.–7:00 p.m., establishments that make donor eligibility determinations for donors of Dockets Management (HFA–305), Food January 26–28, 2016 (Closed). and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Place: Internet Assisted Meeting human cells, tissues, and tissue-based products (HCT/Ps), with Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. (IAM)/Virtual Meeting. • For written/paper comments Status: The meeting will be closed to recommendations concerning the use of submitted to the Division of Dockets the public in accordance with FDA-licensed nucleic acid tests (NAT) Management, FDA will post your provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(4) in donor testing for hepatitis B virus comment, as well as any attachments, and (6), title 5 U.S.C., and the (HBV) deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). except for information submitted, Determination of the Director, The draft guidance, when finalized, is marked and identified, as confidential, Management Analysis and Services intended to supplement previous FDA if submitted as detailed in Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92– recommendations to HCT/P establishments concerning donor testing ‘‘Instructions.’’ 463. Instructions: All submissions received Matters for Discussion: The meeting for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) must include the Docket No. FDA– will include the initial review, and total antibody to hepatitis B core 2015–D–5073 for ‘‘Use of Nucleic Acid discussion, and evaluation of antigen (anti-HBc), in the document Tests to Reduce the Risk of applications received in response to entitled ‘‘Guidance for Industry: Transmission of Hepatitis B Virus from Occupational Safety and Health Eligibility Determination for Donors of Donors of Human Cells, Tissues, and Training Project Grants, FOA PAR15– Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Cellular and Tissue Based Products; 352, initial review. Tissue-Based Products (HCT/Ps)’’ dated Draft Guidance for Industry.’’ Received Contact Person For More Information: August 2007 (2007 Donor Eligibility comments will be placed in the docket Donald Blackman, Ph.D., Scientific Guidance). and, except for those submitted as Review Officer, CDC, 2400 Century DATES: Although you can comment on ‘‘Confidential Submissions,’’ publicly Center Parkway NE., 4th Floor, Room any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR viewable at http://www.regulations.gov 4204, Mailstop E–74, Atlanta, Georgia 10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency or at the Division of Dockets 30345, Telephone: (404) 498–6185, considers your comment on this draft Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., [email protected]. guidance before it begins work on the The Director, Management Analysis Monday through Friday. final version of the guidance, submit • Confidential Submissions—To and Services Office, has been delegated either electronic or written comments submit a comment with confidential the authority to sign Federal Register on the draft guidance by April 7, 2016. information that you do not wish to be notices pertaining to announcements of made publicly available, submit your meetings and other committee ADDRESSES: You may submit comments comments only as a written/paper management activities, for both the as follows: submission. You should submit two Centers for Disease Control and Electronic Submissions copies total. One copy will include the Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Submit electronic comments in the information you claim to be confidential Substances and Disease Registry. following way: with a heading or cover note that states Catherine Ramadei, • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// ‘‘THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS Acting Director, Management Analysis and www.regulations.gov. Follow the CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.’’ The Services Office, Centers for Disease Control instructions for submitting comments. Agency will review this copy, including and Prevention. Comments submitted electronically, the claimed confidential information, in [FR Doc. 2016–00113 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] including attachments, to http:// its consideration of comments. The BILLING CODE 4163–18–P www.regulations.gov will be posted to second copy, which will have the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 938 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

claimed confidential information eligibility determinations for donors of HCT/P establishments concerning donor redacted/blacked out, will be available HCT/Ps, with recommendations testing for HBsAg and total anti-HBc, in for public viewing and posted on http:// concerning the use of FDA-licensed the 2007 Donor Eligibility Guidance. www.regulations.gov. Submit both NAT in donor testing for HBV DNA. This draft guidance is being issued copies to the Division of Dockets FDA considers the use of FDA-licensed consistent with FDA’s good guidance Management. If you do not wish your HBV NAT in testing HCT/Ps donors to practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). name and contact information to be be necessary to adequately and The draft guidance, when finalized, will made publicly available, you can appropriately reduce the risk of represent the current thinking of FDA provide this information on the cover transmission of HBV. The FDA-licensed on the ‘‘Use of Nucleic Acid Tests to sheet and not in the body of your HBV NAT can detect evidence of the Reduce the Risk of Transmission of comments and you must identify this viral infection at an earlier stage than Hepatitis B Virus from Donors of information as ‘‘confidential.’’ Any the HBsAg and total anti-HBc tests. Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and information marked as ‘‘confidential’’ Therefore, FDA recommends the use of Tissue-Based Products.’’ It does not will not be disclosed except in FDA-licensed HBV NAT for testing establish any rights for any person and accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other donors of HCT/Ps for evidence of is not binding on FDA or the public. applicable disclosure law. For more infection with HBV. You can use an alternative approach if information about FDA’s posting of HBV is a major global public health it satisfies the requirements of the comments to public dockets, see 80 FR concern and has been transmitted by applicable statutes and regulations. blood transfusions and tissue 56469, September 18, 2015, or access II. Electronic Access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/ transplantation. Available literature has regulatoryinformation/dockets/ indicated possible transmissions of HBV Persons with access to the Internet default.htm. by hematopoietic stem cells and blood may obtain the draft guidance at either Docket: For access to the docket to with HBV NAT positive/hepatitis B http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBlood read background documents or the surface antigen (anti-HBs) positive/ Vaccines/GuidanceCompliance electronic and written/paper comments HBsAg negative blood, irrespective of RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ received, go to http:// anti-HBc test results. In blood donors, default.htm or http:// www.regulations.gov and insert the adding the HBV NAT testing for HBV www.regulations.gov. docket number, found in brackets in the reduces the residual risk of transmission Dated: January 5, 2016. of HBV infection beyond that which can heading of this document, into the Leslie Kux, ‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts be achieved by screening donors using only HBsAg and total anti-HBc tests. In Associate Commissioner for Policy. and/or go to the Division of Dockets [FR Doc. 2016–00149 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. addition, it can detect breakthrough BILLING CODE 4164–01–P 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. infections in previously vaccinated Submit written requests for single individuals who are exposed to the copies of the draft guidance to the Office virus, and HBV mutants appear to be more likely detected by HBV NAT than DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND of Communication, Outreach and HUMAN SERVICES Development, Center for Biologics by HBsAg assays. In the United States, there are Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food Food and Drug Administration currently FDA-licensed HBV NAT and Drug Administration, 10903 New assays with an indication for screening [Docket No. FDA–2015–N–0001] Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, donor blood samples for Whole Blood Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002. Send and Blood components, other living Gastroenterology and Urology Devices one self-addressed adhesive label to donors (individual organ donors when Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory assist the office in processing your specimens are obtained while the Committee; Notice of Meeting requests. The draft guidance may also be donor’s heart is still beating), and blood obtained by mail by calling CBER at 1– AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, specimens from cadaveric (non-heart- HHS. 800–835–4709 or 240–402–8010. See beating) donors. Some of these are ACTION: Notice. the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section multiplex assays that can for electronic access to the draft simultaneously detect HIV, HCV, and guidance document. This notice announces a forthcoming HBV in a single blood specimen, thus meeting of a public advisory committee FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: improving the feasibility of routine NAT of the Food and Drug Administration Jessica T. Walker, Center for Biologics testing for HBV. By analogy to the (FDA). The meeting will be open to the Evaluation and Research, Food and experience in the blood donor setting, it public. Drug Administration, 10903 New is reasonable to expect that the residual Name of Committee: Gastroenterology Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, risk of transmission of HBV infection and Urology Devices Panel of the Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002, 240– would be reduced by adding HBV NAT Medical Devices Advisory Committee. 402–7911. to the testing strategy for HCT/P donors. General Function of the Committee: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: HBV NAT’s potential utility in further To provide advice and reducing risk of HBV transmission by recommendations to the Agency on I. Background transplantation is mainly restricted to FDA’s regulatory issues. FDA is announcing the availability of the early HBsAg-negative phase of Date and Time: The meeting will be a draft document entitled ‘‘Use of infection. In summary, the available held on February 25, 2016, from 8 a.m. Nucleic Acid Tests to Reduce the Risk scientific data and the availability of to 6 p.m. and February 26, 2016, from of Transmission of Hepatitis B Virus FDA-licensed assays support a 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. from Donors of Human Cells, Tissues, recommendation that all HCT/Ps donors Location: Hilton Washington DC and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products; should be tested using an FDA-licensed North/Gaithersburg, Salons A, B, and C, Draft Guidance for Industry.’’ The draft HBV NAT. The draft guidance, when 620 Perry Pkwy., Gaithersburg, MD guidance document provides finalized, is intended to supplement 20877. The hotel’s telephone number is establishments that make donor previous FDA recommendations to 301–977–8900.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 939

Contact Person: Patricio G. Garcia, urinary incontinence, female, single- Æ IFU/IU: Intended to provide Center for Devices and Radiological incision mini-sling;’’ temporary relief of the symptoms of Health, Food and Drug Administration, • OTO and the associated device hemorrhoids through the application of 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, classification name, ‘‘mesh, surgical, mild heating. Rm. 1611, Silver Spring, MD 20993– synthetic, urogynecologic, for apical • Uses speculum-like plastic 0002, [email protected], 301– vaginal and uterine prolapse, container containing liquid to cool 796–6875, or FDA Advisory Committee transabdominally placed;’’ hemorrhoidal veins. Æ Information Line, 1–800–741–8138 • PAJ and the associated device IFU/IU: Treatment of external (301–443–0572 in the Washington, DC classification name, ‘‘mesh, surgical, hemorrhoids by applying cold therapy area). A notice in the Federal Register non-synthetic, urogynecologic, for (cryotherapy) directly to swollen about last minute modifications that apical vaginal and uterine prolapse, hemorrhoidal veins. impact a previously announced transabdominally placed;’’ The committee, during session III, • advisory committee meeting cannot OTP and the associated device will discuss and make always be published quickly enough to classification name, ‘‘mesh, surgical, recommendations regarding the provide timely notice. Therefore, you synthetic, urogynecologic, for pelvic classification of the product code ‘‘LRL’’ should always check the Agency’s Web organ prolapse, transvaginally placed’’ and the associated device classification site at http://www.fda.gov/ and name, ‘‘Cushion, Hemorrhoid.’’ The • AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and PAI and the associated device product code LRL represents a category scroll down to the appropriate advisory classification name, ‘‘mesh, surgical, of devices intended to temporarily committee meeting link, or call the non-synthetic, urogynecologic, for relieve pain and pressure caused by advisory committee information line to pelvic organ prolapse, transvaginally hemorrhoids. These devices are learn about possible modifications placed.’’ considered preamendments devices before coming to the meeting. Some examples of the means by since they were in commercial Agenda: On February 25, 2016, the which these devices perform these distribution prior to May 28, 1976, committee will discuss, make functions and their respective IFU/ when the Medical Devices Amendments recommendations, and vote on Intended Use (IU) statements are: became effective. Some examples of the • Urogynecologic surgical mesh information regarding the premarket means by which these devices perform instrumentation is used: these functions and their respective approval application (PMA) for ‘‘TOPAS Æ IFU/IU: To aid in insertion, Treatment for Fecal Incontinence,’’ by IFU/IU statements are: placement, fixation, or anchoring of • Uses an injection molded ASTORA Women’s Health, LLC. The surgical mesh for procedures including polypropylene copolymer plastic seat ‘‘TOPAS Treatment for Fecal transvaginal pelvic organ prolapse attached to a toilet seat (the product is Incontinence’’ device is a sling device repair, sacrocolpopexy (transabdominal adjustable and is available in round and (mesh) to be implanted around the pelvic organ prolapse repair), treatment elongated versions). puborectalis muscle (a muscle that of female stress urinary incontinence. Æ IFU/IU: For the temporary relief contributes towards the maintenance of Examples of such surgical from the pain and pressure of fecal continence). The proposed instrumentation include needle passers hemorrhoids. The device is for external Indication for Use (IFU) for the ‘‘TOPAS and trocars, needle guides, fixation use only. Treatment for Fecal Incontinence’’ tools, and tissue anchors. • Uses a cushion with an inflatable device, as stated in the PMA, is as The committee, during session II, will vinyl exterior and a foam center. An air follows: discuss and make recommendations chamber, when filled, prevents the The ‘‘TOPAS Treatment for Fecal regarding the classification of the cushion from compressing the foam. A Incontinence’’ is intended to treat product code ‘‘LKX’’ and the associated urethane foam center adds comfort. women with fecal incontinence (also device classification name, ‘‘Device, Æ IFU/IU: Intended for the home referred to as accidental bowel leakage) Thermal, Hemorrhoids.’’ The product convalescent patient with perineal who have failed more conservative code LKX represents a category of discomfort. therapies. devices intended to apply controlled • Uses a cushion that contains two On February 26, 2016, during session cooling and conductive heating to internal molded structures that conform I, the committee will discuss and make hemorrhoids. These devices are to the patient’s shape. Exerts ‘‘slight’’ recommendations regarding the considered preamendments devices pressure on hemorrhoid. IFU/IU not reclassification of urogynecologic since they were in commercial required at the time of clearance. surgical mesh instrumentation from distribution prior to May 28, 1976, The committee, during session IV, class I to class II. The applicable when the Medical Devices Amendments will discuss and make product codes are those related to became effective. Some examples of the recommendations regarding the urogynecologic surgical mesh as means by which these devices perform classification of the product code follows: these functions and their respective ‘‘LKN’’ and the associated device • OTN and the associated device IFU/IU statements are: classification name, ‘‘Separator, classification name, ‘‘mesh, surgical, • Uses an aluminum probe that automated, blood cell and plasma, synthetic, urogynecologic, for stress contains a temperature sensitive therapeutic.’’ The product code LKN urinary incontinence, female, multi- element to regulate temperature within represents a category of centrifuge-type incision;’’ 2 degrees (between 37 and 46 degrees devices intended to separate blood • PAG and the associated device centigrade). components and perform therapeutic classification name, ‘‘mesh, surgical, Æ IFU/IU: The apparatus is intended plasma exchange for the management of non-synthetic, urogynecologic, for stress to apply controlled, conductive heating serious medical conditions in adults urinary incontinence, female, multi- to hemorrhoids. and children. These devices are incision;’’ • Uses a heat applicator inserted into considered preamendments devices • PAH and the associated device the rectum, applicator contains a battery since they were in commercial classification name, ‘‘mesh, surgical, operated heater, and a sensor which distribution prior to May 28, 1976, synthetic, urogynecologic, for stress provides temperature control/feedback. when the Medical Devices Amendments

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 940 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

became effective. Some examples of the public hearing session. The contact extension to allow interested persons means by which these devices perform person will notify interested persons additional time to submit comments. these functions and their respective regarding their request to speak by DATES: FDA is extending the comment IFU/IU statements are: February 10, 2016. period for the draft guidance by an • Utilizes a continuous flow Persons attending FDA’s advisory additional 30 days. Although you can centrifuge (max speed 3000 revolutions committee meetings are advised that the comment on any guidance at any time per minute) to separate source blood Agency is not responsible for providing (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)), to permit the from a subject into blood components. access to electrical outlets. Æ Agency to consider your comments IFU/IU: May be used to perform FDA welcomes the attendance of the before issuing the final version of the therapeutic plasma exchange. public at its advisory committee guidance, submit either electronic or Æ IFU/IU: May be used to perform meetings and will make every effort to written comments on the draft guidance Red Blood Cell Exchange procedures for accommodate persons with disabilities. by February 22, 2016. the transfusion management of Sickle If you require accommodations due to a Cell Disease in adults and children. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments • disability, please contact AnnMarie as follows: Uses continuous flow access to a Williams at rotating centrifuge to separate blood [email protected], 301– Electronic Submissions components. 796–5966, at least 7 days in advance of Æ IFU/IU: May be used to harvest Submit electronic comments in the the meeting. cellular components from the blood of following way: FDA is committed to the orderly certain patients where the attending • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// conduct of its advisory committee physician feels the removal of such www.regulations.gov. Follow the component may benefit the patient. meetings. Please visit our Web site at instructions for submitting comments. Æ IFU/IU: May be used to remove http://www.fda.gov/Advisory Comments submitted electronically, plasma components and/or fluid Committees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ including attachments, to http:// selected by the attending physicians. ucm111462.htm for procedures on www.regulations.gov will be posted to FDA intends to make background public conduct during advisory the docket unchanged. Because your material available to the public no later committee meetings. comment will be made public, you are than 2 business days before the meeting. Notice of this meeting is given under solely responsible for ensuring that your If FDA is unable to post the background the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 comment does not include any material on its Web site prior to the U.S.C. app. 2). confidential information that you or a meeting, the background material will Dated: January 4, 2016. third party may not wish to be posted, be made publicly available at the Jill Hartzler Warner, such as medical information, your or location of the advisory committee Associate Commissioner for Special Medical anyone else’s Social Security number, or meeting, and the background material Programs. confidential business information, such will be posted on FDA’s Web site after [FR Doc. 2016–00111 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] as a manufacturing process. Please note the meeting. Background material is BILLING CODE 4164–01–P that if you include your name, contact available at http://www.fda.gov/ information, or other information that AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/ identifies you in the body of your default.htm and then by scrolling down DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND comments, that information will be to the appropriate advisory committee HUMAN SERVICES posted on http://www.regulations.gov. meeting link. • If you want to submit a comment Procedure: Interested persons may Food and Drug Administration with confidential information that you present data, information, or views, do not wish to be made available to the orally or in writing, on issues pending [Docket No. FDA–2015–D–4021] public, submit the comment as a before the committee. Written Over-the-Counter Sunscreens: Safety written/paper submission and in the submissions may be made to the contact and Effectiveness Data; Draft manner detailed (see ‘‘Written/Paper person on or before February 17, 2016. Guidance for Industry; Extension of Submissions’’ and ‘‘Instructions’’). Oral presentations from the public will Comment Period be scheduled on February 25, 2016, Written/Paper Submissions between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Submit written/paper submissions as p.m. and on February 26, 2016, between HHS. follows: • approximately 8:30 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. ACTION: Notice; extension of the Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for Those individuals interested in making comment period. written/paper submissions): Division of formal oral presentations should notify Dockets Management (HFA–305), Food the contact person and submit a brief SUMMARY: The Food and Drug and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers statement of the general nature of the Administration (FDA or Agency) is Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. evidence or arguments they wish to extending the comment period provided • For written/paper comments present, the names and addresses of in the notice entitled ‘‘Over-the-Counter submitted to the Division of Dockets proposed participants, and an Sunscreens: Safety and Effectiveness Management, FDA will post your indication of the approximate time Data; Draft Guidance for Industry; comment, as well as any attachments, requested to make their presentation on Availability’’ that appeared in the except for information submitted, or before February 9, 2016. Time Federal Register on November 23, 2015 marked and identified, as confidential, allotted for each presentation may be (80 FR 72975). That notice announced if submitted as detailed in limited. If the number of registrants the availability of a draft guidance for ‘‘Instructions.’’ requesting to speak is greater than can industry and requested comments to Instructions: All submissions received be reasonably accommodated during the that draft guidance by January 22, 2016. must include the Docket No. FDA– scheduled open public hearing session, FDA is extending the draft guidance’s 2015–D–4021 for ‘‘Over-the-Counter FDA may conduct a lottery to determine comment period by 30 days (to February Sunscreens: Safety and Effectiveness the speakers for the scheduled open 22, 2016) in response to a request for an Data; Draft Guidance for Industry.’’

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 941

Received comments will be placed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Individuals who plan to attend and the docket and, except for those Kristen Hardin, Center for Drug need special assistance, such as sign submitted as ‘‘Confidential Evaluation and Research, Food and language interpretation or other Submissions,’’ publicly viewable at Drug Administration, 10903 New reasonable accommodations, should http://www.regulations.gov or at the Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 5443, notify the Contact Person listed below Division of Dockets Management Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002, 240– in advance of the meeting. between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday 402–4246. The meeting will be closed to the through Friday. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: public in accordance with the • Confidential Submissions—To provisions set forth in sections I. Background submit a comment with confidential 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., information that you do not wish to be In the Federal Register of November as amended. The grant applications made publicly available, submit your 23, 2015 (80 FR 72975), FDA published and/or contract proposals and the comments only as a written/paper a notice of availability with a 60-day discussions could disclose confidential submission. You should submit two comment period for the draft guidance trade secrets or commercial property copies total. One copy will include the for industry entitled ‘‘Over-the-Counter such as patentable material, and information you claim to be confidential Sunscreens: Safety and Effectiveness personal information concerning with a heading or cover note that states Data.’’ Publication of that draft guidance individuals associated with the grant ‘‘THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS was mandated by the Sunscreen applications and/or contract proposals, CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.’’ The Innovation Act (SIA), which also the disclosure of which would Agency will review this copy, including requires FDA to publish the final constitute a clearly unwarranted the claimed confidential information, in guidance no later than November 26, invasion of personal privacy. its consideration of comments. The 2016. Name of Committee: National Advisory second copy, which will have the The Agency has received a request for Mental Health Council. claimed confidential information a 30-day extension of the comment Date: February 4, 2016. redacted/blacked out, will be available period to provide more time for Closed: 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. for public viewing and posted on http:// regulated industry to prepare a detailed Agenda: To review and evaluate the NIMH www.regulations.gov. Submit both and meaningful response to the draft Division of Intramural Research Programs. guidance. FDA has considered the Place: National Institutes of Health, copies to the Division of Dockets Neuroscience Center, Conference Rooms C/ Management. If you do not wish your request and is extending the comment D/E, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, name and contact information to be period for 30 days, until February 22, MD 20852. made publicly available, you can 2016. The Agency believes that a 30-day Open: 9:15 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. provide this information on the cover extension will allow adequate time for Agenda: Presentation of the NIMH sheet and not in the body of your interested persons to submit comments Director’s Report and discussion of NIMH comments and you must identify this without compromising timely program and policy issues. information as ‘‘confidential.’’ Any publication of the final guidance as Place: National Institutes of Health, mandated by the SIA. Neuroscience Center, Conference Rooms C/ information marked as ‘‘confidential’’ D/E, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, will not be disclosed except in II. Electronic Access MD 20852. accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other Persons with access to the Internet Closed: 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. applicable disclosure law. For more Agenda: To review and evaluate grant information about FDA’s posting of may obtain the draft guidance at either http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/ applications. comments to public dockets, see 80 FR Place: National Institutes of Health, 56469, September 18, 2015, or access GuidanceCompliance Neuroscience Center, Conference Rooms C/ the information at: http://www.fda.gov/ RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ D/E, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, regulatoryinformation/dockets/ default.htm or http:// MD 20852. default.htm. www.regulations.gov. Contact Person: Jean G. Noronha, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities Dated: January 4, 2016. Docket: For access to the docket to National Institute of Mental Health, NIH read background documents or the Leslie Kux, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., electronic and written/paper comments Associate Commissioner for Policy. Room 6147, MSC 9609, Bethesda, MD 20892– received, go to http:// [FR Doc. 2016–00128 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] 9609, 301–443–3367, [email protected]. www.regulations.gov and insert the BILLING CODE 4164–01–P Any member of the public interested docket number, found in brackets in the in presenting oral comments to the heading of this document, into the committee may notify the Contact ‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Person listed on this notice at least 10 and/or go to the Division of Dockets HUMAN SERVICES days in advance of the meeting. Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. Interested individuals and 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. National Institutes of Health representatives of organizations may Submit written requests for single submit a letter of intent, a brief National Institute of Mental Health: copies of the draft guidance to the description of the organization Notice of Meeting Division of Drug Information, Center for represented, and a short description of Drug Evaluation and Research, Food Pursuant to section 10(d) of the the oral presentation. Only one and Drug Administration, 10001 New Federal Advisory Committee Act, as representative of an organization may be Hampshire Ave., Hillandale Building, amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is allowed to present oral comments and if 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993– hereby given of a meeting of the accepted by the committee, 0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive National Advisory Mental Health presentations may be limited to five label to assist that office in processing Council. minutes. Both printed and electronic your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY The meeting will be open to the copies are requested for the record. In INFORMATION section for electronic public as indicated below, with addition, any interested person may file access to the draft guidance document. attendance limited to space available. written comments with the committee

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 942 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

by forwarding their statement to the Place: Embassy Suites at DC Convention would constitute a clearly unwarranted Contact Person listed on this notice. The Center, 900 10th Street NW., Washington, DC invasion of personal privacy. 20001. statement should include the name, Name of Committee: National Institute on address, telephone number and when Contact Person: Gabriel B Fosu, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special applicable, the business or professional Scientific Review, National Institutes of Emphasis Panel; NIAAA PAR15–154 and affiliation of the interested person. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3108, Fellowship Applications. In the interest of security, NIH has MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Date: January 26, 2016. instituted stringent procedures for 3562, [email protected]. Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant entrance onto the NIH campus. All This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing applications. visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, Place: NIAAA, NIH, 5635 Fishers Lane, CR hotel, and airport shuttles will be limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle. 2098, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone inspected before being allowed on Conference Call). campus. Visitors will be asked to show Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Ranga Srinivas, Ph.D., one form of identification (for example, Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: Chief, Scientific Review Officer, Extramural Systems Science and Health in the a government-issued photo ID, driver’s Project Review Branch, National Institutes of Behavioral and Social Sciences. Health, 5365 Fishers Lane, Room 2085, license, or passport) and to state the Date: January 25, 2016. purpose of their visit. Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 451–2067, Time: 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. [email protected]. Information is also available on the Agenda: To review and evaluate grant This notice is being published less than 15 Institute’s/Center’s home page: applications. Place: Embassy Suites at DC Convention days prior to the meeting due to the timing www.nimh.nih.gov/about/advisory- limitations imposed by the review and boards-and-groups/namhc/index.shtml., Center, 900 10th Street NW., Washington, DC 20001. funding cycle. where an agenda and any additional Contact Person: Gabriel B Fosu, Ph.D., (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance information for the meeting will be Scientific Review Officer, Center for Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research posted when available. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Career Development Awards for Scientists (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3108, and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Assistance Program No. 93.242, Mental MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Research Service Awards for Research Health Research Grants, National 3562, [email protected]. Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; This notice is being published less than 15 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants; Institutes of Health, HHS) days prior to the meeting due to the timing 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical Research Dated: January 4, 2016. limitations imposed by the review and and Research Support Awards., National Carolyn A. Baum, funding cycle. Institutes of Health, HHS) Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Dated: January 5, 2016. Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; Committee Policy. Melanie J. Gray, 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, [FR Doc. 2016–00196 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory BILLING CODE 4140–01–P 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Committee Policy. Institutes of Health, HHS) [FR Doc. 2016–00194 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140–01–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Dated: January 5, 2016. HUMAN SERVICES Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND National Institutes of Health Committee Policy. HUMAN SERVICES [FR Doc. 2016–00195 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Center for Scientific Review: Notice of BILLING CODE 4140–01–P National Institutes of Health Closed Meetings Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Pursuant to section 10(d) of the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Closed Meetings Federal Advisory Committee Act, as HUMAN SERVICES amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Pursuant to section 10(d) of the hereby given of the following meetings. National Institutes of Health Federal Advisory Committee Act, as The meetings will be closed to the amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is public in accordance with the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse hereby given of the following meetings. provisions set forth in sections and Alcoholism: Notice of Closed The meetings will be closed to the 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Meeting public in accordance with the as amended. The grant applications and provisions set forth in sections the discussions could disclose Pursuant to section 10(d) of the 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., confidential trade secrets or commercial Federal Advisory Committee Act, as as amended. The grant applications and property such as patentable material, amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is the discussions could disclose and personal information concerning hereby given of the following meeting. confidential trade secrets or commercial individuals associated with the grant The meeting will be closed to the property such as patentable material, applications, the disclosure of which public in accordance with the and personal information concerning would constitute a clearly unwarranted provisions set forth in sections individuals associated with the grant invasion of personal privacy. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., applications, the disclosure of which as amended. The grant applications and would constitute a clearly unwarranted Name of Committee: Center for Scientific the discussions could disclose Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR 13– invasion of personal privacy. 374: Modeling Social Behavior. confidential trade secrets or commercial Name of Committee: Biological Chemistry Date: January 25, 2016. property such as patentable material, and Macromolecular Biophysics Integrated Time: 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and personal information concerning Review Group Macromolecular Structure and Agenda: To review and evaluate grant individuals associated with the grant Function C Study Section. applications. applications, the disclosure of which Date: February 4–5, 2016.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 943

Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. not a rulemaking and the Federal online at http://www.regulations.gov in Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Rulemaking Portal is being utilized only docket ID FEMA–2013–0006. Based on applications. as a mechanism for receiving comments. the comments received, FEMA may Place: Renaissance Mayflower Hotel, 1127 Mail: Regulatory Affairs Division, make appropriate revisions to the Connecticut Avenue NW., Washington, DC Office of Chief Counsel, Federal 20036. proposed guidance. Although FEMA Contact Person: William A Greenberg, Emergency Management Agency, 8NE, will consider any comments received in Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC the drafting of the final policy, FEMA Scientific Review, National Institutes of 20472–3100. will not provide a response to Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4168, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: comments document. When or if FEMA MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Jessica Specht, Federal Emergency issues a final policy, FEMA will publish 1726, [email protected]. Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., a notice of availability in the Federal Name of Committee: Endocrinology, Washington, DC 20472, 202–212–2288. Register and make the final guidance Metabolism, Nutrition and Reproductive SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: available at http://www.regulations.gov. Sciences Integrated Review Group; Clinical The final guidance will not have the and Integrative Diabetes and Obesity Study I. Public Participation force or effect of law. Section. Instructions: All submissions received Authority: Pub. L. 113–2. Date: February 4–5, 2016. must include the agency name and Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Dated: December 30, 2015. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant docket ID. Regardless of the method W. Craig Fugate, applications. used for submitting comments or Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & material, all submissions will be posted, Administrator, Federal Emergency Conference Center, Montgomery County without change, to the Federal Management Agency. Conference Center Facility, 5701 Marinelli eRulemaking Portal at http:// [FR Doc. 2016–00173 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Road, North Bethesda, MD 20852. www.regulations.gov, and will include BILLING CODE 9111–23–P Contact Person: Hui Chen, MD., Scientific any personal information you provide. Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, Therefore, submitting this information National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge makes it public. You may wish to read DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435–1044, the Privacy Act notice, which can be SECURITY [email protected]. viewed by clicking on the ‘‘Privacy (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Notice’’ link in the footer of Transportation Security Administration Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; www.regulations.gov. 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, You may submit your comments and [Docket No. TSA–2005–21866] 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, material by the methods specified in the 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Intent To Request Renewal From OMB ADDRESSES section. Please submit your Institutes of Health, HHS) of One Current Public Collection of comments and any supporting material Information: Enhanced Security Dated: January 4, 2016. by only one means to avoid the receipt Procedures at Ronald Reagan Carolyn Baum, and review of duplicate submissions. Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Docket: The proposed guidance is Washington National Airport Committee Policy. available in docket ID FEMA–2013– AGENCY: Transportation Security [FR Doc. 2016–00106 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] 0006. For access to the docket to read Administration (TSA), DHS. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P background documents or comments ACTION: 60-Day notice. received, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov and SUMMARY: The Transportation Security DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND search for the docket ID. Submitted Administration (TSA) invites public SECURITY comments may also be inspected at comment on one currently approved FEMA, Office of Chief Counsel, 8NE, Information Collection Request (ICR), Federal Emergency Management 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC Office of Management and Budget Agency 20472. (OMB) control number 1652–0035, [Docket ID FEMA–2013–0006] II. Background abstracted below, that we will submit to the OMB for renewal in compliance Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance The Sandy Recovery Improvement with the Paperwork Reduction Act Act of 2013 amended the Robert T. (PRA). The ICR describes the nature of AGENCY: Federal Emergency Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency the information collection and its Management Agency, DHS. Assistance Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. expected burden. The collection ACTION: Notice. 5121 et seq. (Stafford Act), to provide requires General Aviation (GA) aircraft federally-recognized Indian Tribal operators who wish to fly into and out SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency governments the option to request a Management Agency (FEMA) is of Ronald Reagan Washington National Presidential emergency or major disaster Airport (DCA) to designate a security accepting comments on the Tribal declaration.1 FEMA is proposing to Declarations Pilot Guidance. coordinator and adopt a DCA Access establish a pilot program to manage Standard Security Program (DASSP). DATES: Comments must be received by declaration requests from Indian Tribal DATES: April 7, 2016. governments, and is seeking comment Send your comments by March ADDRESSES: Comments must be on its proposed Tribal Declarations Pilot 8, 2016. identified by docket ID FEMA–2013– Guidance to implement such a program. ADDRESSES: Comments may be emailed 0006 and may be submitted by one of The proposed guidance does not have to [email protected] or delivered to the the following methods: the force or effect of law. TSA PRA Officer, Office of Information Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// FEMA seeks comment on the Technology (OIT), TSA–11, www.regulations.gov. Follow the proposed guidance, which is available Transportation Security Administration, instructions for submitting comments. 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA Please note that this proposed policy is 1 Public Law 113–2, § 1110. 20598–6011.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 944 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: submit fingerprints for a Criminal electronic mail to oira_submission@ Christina A. Walsh at the above address, History Records Check (CHRC). In omb.eop.gov or faxed to (202) 395–6974. or by telephone (571) 227–2062. addition, GA aircraft operator must also FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: maintain CHRC records of all employees Christina A. Walsh, TSA PRA Officer, and authorized representative for which Comments Invited Office of Information Technology (OIT), a CHRC has been completed. These TSA–11, Transportation Security In accordance with the Paperwork records must be made available to TSA Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 upon request. Arlington, VA 20598–6011; telephone et seq.), an agency may not conduct or TSA estimates a total of 4,887 (571) 227–2062; email sponsor, and a person is not required to respondents annually. The total number [email protected]. respond to, a collection of information of annual burden hours is estimated to unless it displays a valid OMB control be 5,547 hours per year. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: number. The ICR documentation is Dated: January 4, 2016. Comments Invited available at http://www.reginfo.gov. Christina A. Walsh, In accordance with the Paperwork Therefore, in preparation for OMB Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 review and approval of the following TSA Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Office of Information Technology. et seq.), an agency may not conduct or information collection, TSA is soliciting [FR Doc. 2016–00175 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] sponsor, and a person is not required to comments to— (1) Evaluate whether the proposed BILLING CODE 9110–05–P respond to, a collection of information information requirement is necessary for unless it displays a valid OMB control the proper performance of the functions number. The ICR documentation is DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND of the agency, including whether the available at http://www.reginfo.gov. SECURITY information will have practical utility; Therefore, in preparation for OMB review and approval of the following (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the Transportation Security Administration agency’s estimate of the burden; information collection, TSA is soliciting comments to— (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and Extension of Agency Information (1) Evaluate whether the proposed clarity of the information to be Collection Activity Under OMB Review: information requirement is necessary for collected; and Office of Law Enforcement/Federal Air the proper performance of the functions (4) Minimize the burden of the Marshal Service Mental Health of the agency, including whether the collection of information on those who Certification are to respond, including using information will have practical utility; appropriate automated, electronic, AGENCY: Transportation Security (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the mechanical, or other technological Administration, DHS. agency’s estimate of the burden; collection techniques or other forms of ACTION: 30-Day notice. (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and information technology. clarity of the information to be SUMMARY: This notice announces that collected; and Information Collection Requirement the Transportation Security (4) Minimize the burden of the OMB Control No. 1652–0035; Administration (TSA) has forwarded the collection of information on those who Enhanced Security Procedures at Information Collection Request (ICR), are to respond, including using Ronald Reagan Washington National Office of Management and Budget appropriate automated, electronic, Airport (DCA). TSA is seeking approval (OMB) control number 1652–0043, mechanical, or other technological to renew this collection of information. abstracted below to OMB for review and collection techniques or other forms of TSA requires GA aircraft operators approval of an extension of the information technology. who wish to fly into and out of DCA to currently approved collection under the Information Collection Requirement designate a security coordinator and Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The adopt the DASSP. Once aircraft ICR describes the nature of the Title: Office of Law Enforcement/ operators have adopted the DASSP, the information collection and its expected Federal Air Marshal Service Mental operators must request a tentative slot burden. TSA published a Federal Health Certification. reservation from the Federal Aviation Register notice, with a 60-day comment Type of Request: Extension of a Administration (FAA) and request period soliciting comments, of the currently approved collection. authorization from TSA to fly into or following collection of information on OMB Control Number: 1652–0043. out of DCA. This information is October 26, 2015, 80 FR 65237. The Forms(s): TSA Form 1164. collected under OMB control number collection involves a certification form Affected Public: Law Enforcement 1652–0033 TSA Airspace Waiver that applicants for the Federal Air Officers/Air Marshal Applicants. Program. If TSA approves the flight, Marshal positions are required to Abstract: TSA policy requires that TSA will transmit that information to complete regarding their mental health applicants for Federal Air Marshal FAA. history. (FAM) positions meet certain medical The DASSP application collects basic standards, including whether the DATES: Send your comments by information about the applicant, the individual has an established medical February 8, 2016. A comment to OMB aircraft operator, and the security history or clinical diagnosis of is most effective if OMB receives it coordinator that the operator wishes to psychosis, neurosis, or any other within 30 days of publication. designate, as well as the identifier of the personality or mental disorder that airport used as a base of operation and ADDRESSES: Interested persons are clearly demonstrates a potential hazard whether the operator presently complies invited to submit written comments on to the performance of FAM duties or the with a TSA Standard Security Program. the proposed information collection to safety of self or others. Information TSA also requires individuals the Office of Information and Regulatory collected would be used to assess the designated as security coordinators and Affairs, OMB. Comments should be eligibility and suitability of FAM flight crewmembers assigned to duty on addressed to Desk Officer, Department applicants. a GA aircraft into and out of DCA to of Homeland Security/TSA, and sent via Number of Respondents: 600.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Jan 15, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 945

Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An Comments Invited DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND estimated 600 hours annually. URBAN DEVELOPMENT In accordance with the Paperwork Dated: January 4, 2016. Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 [Docket No. FR–5907–N–02] Christina A. Walsh, et seq.), an agency may not conduct or TSA Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Office sponsor, and a person is not required to Federal Property Suitable as Facilities of Information Technology. respond to, a collection of information To Assist the Homeless [FR Doc. 2016–00154 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] unless it displays a valid OMB control AGENCY: Office of the Assistant BILLING CODE 9110–05–P number. The ICR documentation is Secretary for Community Planning and available at http://www.reginfo.gov. Development, HUD. Therefore, in preparation for OMB ACTION: Notice. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND review and approval of the following SECURITY information collection, TSA is soliciting SUMMARY: This Notice identifies comments to— Transportation Security Administration unutilized, underutilized, excess, and (1) Evaluate whether the proposed surplus Federal property reviewed by Extension of Agency Information information requirement is necessary for HUD for suitability for use to assist the Collection Activity Under OMB Review: the proper performance of the functions homeless. TSA Airspace Waiver Program of the agency, including whether the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: information will have practical utility; Juanita Perry, Department of Housing AGENCY: Transportation Security and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Administration, DHS. (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden; Street SW., Room 7266, Washington, DC ACTION: 30-day Notice. 20410; telephone (202) 402–3970; TTY (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and SUMMARY: This notice announces that number for the hearing- and speech- clarity of the information to be impaired (202) 708–2565 (these the Transportation Security collected; and Administration (TSA) has forwarded the telephone numbers are not toll-free), or Information Collection Request (ICR), (4) Minimize the burden of the call the toll-free Title V information line Office of Management and Budget collection of information on those who at 800–927–7588. (OMB) control number 1652–0033, are to respond, including using SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In abstracted below to OMB for review and appropriate automated, electronic, accordance with 24 CFR part 581 and approval of an extension of the mechanical, or other technological section 501 of the Stewart B. McKinney currently approved collection under the collection techniques or other forms of Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The information technology. 11411), as amended, HUD is publishing ICR describes the nature of the Information Collection Requirement this Notice to identify Federal buildings information collection and its expected and other real property that HUD has burden. TSA published a Federal Title: TSA Airspace Waiver Program. reviewed for suitability for use to assist Register notice, with a 60-day comment Type of Request: Extension of a the homeless. The properties were period soliciting comments, of the currently approved collection. reviewed using information provided to following collection of information on HUD by Federal landholding agencies OMB Control Number: 1652–0033. September 1, 2015, 80 FR 52780. This regarding unutilized and underutilized collection of information allows TSA to Forms(s): N/A. buildings and real property controlled conduct security threat assessments on Affected Public: Aircraft operators, by such agencies or by GSA regarding individuals who are included in passengers, and crewmembers. its inventory of excess or surplus requests to operate in restricted airspace Federal property. This Notice is also Abstract: The airspace waiver pursuant to an airspace waiver. published in order to comply with the program allows U.S. and foreign general December 12, 1988 Court Order in DATES: Send your comments by aviation aircraft operators to apply for February 8, 2016. A comment to OMB National Coalition for the Homeless v. approval to operate in U.S. restricted Veterans Administration, No. 88–2503– is most effective if OMB receives it airspace, including over flying the within 30 days of publication. OG (D.D.C.). United States and its territories. TSA Properties reviewed are listed in this ADDRESSES: Interested persons are collects certain information from the Notice according to the following invited to submit written comments on aircraft operator concerning the categories: Suitable/available, suitable/ the proposed information collection to proposed flight and aircraft as well as unavailable, and suitable/to be excess, the Office of Information and Regulatory identifying information for all pilots, and unsuitable. The properties listed in Affairs, OMB. Comments should be crewmembers and passengers, who will the three suitable categories have been addressed to Desk Officer, Department be onboard the aircraft operated in reviewed by the landholding agencies, of Homeland Security/TSA, and sent via restricted airspace in order to perform a and each agency has transmitted to electronic mail to security threat assessment on each HUD: (1) Its intention to make the [email protected] or faxed individual. property available for use to assist the to (202) 395–6974. Number of Respondents: 9,134. homeless, (2) its intention to declare the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: property excess to the agency’s needs, or Christina A. Walsh, TSA PRA Officer, Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An estimated 7,099 hours annually. (3) a statement of the reasons that the Office of Information Technology (OIT), property cannot be declared excess or TSA–11, Transportation Security Dated: January 4, 2016. made available for use as facilities to Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Christina A. Walsh, assist the homeless. Arlington, VA 20598–6011; telephone TSA Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Office Properties listed as suitable/available (571) 227–2062; email of Information Technology. will be available exclusively for [email protected]. [FR Doc. 2016–00155 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] homeless use for a period of 60 days SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BILLING CODE 9110–05–P from the date of this Notice. Where

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 946 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

property is described as for ‘‘off-site use Whiteford, Army Corps of Engineers, Elmer LA 71424 only’’ recipients of the property will be Real Estate, CEMP–CR, 441 G Street Landholding Agency: Agriculture required to relocate the building to their NW., Washington, DC 20314; (202) 761– Property Number: 15201540007 own site at their own expense. 5542; INTERIOR: Mr. Michael Wright, Status: Excess Comments: off-site removal only; 192 sq. ft.; Homeless assistance providers Acquisition & Property Management, new roofing/siding needed; contact interested in any such property should Department of the Interior, 3960 N. 56th Agriculture for more information send a written expression of interest to Ave. #104, Hollywood, FL. 33021; (443) Mississippi HHS, addressed to: Ms. Theresa M. 223–4639 (These are not toll-free Ritta, Chief Real Property Branch, the numbers). FHA Insect Study Housing Department of Health and Human (20–0018–HAR); 23332 Success Rd. Dated: December 30, 2015. (30*37′38″N89*02′54″W) Services, Room 5B–17, Parklawn Brian P. Fitzmaurice, Saucier MS 39547 Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Landholding Agency: Agriculture MD 20857, (301)-443–2265 (This is not Director, Division of Community Assistance, Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs. Property Number: 15201540008 a toll-free number.) HHS will mail to the Status: Excess interested provider an application TITLE V, FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY Comments: off-site removal only; 3,200 sq. packet, which will include instructions PROGRAM FEDERAL REGISTER REPORT ft.; removal difficult due to size/type; for completing the application. In order FOR 01/08/2016 inadequately insulated; no heating source; contact Agriculture for more information to maximize the opportunity to utilize a Suitable/Available Properties suitable property, providers should Vermont Building submit their written expressions of Tract #1–205–30, interest as soon as possible. For Arkansas Bartlett House; Appalachian National Scenic complete details concerning the 2 Structures Trail; 563 Bartlett Brook Rd. processing of applications, the reader is Blue Mountain Lake Field Office Pomfret VT 05067 encouraged to refer to the interim rule CESWL–OP–NB–B Landholding Agency: Interior Havana AR 72842 governing this program, 24 CFR part Property Number: 61201540005 Landholding Agency: COE Status: Excess 581. Property Number: 31201540004 Comments: off-site removal only; 900 sq. ft.; For properties listed as suitable/to be Status: Underutilized structurally sound; boarded up; contact excess, that property may, if Directions: Waveland Park Vault Toilet, Interior for more information subsequently accepted as excess by BLUMTN–43365, 16′x10′8″ Tower Heights GSA, be made available for use by the Park, Vault Toilet, BLUMTN–43347, Unsuitable Properties ′ ″ ′ homeless in accordance with applicable 10 8 x24 Building Comments: Deteriorated/decay; will require law, subject to screening for other California Federal use. At the appropriate time, substantial repairs; contact COE for more HUD will publish the property in a information Vogelsang Backpacker’s Camp Composting Toilet Notice showing it as either suitable/ 2 Structures Blue Mountain Lake Field Office Yosemite National Park available or suitable/unavailable. Yosemite CA 95389 For properties listed as suitable/ CESWL–OP–NB–B Plainview AR 72842 Landholding Agency: Interior unavailable, the landholding agency has Landholding Agency: COE Property Number: 61201540007 decided that the property cannot be Property Number: 31201540005 Status: Unutilized declared excess or made available for Status: Underutilized Directions: The Vogelsang High Sierra Camp use to assist the homeless, and the Directions: Fish Cleaning Station with is a 7 mile hike from Tuolumne Meadows property will not be available. canopy, NIMROD–44953, 144 sq. ft.; Fish near Tioga Pass CA State Rte. 120 Properties listed as unsuitable will Cleaning Station with canopy, NIMROD– Comments: Documented deficiencies: Severe not be made available for any other 44942 rodent infestation and transmission of the purpose for 20 days from the date of this Comments: Deteriorated/decay; will require hantavirus is significantly probable; clear Notice. Homeless assistance providers substantial repairs; contact COE for more threat to physical safety information Reasons: Extensive deterioration interested in a review by HUD of the determination of unsuitability should Louisiana Emergency Services Shed Yosemite National Park Cooler Building (29–0007–John) call the toll free information line at 1– 9034 Village Dr. 255 Turnage Rd. 800–927–7588 for detailed instructions Yosemite Valley CA 95389 (31*10′46.0″N92*40′38.1″W) or write a letter to Ann Marie Oliva at Landholding Agency: Interior the address listed at the beginning of Elmer LA 71424 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 61201540008 this Notice. Included in the request for Property Number: 15201540005 Status: Excess review should be the property address Status: Excess Comments: Documented deficiencies: (including zip code), the date of Comments: off-site removal only; 384 sq. ft.; Significant rot to the foundation posts and publication in the Federal Register, the storage; new roofing/siding needed; contact framing; clear threat to physical safety landholding agency, and the property Agriculture for more information Reasons: Extensive deterioration number. Oil House Building Minnesota For more information regarding (29–0003–John); 255 Turnage Rd Marshland Visitor Center particular properties identified in this (31*10′46.0″N92*40′38.1″W) Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway; 15975 Notice (i.e., acreage, floor plan, existing Elmer LA 71424 State Highway 70 sanitary facilities, exact street address), Landholding Agency: Agriculture Pine City MN 55063 providers should contact the Property Number: 15201540006 Landholding Agency: Interior Status: Excess appropriate landholding agencies at the Property Number: 61201540009 Comments: off-site removal only; 384 sq. ft.; Status: Unutilized following addresses: AGRICULTURE: storage; new roofing/siding needed; contact Comments: Documented deficiencies: Severe Ms. Debra Kerr, Department of Agriculture for more information rodent infestation and transmission of Agriculture, Reporters Building, 300 7th Pesticide Storage hantavirus is probable; clear threat to Street SW., Room 300, Washington, DC (29–0026–John); 255 Turnage Rd. physical safety 20024, (202)- 720–8873; COE: Mr. Scott (31*10′46.0N92*40′38.1″W) Reasons: Extensive deterioration

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 947

Vermont headquarters, 8231 Beach Road, consistent with sound principles of fish 4 Buildings Chincoteague Island, VA 23336. and wildlife management, conservation, Appalachian National Scenic Trail FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: legal mandates, and our policies, as well 563 Bartlett Brook Rd. Thomas Bonetti, Natural Resource as respond to key issues and public Pomfret VT 05067 Planner, 413–253–8307 (phone); concerns. In addition to outlining broad Landholding Agency: Interior [email protected] (email). management direction on conserving Property Number: 61201540006 wildlife and their habitats, CCPs SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Status: Excess identify wildlife-dependent recreational Directions: Bartlett Barn, Bartlett Calf House, Milkhouse, Bartlett Sugarhouse Introduction opportunities available to the public, Comments: Documented deficiencies: With this notice, we finalize the CCP including opportunities for hunting, Structurally unsound; extremely process for Chincoteague NWR and fishing, wildlife observation and dilapidated conditions; clear threat to Wallops Island NWR. We began this photography, and environmental physical safety process through a notice of intent in the education and interpretation. We will Reasons: Extensive deterioration review and update the CCP at least [FR Doc. 2015–33189 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Federal Register (75 FR 57056) on September 17, 2010. For more about the every 15 years, in accordance with the BILLING CODE 4210–67–P Refuge Administration Act. initial process and the history of the refuges, see that notice. On May 15, CCP Alternatives 2014, we announced the release of the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR During the scoping phase of the draft CCP/Environmental Impact planning process, we identified issues Statement (EIS) to the public and Fish and Wildlife Service and concerns based on input from the requested comments in a notice of public, State or Federal agencies, other [FWS–R5–R–2015–N216; BAC–4333–99] availability in the Federal Register (79 Service programs, and our planning FR 27906). We subsequently extended team. We developed refuge management Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge the public comment period in another alternatives to address issues; help and Wallops Island National Wildlife notice in the Federal Register (79 FR achieve refuge goals, objectives, and Refuge, Accomack County, VA; Record 41300) on July 15, 2014. We released the purposes; and support the Refuge of Decision for Final Environmental final CCP/EIS for public review on System mission. Our draft CCP/EIS (79 Impact Statement September 11, 2015 (80 FR 54799). FR 27906) and final CCP/EIS (80 FR In the draft and final CCP/EIS, we AGENCY: 54799) fully analyze three alternatives Fish and Wildlife Service, evaluated three alternatives for Interior. for the future management of the refuge: managing the refuge and completed a (1) Alternative A, Current Management; ACTION: Notice of availability; final thorough analysis of the environmental, (2) Alternative B, Balanced Approach; comprehensive conservation plan and social, and economic considerations of and (3) Alternative C, Reduced record of decision. each alternative. Based on comments Disturbance. Alternative A satisfies the received on the draft CCP/EIS, we made SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and NEPA requirement of a ‘‘No Action’’ minor modifications to alternative B, the Wildlife Service (Service), announce the alternative. Both the draft and final Service’s preferred alternative in the availability of the final comprehensive plans identify alternative B as the final CCP/EIS. During the public review conservation plan (CCP) and record of Service-preferred alternative. Please period for the final CCP/EIS, we did not decision (ROD) for Chincoteague refer to the final CCP/EIS for more receive any comments that raised National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) and details on each of the alternatives. significant new issues, resulted in Wallops Island NWR. We prepared this changes to our analysis, or warranted Basis for Selected Alternative ROD pursuant to the National any further changes to alternative B. Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Our decision is to adopt alternative B, In accordance with NEPA (40 CFR (NEPA) and its implementing as described in the final CCP. We 1506.6(b)) requirements, this notice regulations. The Service is furnishing provide a brief summary of our decision announces our decision to select this notice to advise the public and below. For the full basis of our decision, alternative B for implementation and ADDRESSES other agencies of our decision and of the please see the ROD (see ). the availability of the ROD and final The decision to adopt alternative B for availability of the ROD. CCP for Chincoteague NWR and implementation was made after DATES: The ROD was signed on Wallops Island NWR. The final CCP will considering the follow factors: (1) The November 6, 2015. guide our management and impacts identified in Chapter 4, ADDRESSES: You may view or obtain administration of the refuges over the Environmental Consequences, of the copies of the final CCP and ROD by any next 15 years. draft and final CCP/EIS; (2) The results of the following methods. of public and agency comments; (3) Background Agency Web site: Download a copy of How well the alternative achieves the the document at http://www.fws.gov/ The National Wildlife Refuge System stated purpose and need for a CCP and refuge/Chincoteague/what_we_do/ Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. the seven goals presented in the final conservation.html. 668dd–668ee) (Refuge Administration CCP/EIS chapter 1; (4) How well the Email: Send requests to Act), as amended by the National alternative addresses the relevant issues, [email protected]. Include Wildlife Refuge System Improvement concerns, and opportunities identified ‘‘Chincoteague NWR’’ in the subject line Act of 1997, requires us to develop a in the planning process; and (5) Other of your email. CCP for each NWR. The purpose for relevant factors, including fulfilling the U.S. Mail: Thomas Bonetti, Natural developing a CCP is to provide refuge purposes for which the refuge was Resource Planner, U.S. Fish and managers with a 15-year plan for established, contributing to the mission Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center achieving refuge purposes and goals and and goals of the Refuge System, and Drive, Hadley, MA 01035. contributing to the mission of the statutory and regulatory guidance. In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Visit National Wildlife Refuge System Compared to the other two during regular business hours at refuge (Refuge System). CCPs should be alternatives, alternative B includes the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 948 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

suite of actions that best meet the factors FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. distance of 355.84 feet to a mag nail set above using the most balanced and Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of Indian at the southerly sideline of Sampsons integrated approach, and with due Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services, Mill Road; consideration for both the biological and MS–4642–MIB, 1849 C Street NW., Thence S 70°51′50″ E along the human environment. Alternative B will Washington, DC 20240, at (202) 208– southerly sideline of Sampsons Mill best fulfill the CCP’s biological goals, by 3615. Road a distance of 528.32 feet to a managing for particular Federal trust SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This concrete bound at the point of species and habitats that are of regional notice is published in the exercise of curvature; conservation concern. It clearly defines authority delegated by the Secretary of Thence easterly along the southerly which Federal trust species and habitat the Interior to the Assistant Secretary— sideline of Sampsons Mill Road a curve will be a management priority in both Indian Affairs by part 209 of the to the left having a radius of 191.36 feet, uplands and wetlands, and details Departmental Manual. an arc distance of 132.25 feet, a chord specific objectives and strategies for A proclamation was issued according bearing N 89°20′15″ E and a chord their management. The refuge’s to the Act of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984; length of 129.63 feet to point of establishment purposes emphasize the 25 U.S.C. 467) for the lands described tangency; conservation of migratory birds; thus, below. The land was proclaimed to be Thence N 69°32′13″ E along the protecting the biological integrity, the Mashpee Wampanoag Reservation of southerly sideline of Sampsons Mill diversity, and environmental health of the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe. The Road a distance of 195.68 feet to a point Chincoteague NWR and its habitat and approximate acreages described below of curvature; wildlife, particularly migratory birds, is are those identified in Attachment I of Thence easterly along the southerly paramount. the Record of Decision signed by the sideline of Sampsons Mill Road a curve In summary, we selected alternative B Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs on to the right having a radius of 171.59 for implementation because it best September 18, 2015. feet, an arc distance of 120.46 feet, a meets the factors identified above when chord bearing N 89°38′54″ E and a chord Parcel 1—213 Sampsons Mill Road compared to alternatives A and C. length of 118.00 feet to point of (Assessor’s Parcel 63–10–0–R) Alternative B provides the greatest tangency; number of opportunities for Description of land in the Thence S 70°14′27″ E along the Chincoteague NWR and Wallops Island Commonwealth of Massachusetts, southerly sideline of Sampsons Mill NWR to contribute to the conservation County of Barnstable, Town of Mashpee Road a distance of 114.00 feet to the of fish, wildlife, and habitat in the on the east side of Quippish Road, and medial line of the Santuit River; Region, will increase the capacity of the the south side of Sampsons Mill Road Thence numerous courses along the refuges to meet their purposes and more particularly shown as Lot 6 on a medial line of Santuit River; contribute to the Refuge System plan entitled ‘‘Plan of Land in Mashpee, Thence S 26°12′29″ W along the mission, and will provide the means to Mass. Jill Slaymaker in Mashpee, Ma. medial line of the Santuit River a ″ ′ better respond to changing ecological Scale 1 = 100 , Date March 22, 1985’’ distance of 21.27 feet to a point; conditions within the surrounding prepared by Edward E. Kelley Reg. Land Thence S 06°37′27″ E along the environment. Surveyor and recorded in Barnstable medial line of the Santuit River a County Registry of Deeds, Plan Book Public Availability of Documents distance of 98.31 feet to a point; 401 Page 97. Bounded and described as Thence S 49°39′30″ W along the You can view or obtain the final CCP follows: medial line of the Santuit River a and ROD as indicated under ADDRESSES. Beginning at a concrete bound at the distance of 40.85 feet to a point; Dated: December 9, 2015. intersection of Quippish Road and Thence S 38°48′36″ W along the Linwood Street and the southwesterly Wendi Weber, medial line of the Santuit River a corner of the parcel herein described; distance of 43.45 feet to point; Regional Director, Northeast Region, U.S. Fish Thence N 01°28′19″ W along the and Wildlife Service. Thence S 30°48′45″ E along the easterly sideline of Quippish Road a [FR Doc. 2016–00176 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] medial line of the Santuit River a distance of 258.98 feet to a concrete BILLING CODE 4333–15–P distance of 27.64 feet to a point; bound; ° ′ ″ Thence N 14°02′10″ W along the Thence S 53 29 40 E along the easterly sideline of Quippish Road on a medial line of the Santuit River a DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR distance of 209.57 feet to a concrete distance of 31.73 feet to a point; Thence S 29°39′25″ E along the Bureau of Indian Affairs bound; Thence N 20°57′57″ W along the medial line of the Santuit River a [156A2100DD/AAKC001030/ easterly sideline of Quippish Road a distance of 73.97 feet to a point; ° ′ ″ A0A501010.999900 253G] distance of 266.53 feet to a point near Thence S 05 07 08 W along the a concrete bound disturbed at the land medial line of the Santuit River a Proclaiming Certain Lands as now or formerly of Willowbend distance of 81.61 feet to a point; Reservation for the Mashpee ° ′ ″ Community Trust; Thence S 19 19 45 W along the Wampanoag Thence N 68°19′49″ E along land now medial line of the Santuit River a AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs. or formerly of Willowbend Community distance of 55.78 feet to a point; ° ′ ″ ACTION: Notice of Reservation Trust a distance of 335.86 feet to a Thence S 14 31 54 E along the Proclamation. concrete bound; medial line of the Santuit River a Thence N 18°23′09″ W along land distance of 146.35 feet to a point; SUMMARY: This notice informs the public now or formerly of Willowbend Thence S 27°27′03″ E along the that the Assistant Secretary—Indian Community Trust a distance of 391.81 medial line of the Santuit River a Affairs proclaimed approximately feet to a concrete bound at the easterly distance of 94.14 feet to a point; 321.34 acres, more or less, as the initial sideline of Quippish Road; Thence S 51°23′03″ E along the reservation of the Mashpee Wampanoag Thence N 18°23′09″ W along the medial line of the Santuit River a Tribe on December 30, 2015. easterly sideline of Quippish Road a distance of 56.47 feet to a point;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 949

Thence S 08°58′54″ E along the herein described and the land now or on the west side of Great Neck Road medial line of the Santuit River a formerly of new Seabury Properties, South more particularly shown on a distance of 48.95 feet to a point; LLC; plan entitled ‘‘Plan of Land in Mashpee, Thence S 01°59′19″ E along the Thence N 09°08′29″ E along land now Mass. Prepared for Duck Pond Limited medial line of the Santuit River a or formerly of new Seabury Properties, Partnership. Scale 1″ = 50′, dated distance of 49.82 feet to a point; LLC a distance of 57.00 feet to a bound February 13, 2007’’ prepared by Holmes Thence S 20°26′08″ E along the at the land now or formerly of Paul; and McGrath, Inc. and recorded in medial line of the Santuit River a Thence N 59°24′39″ E along land now Barnstable County Registry of Deeds, distance of 34.79 feet to a point; or formerly of Paul a distance of 188.63 Plan Book 618 Page 13. Bounded and Thence S 07°02′20″ E along the feet to a concrete bound at the easterly described as follows: medial line of the Santuit River a sideline of Mizzenmast; Beginning at a concrete bound at the distance of 34.79 feet to a point; Thence southerly along the easterly northeasterly corner of the parcel herein Thence S 11°59′37″ W along the sideline of Mizzenmast a curve to the described and at the land now or medial line of the Santuit River a right, having a radius of 547.59 feet, an formerly of the Mashpee Wampanoag distance of 65.43 feet to a point; arc distance of 118.00 feet, with a chord Tribal Council, Inc.; Thence S 56°08′09″ W along the bearing S 8°45′36″ E and a chord length ° ′ ″ medial line of the Santuit River a of 117.77 feet to a concrete bound at the Thence S 70 00 00 E along the land distance of 88.60 feet to a point; land now or formerly of Garber; now or formerly of the Mashpee Thence S 13°17′42″ W along the Thence S 79°16′28″ W along land now Wampanoag Tribal Council, Inc. A medial line of the Santuit River a or formerly of Garber a distance of distance of 180.00 feet to a point; distance of 102.68 feet to a point; 192.74 feet to the Point of Beginning. Thence S 24°54′00″ E along the land Thence S 49°39′30″ W along the The above described parcel contains now or formerly of the Mashpee medial line of the Santuit River a 15,727 +/¥ s.f. or 0.3610 +/¥ acres. Wampanoag Tribal Council, Inc. A distance of 18.15 feet to a point; distance of 93.07 feet to a point; Thence S 02°26′46″ Parcel 3—56 Uncle Percy’s Road Thence S 01°00′00″ W along the land Thence S 30°57′53″ E along the (Assessor’s Parcel 117–173–0–R) now or formerly of the Mashpee medial line of the Santuit River a Description of land in the Wampanoag Tribal Council, Inc. A distance of 33.53 feet to a point at the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, distance of 75.00 feet to a concrete land now or formerly of the Town of County of Barnstable, Town of Mashpee, bound; Mashpee Conservation Commission; on the south side of Uncle Percy’s Road ° ′ ″ Thence S 75°43′36″ W along land now more particularly shown as Lot 15 Thence S 13 55 00 W along the land or formerly of the Town of Mashpee (Block 10) Land Court Plan 11408–I now or formerly of the Mashpee Conservation Commission a distance of filed in Land Registration Office, Wampanoag Tribal Council, Inc. A 314.40 feet to a concrete bound; Barnstable County Registry of Deeds distance of 190.01 feet to a point at the Thence S 75°43′36″ W along land now with a Certificate of Title Number land now or formerly of Mashpee or formerly of the Town of Mashpee 157612. Bounded and described as Commons LP; Conservation Commission and along an follows: Thence N 84°57′25″ W along the land undeveloped way know as Linwood Beginning at a concrete bound along now or formerly of Mashpee Commons Street, all being land of the Town of the southerly sideline of Uncle Percy’s LP a distance of 282.36 feet to a concrete Mashpee Conservation Commission, a Road at the westerly corner of the parcel bound; distance of 300.03 feet to a concrete herein described and at the land now or Thence N 84°57′25″ W along the land bound at the sideline of Linwood Street; formerly of Tucchio; ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ now or formerly of Mashpee Commons Thence S 75 43 36 W along the Thence N 45 15 00 E along the LP a distance of 500.11 feet to a concrete northerly sideline of Linwood Street a southerly sideline of Uncle Percy’s Road bound; distance of 417.21 feet to a concrete a distance 65.00 feet to a concrete bound ° ′ ″ bound at the easterly sideline of at the land now or formerly of Thence N 84 57 25 W along the land Quippish Road, being the Point of Mainberger, Trustee; now or formerly of Mashpee Commons Beginning. Thence S 44°45′00″ E along land now LP a distance of 244.03 feet to a point The above parcel contains 29.92 +/¥ or formerly of Mainberger, Trustee a near a concrete bound at land now or acres. distance of 100.00 feet to a concrete formerly of the Mashpee Wampanoag For Grantor’s title see deed dated bound at the land now or formerly of Tribal Council, Inc.; February 7, 2013 from Maushop L.L.C. Romanski; Thence N 14°32′19″ E along the land and recorded in the Barnstable Registry Thence S 45°15′00″ W along land now now or formerly of the Mashpee of Deeds in Book 27116, Page 35. or formerly of Romanski and Brossi a Wampanoag Tribal Council, Inc.; a distance of 65.00 feet to a point at the distance of 395.00 feet to a concrete Parcel 2—17 Mizzenmast (Assessor’s land now or formerly of Tucchio; bound; Parcel 125–238–0–E) ° ′ ″ Thence N 44 45 00 W along land Thence S 84°57′43″ E along the land Description of land in the now or formerly of Tucchio a distance now or formerly of the Mashpee Commonwealth of Massachusetts, of 100.00 feet to the southerly sideline Wampanoag Tribal Council, Inc. a County of Barnstable, Town of Mashpee, of Uncle Percy’s Road and the Point of distance of 765.00 feet to a concrete on the east side of Mizzenmast more Beginning. bound being the Point of Beginning. particularly shown as shown as Lot 80 The above described parcel contains ¥ Land Court Plan 35464–b (Sheet 7) filed 6,500 s.f. or 0.1492 +/¥ acres. The above parcel contains 8.88 +/ in Land Registration Office, Barnstable acres County Registry of Deeds with a Parcel 4—Great Neck Road South For Grantor’s title see deed dated June Certificate of Title Number 165381 (Assessor’s Parcel 99–38–0–R) 12, 2007 from Duck Pond Limited bounded and described as follows: Description of land in the Partnership and recorded in the Beginning at a concrete bound at the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Barnstable Registry of Deeds in Book southwesterly corner of the parcel County of Barnstable, Town of Mashpee 22104, Page 110.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 950 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Parcel 5—483 Great Neck Road South Thence N 84°57′25″ W along land Thence S 82°18′33″ E along land n/f (Assessor’s Parcel 95–7–0–R) now or formerly of the Mashpee of the Town of Mashpee Conservation Description of land in the Commons LP a distance of 499.97 feet Commission a distance of 352.06 feet to Commonwealth of Massachusetts, to a concrete bound; a concrete bound; ° ′ ″ Thence S 82°18′33″ E along land n/f County of Barnstable, Town of Mashpee Thence N 84 57 25 W along land of the Town of Mashpee Conservation on the west side of Great Neck Road now or formerly of the Mashpee Commission a distance of 125.83 feet to South more particularly shown on a Commons LP a distance of 500.00 feet a concrete bound; plan entitled ‘‘Plan of Land in Mashpee, to a concrete bound at the northerly Thence S 82°18′33″ E along land n/f Mass. Prepared for the Mashpee sideline of Holland Mill Road; Thence N 6°32′16″ E along Holland of the Town of Mashpee Conservation Wampanoag Indian Tribal Council, Inc. Mill Road so called a distance of 8.04 Commission a distance of 484.05 feet to Scale 1″ = 100′, dated June 6/3/15’’ feet to a point; a concrete bound; prepared by Cape & Islands Engineering, Thence N 58°32′13″ W along the Thence S 82°18′33″ E along land n/f Inc. To be recorded in Barnstable northerly sideline of Holland Mill Road of the Town of Mashpee Conservation County Registry of Deeds; bounded and a distance of 342.16 feet to a concrete Commission a distance of 405.76 feet to described as follows: bound; a concrete bound; Beginning at a Mashpee road bound Thence N 75°30′32″ W along the Thence S 82°18′33″ E along land n/f along the westerly sideline of Great northerly sideline of Holland Mill Road of the Town of Mashpee Conservation Neck Road South; ° ′ ″ a distance of 95.19 feet to a concrete Commission a distance of 500.19 feet to Thence S 19 26 15 W along the bound; a concrete bound; westerly sideline of Great Neck Road Thence N 83°41′49″ W along the Thence S 82°18′33″ E along land now South a distance of 220.76 feet to a northerly sideline of Holland Mill Road or formerly of the Town of Mashpee point of curvature near a disturbed a distance of 90.76 feet to a concrete Conservation Commission a distance of concrete bound; bound online and thence continuing 159.99 feet to a point near a concrete Thence southerly along the westerly 12.90 feet to a point at the easterly bound at the westerly sideline of Great sideline of Great Neck Road South a sideline of Great Hay Road; Neck Road South; curve to the left having a radius of Thence N 10°25′26″ E along the Thence S 04°15′00″ E along the 4055.79 feet, an arc distance of 249.01 westerly sideline of Great Neck Road ° ′ ″ easterly sideline of Great Hay Road a feet, a chord bearing S 17 40 43 W and distance of 96.00 feet to a point; South a distance of 43.97 feet to a point a chord length of 248.97 feet to a point Thence N 12°38′07″ E along the of curvature; at the land now or formerly of Mashpee easterly sideline of Great Hay Road a Thence southerly along the westerly Commons LP; distance of 149.30 feet to a point; sideline of Great Neck Road South a ° ′ ″ Thence N 84 57 25 W along land Thence N 10°23′37″ E along the curve to the right having a radius of now or formerly Mashpee Commons LP easterly sideline of Great Hay Road a 914.51 feet, an arc distance of 378.08 a distance of 265.00 feet to a point at distance of 98.12 feet to a point of feet, a chord bearing S 7°35′38″ W and land now or formerly of the Mashpee curvature; a chord length of 375.39 feet to a Wampanoag Tribal Council; Thence northerly along the easterly Mashpee Road bound being the Point of ° ′ ″ Thence N 13 55 00 E along land now sideline of Great Hay Road a curve to Beginning or formerly of the Mashpee Wampanoag the left having a radius of 412.75 feet, The above parcel contains 57.94 +/¥ Tribal Council, Inc. a distance of 190.01 an arc distance of 98.07 feet, a chord acres feet to a concrete bound; bearing N 3°53′22″ E and a chord length ° ′ ″ Parcel 6—414 Main Street (Assessor’s Thence N 01 00 00 E along land now of 97.84 feet to a point of tangency; Parcel 35–30–0–R) or formerly of the Mashpee Wampanoag Thence N 2°55′03″ W along the Tribal Council, Inc. a distance of 75.00 easterly sideline of Great Hay Road a Description of land in the feet to a point; distance of 125.15 feet to a point; Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Thence N 24°54′00″ W along land Thence N 0°35′42″ E along the County of Barnstable, Town of Mashpee now or formerly of the Mashpee easterly sideline of Great Hay Road a on the south side of Main Street more Wampanoag Tribal Council, Inc. a distance of 49.42 feet to a point of particularly shown as shown as parcel distance of 93.07 feet to a point; curvature; 35 30 0 on the Town of Mashpee Thence N 70°00′00″ W along land Thence northerly along the easterly Assessors Maps, and is shown as parcel now or formerly of the Mashpee sideline of Great Hay Road a curve to labeled Town of Mashpee on a plan Wampanoag Tribal Council, Inc. a the left having a radius of 404.20 feet, entitled ‘‘Plan of Land in Mashpee, distance of 180.00 feet to a concrete an arc distance of 208.01 feet, a chord Mass. As surveyed for Bonnie bound; bearing N 14°08′53″ W and a chord MacCarthy, Scale 1 in. = 40 ft., May 11, Thence N 84°57′43″ W along land length of 205.72 feet to a point of 1973, Nickerson & Berger, Inc. now or formerly of the Mashpee tangency; Engineers,’’ recorded with the Wampanoag Tribal Council, Inc. a Thence N 28°53′28″ W along the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds at distance of 765.00 feet to a concrete easterly sideline of Great Hay Road a Plan Book 273, Page 2. Bounded and bound; distance of 49.10 feet to a point at the described as follows: Thence S 14°32′19″ W along land now land now or formerly (n/f) of the Town Beginning on the southerly sideline of or formerly of the Mashpee Wampanoag of Mashpee Conservation Commission; Main Street at a concrete bound at the Tribal Council, Inc. a distance of 395.00 Thence S 82°18′33″ E along land n/f northwesterly corner of the parcel feet to a point near a concrete bound at of the Town of Mashpee Conservation herein described and at the land now or the land now or formerly of Mashpee Commission a distance of 10.11 feet to formerly of the Commonwealth of Commons LP; a broken concrete bound; Massachusetts; Thence N 84°57′25″ W along land Thence S 82°18′33″ E along land n/f Thence S 74°26′15″ E by said Main now or formerly of the Mashpee of the Town of Mashpee Conservation Street a distance of 230.95 feet to a point Commons LP a distance of 256.07 feet Commission a distance of 1216.01 feet on the westerly bank of the Mashpee to a broken concrete bound; to a broken concrete bound; River;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 951

Thence S 11°57′41″ W along the length of 1758.49 feet, and whose long described and at the land now or westerly bank of the Mashpee River a chord bears S 78°30′33″ E a distance of formerly of the Mashpee Wampanoag distance of 20.35 feet to a point; 647.68 feet to a concrete bound with a Tribal Council Inc.; Thence S 11°35′07″ W along the drill hole set in the southerly line of Thence S 5°22′15″ W along the westerly bank of the Mashpee River a Hollow Road, thence; easterly sideline of Meetinghouse Road distance of 18.16 feet to a point; By the southerly line of Hollow Road a distance of 10.17 feet to a concrete Thence N 79°14′07″ W along the along a curve to the right, having a bound with disk located on the easterly westerly bank of the Mashpee River a radius of 230.06 feet, an arc length of sideline of Meeting House Road; distance of 3.28 feet to a point; 207.20 feet, and whose long chord bears Thence easterly along the sideline of Thence S 06°00′37″ W along the S 67°36′33″ E a distance of 200.27 feet Meetinghouse Road on a curve to the westerly bank of the Mashpee River a to a point, thence; left having a radius of 996.84 feet, an arc distance of 34.71 feet to a point; By the southerly line of Hollow Road distance of 59.85 feet, a chord bearing ° ′ ″ Thence S 04 19 12 W along the S 41°48′27″ E a distance of 14.34 feet to S 3°39′02″ W and a chord length of westerly bank of the Mashpee River a a concrete bound with a drill hole set 59.84 feet to a point located at the distance of 39.78 feet to a point; at land of Town of Mashpee southwest corner of the parcel herein ° ′ ″ Thence S 56 36 27 W along the Conservation Commission, thence; described; westerly bank of the Mashpee River a By land of Town of Mashpee Thence S 73°12′45″ E along land now distance of 3.97 feet to a point; Conservation Commission S 18°18′01″ ° ′ ″ or formerly of Mashpee Wampanoag Thence S 16 22 26 E along the W a distance of 665.60 feet to a concrete Tribal Council Inc. A distance of 86.92 westerly bank of the Mashpee River a bound with a drill hole set at land of feet to a point; distance of 19.51 feet to a point; Mashpee Old Indian Meeting House ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Thence N 13 42 06 E along land now Thence S 01 45 28 E along the Authority, Inc., thence; or formerly of Mashpee Wampanoag westerly bank of the Mashpee River a By land of Mashpee Old Indian Tribal Council Inc. A distance of 70.00 distance of 10.40 feet to a point at the Meeting House Authority, Inc. S ° ′ ″ feet to a point marked by a concrete land now or formerly of the 72 07 25 W a distance of 411.20 feet to bound with a nail; Commonwealth of Massachusetts; a point, thence; Thence N 74°10′05″ W along land Thence N 65°57′45″ W along land By land of Mashpee Old Indian now or formerly of Mashpee now or formerly of the Commonwealth Meeting House Authority, Inc. N Wampanoag Tribal Council Inc. A of Massachusetts a distance of 40.08 feet ° ′ ″ 73 07 23 W a distance of 301.99 feet to distance of 98.78 feet to a point marked to a concrete bound; a point, thence; by a concrete bound with a nail at the Thence N 65°57′45″ W along land By land of Mashpee Old Indian easterly sideline of Meetinghouse Road, now or formerly of the Commonwealth Meeting House Authority, Inc. N being the Point of Beginning; of Massachusetts a distance of 234.92 18°56′33″ W a distance of 614.52 feet to The above parcel contains 6,447 +/¥ feet to a concrete bound; a point, thence; ¥ Thence N 25°22′55″ E along land now By land of Mashpee Old Indian s.f. or 0.1480 +/ acres. or formerly of the Commonwealth of Meeting House Authority, Inc. N For grantor’s title see deed dated Massachusetts a distance of 102.38 feet 68°19′57″ W a distance of 287.36 feet to April 28, 2008 from the Town of to the southerly sideline of Main Street a point in the easterly line of Mashpee, acting by and through its and the Point of Beginning. Goodspeed’s Meetinghouse Road, Board of Selectmen, and recorded in the The above described parcel contains thence; Barnstable Registry of Deeds in Book 29,708 +/¥ s.f. or 0.6820 +/¥ acres. By the easterly line of Goodspeed’s 22867, Page 31. Meetinghouse Road N 17°54′20″ E a Parcel 7—41 Hollow Road (Assessor’s Parcel 9—414 Meetinghouse Road distance of 217.36 feet to a point, Parcel 45–73–A–R) (Assessor’s Parcel 68–13a–0–E) thence; That certain parcel of land together By the easterly line of Goodspeed’s Description of land in the with the buildings thereon located on Meetinghouse Road N 24°06′17″ E a Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the southerly side of Hollow Road in distance of 249.44 feet to the Point of County of Barnstable, Town of Mashpee Mashpee, Barnstable County, Beginning. on the west side of Falmouth Road, and Massachusetts, now known and Parcel 73A contains 10.81 +/¥ acres. the east side of Meetinghouse Road numbered as 41 Hollow Road, described more particularly shown as Parcel 13B Parcel 8—410 Meetinghouse Road as follows: on a plan entitled ‘‘Plan of Land Beginning at a Point (P.O.B. ‘‘A’’) at (Assessor’s Parcel 61–58a–0–R) Prepared For Mashpee Wampanoag the southerly side of Hollow Road and Description of land in the Tribe in Mashpee, MA. Scale 1″ = 80′, the easterly side of Goodspeed’s Commonwealth of Massachusetts, date May 16, 2008’’ prepared by Holmes Meeting House Road. Said Point (P.O.B. County of Barnstable, Town of Mashpee and McGrath Inc. and recorded in ‘‘A’’) lies N 54°53′10″ E a distance of on the east side of Meetinghouse Road Barnstable County Registry of Deeds, 39.89 feet from a concrete bound with more particularly shown as Parcel 58A Plan Book 626 Page 4. Bounded and a drill hole found, thence: on a plan entitled ‘‘Plan of Land described as follows: By the southerly line of Hollow Road Prepared for Old Indian Meeting House Beginning near a concrete bound S 54°11′06″ E a distance of 160.52 feet Authority, Inc. Scale 1″ = 10′, date along the westerly sideline of Falmouth to a point, thence; March 29, 2007’’ prepared by Holmes Road at the southeasterly corner of the By the southerly line of Hollow Road and McGrath Inc. and recorded in parcel herein described and at the land S 58°08′17″ E a distance of 267.94 feet Barnstable County Registry of Deeds, now or formerly of the Town of to a concrete bound with a drill hole set Plan Book 625 page 8. Bounded and Mashpee; at land of Mashpee Water District, described as follows: Thence N 64°23′33″ W along land thence; Beginning at a concrete bound with now or formerly of the Town of By land of Mashpee Water District nail located along the easterly sideline Mashpee a distance of 375.00 feet to a along a non-tangent curve to the left, of Meetinghouse Road at the concrete bound on the easterly sideline having a radius of 400.00 feet, an arc northeasterly corner of the parcel herein of Meeting House Road;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 952 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Thence easterly along the sideline of W and a chord length of 329.29 feet to Parcel 11—184 Meetinghouse Road Meetinghouse Road on a curve to the a concrete bound at a point of tangency; (Assessor’s Parcel 45–75–0–R) right having a radius of 996.84 feet, an Thence S 26°39′12″ W along the That certain parcel of land together arc distance of 158.50 feet, a chord westerly sideline of Falmouth Road a with the buildings thereon located on ° ′ ″ bearing N 2 37 29 W and a chord distance of 102.33 feet to the Point of the easterly side of Meetinghouse Road length of 158.33 feet to a point; Beginning. ° ′ ″ in Mashpee, Barnstable County, Thence S 73 12 45 E along land now The above parcel contains 501,486 +/ Massachusetts, now known and or formerly of Mashpee Wampanoag ¥ s.f. or 11.5125 +/¥ acres. numbered as #184 Meetinghouse Road, Tribal Council Inc. A distance of 86.92 For Grantor’s title see deed dated May described as follows: feet to a point; Beginning at a point (P.O.B. ‘‘B’’) at ° ′ ″ 19, 2008 from the Town of Mashpee, Thence N 13 42 06 E along land now acting by and through its Board of the easterly side of Goodspeed’s or formerly of Mashpee Wampanoag Selectmen, and recorded in the Meetinghouse Road and the easterly Tribal Council Inc. A distance of 70.00 Barnstable Registry of Deeds in Book side of Meetinghouse Road. Said point feet to a point marked by a concrete 23010, Page 37. (P.O.B. ‘‘B’’) lies S 06°34′23″ E a bound with a nail; distance of 64.36 feet from a concrete ° ′ ″ Thence N 74 10 05 W along land Parcel 10—431 Main Street (Assessor’s bound with a drill hole found, thence: now or formerly of Mashpee Parcel 27–42–0–R) By the easterly line of Goodspeed’s Wampanoag Tribal Council Inc. a ° ′ ″ Description of the land in the Meetinghouse Road N 7 50 42 E a distance of 98.78 feet to a point marked Commonwealth of Massachusetts, distance of 157.70 feet to a point, by a concrete bound with a nail at the County of Barnstable, Town of Mashpee, thence; easterly sideline of Meetinghouse Road, on the northerly side of Main Street By the easterly line of Goodspeed’s Thence N 05°22′15″ E along the ° ′ ″ more particularly shown as parcel 27 42 Meetinghouse Road N 22 53 12 E a easterly sideline of Meetinghouse Road 0 on the Town of Mashpee Assessors distance of 196.84 feet to a point, a distance of 186.63 feet to the a point Maps, bounded and described as thence; of curvature; By the easterly line of Goodspeed’s follows: Thence along the easterly sideline of Meetinghouse Road N 29°49′31″ E a Meetinghouse Road a curve to the left Beginning at a broken concrete bound distance of 257.97 feet to a point, having a radius of 1050.00 feet, an arc on the northerly sideline of Main Street thence; distance of 233.86 feet, a chord bearing at the southwesterly corner of the parcel By the easterly line of Goodspeed’s N 1°00′35″ W and a chord length of herein described and at the land now or Meetinghouse Road N 17°54′20″ E a 233.38 feet to a concrete bound at the formerly of Mauro; distance of 11.49 feet to a point at land ° ′ ″ land now or formerly of the Town of Thence N 20 15 55 E along land now of Mashpee Wampanoag Indian Tribal Mashpee; or formerly of Mauro & Aselbekian a Council, Inc., thence; Thence N 73°02′52″ E along land of distance of 150.00 feet to a rod with a By land of Mashpee Wampanoag now or formerly Town of Mashpee a cap at the land now or formerly of Indian Tribal Council, Inc. S 68°19′57″ distance of 720.70 feet to a point marked Mashpee Shores Realty Trust; E a distance of 287.36 feet to a point, by a concrete bound at the land now or Thence N 20°15′55″ E along land now thence; formerly of Nancy D. Ellison and at the or formerly of Mashpee Shores Realty By land of Mashpee Wampanoag land of now or formerly of Scott Trust a distance of 207.89 feet to a point Indian Tribal Council, Inc. S 18°56′33″ Greenwood; at the land now or formerly of Wolf; E a distance of 614.52 feet to a point, Thence S 11°40′13″ E along lands of Thence N 20°15′55″ E along land now thence; now or formerly of Greenwood, of or formerly of Wolf a distance of 70.00 By land of Mashpee Wampanoag Ainsworth and of Draggoo a distance of feet to a concrete bound at the land now Indian Tribal Council, Inc. S 73°07′23″ 381.13 feet to a rod with cap at the or formerly of Bortolotti; E a distance of 301.99 feet to a point, centerline of the way and at the land Thence S 76°03′10″ E along land now thence; now or formerly Michael G. Miller; or formerly of Bortolotti a distance of By land of Mashpee Wampanoag ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Thence S 60 17 07 W along land now 264.65 feet to a concrete bound at the Indian Tribal Council, Inc. N 72 07 25 or formerly of Miller a distance 44.94 land now or formerly of Peters; E a distance of 411.20 feet to a concrete bound with a drill hole set at land of feet to a rod with cap; Thence S 29°16′14″ W along land of ° ′ ″ Town of Mashpee Conservation Thence S 50 37 58 W along land now now or formerly of Peters a distance of Commission, thence; or formerly of Miller a distance of 44.45 477.51 feet to a concrete bound at the By land of Town of Mashpee feet to a rod with cap; northerly sideline of Main Street; Thence S 43°49′11″ W along land now Conservation Commission N 53°00′36″ E or formerly of Miller a distance of 56.00 Thence westerly along the northerly a distance of 567.12 feet to a concrete feet to a rod with cap; sideline of Main Street, on a curve to the bound with a drill hole set in the Thence S 41°13′45″ W along land now right having a radius of 594.62 feet, an westerly line of Noisy Hole Road, arc distance of 189.67 feet with a chord or formerly of Miller a distance of 44.85 ° ′ ″ thence; feet to a rod with cap; bearing N 65 17 58 W and a chord By westerly line of Noisy Hole Road Thence S 38°24′16″ W along land now length of 188.87 feet, to a broken along a non-tangent curve to the RIGHT, or formerly of Miller a distance of 56.58 concrete bound being the Point of having a radius of 1095.10 feet, an arc feet to a rod with cap; Beginning. length of 145.55 feet, and whose long Thence S 23°27′46″ W along land now Above described parcel contains chord bears S 30°06′07″ E a distance of or formerly of Miller a distance of 102,177 s.f. or 2.3456 +/¥ acres. 145.44 feet to a point, thence; 113.79 feet to a rod with cap at the For Grantor’s title see deed dated By westerly line of Noisy Hole Road westerly sideline of Falmouth Road; April 28, 2008 from the Town of along a curve to the LEFT, having a Thence westerly along the sideline of Mashpee, acting by and through its radius of 2636.04 feet, an arc length of Falmouth Road a curve to the left, Board of Selectmen, and recorded in the 435.63 feet, and whose long chord bears radius of 2030.00 feet, an arc distance of Barnstable Registry of Deeds in Book S 31°01′44″ E a distance of 435.13 feet 329.65 feet, a chord bearing S 31°18′19″ 22867, Page 26. to a point, thence;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 953

By westerly line of Noisy Hole Road 186.89 feet to a point on a curve on the distance of 30.00 feet to the approximate along a curve to the RIGHT, having a westerly side line of O’Connell Way; centerline of the Cotley River; radius of 2823.63 feet, an arc length of THENCE southerly along the westerly THENCE S 10°39′46″ W along the 197.19 feet, and whose long chord bears sideline of O’Connell Way on a curve to approximate centerline of Cotley River a S 33°45′45″ E a distance of 197.15 feet the left having a radius of 230.00 feet, distance of 110.86 feet; ° ′ ″ to a point, thence; an arc distance of 92.90 feet, a chord THENCE S 05 31 51 E along the By westerly line of Noisy Hole Road bearing S 30°45′02’’ E and a chord approximate centerline of Cotley River a S 31°45′43″ E a distance of 145.38 feet distance of 43.77 feet; length of 92.27 feet to a point of ° ′ ″ to a concrete bound with a drill hole set tangency; THENCE S 54 00 16 E along the at land of Town of Mashpee THENCE S 42°19′18″ E along the approximate centerline of Cotley River a Conservation Commission, thence; westerly sideline of O’Connell Way a distance of 31.07 feet; THENCE S 58°48′35″ E along the By land of Town of Mashpee distance of 135.62 feet to a point of approximate centerline of Cotley River a Conservation Commission S 69°37′19″ curvature; distance of 35.99 feet; W a distance of 2045.48 feet to a THENCE southerly along the westerly ° ′ ″ concrete bound with a drill hole set, THENCE S 22 35 20 E along the sideline of O’Connell Way on a curve to approximate centerline of Cotley River a thence; the right having a radius of 170.00 feet, By land of Town of Mashpee distance of 27.33 feet; an arc distance of 86.47 feet, a chord THENCE S 15°02′05″ E along the Conservation Commission N 55°19′03″ ° ′ ″ bearing S 27 44 58 E and a chord approximate centerline of Cotley River a W a distance of 34.35 feet to a concrete length of 85.54 feet to a point of bound with a drill hole set in the distance of 115.27 feet; tangency; THENCE S 07°35′17″ W along the easterly line of Meetinghouse Road, THENCE S 13°10′38″ E along the approximate centerline of Cotley River a thence; westerly side line of O’Connell Way a distance of 30.90 feet; By the easterly line of Meetinghouse distance of 218.68 feet to the Point of THENCE S 36°31′36″ W along the Road along a non-tangent curve to the Beginning; approximate centerline of Cotley River a LEFT, having a radius of 1075.46 feet, The above described lot contains distance of 36.78 feet; an arc length of 342.37 feet, and whose ¥ ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ 2.726 +/ acres. THENCE S 22 05 23 W along the long chord bears N 10 09 22 W a approximate centerline of Cotley River a distance of 340.93 feet to a concrete Tract 1—TDC—Lot 13 distance of 37.53 feet; bound with a drill hole found, thence; Description of land in the THENCE S 00°51′38″ E along the By the easterly line of Meetinghouse approximate centerline of Cotley River a ° ′ ″ Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Road N 19 16 34 W a distance of County of Bristol, City of Taunton, on distance of 102.63 feet; 930.78 feet to the Point of Beginning. THENCE S 10°19′41″ E along the ¥ the west side of O’Connell Way off of Parcel 75 contains 46.83 +/ acres. Stevens Street owned by the Taunton approximate centerline of Cotley River a City of Taunton Development Corporation and shown as distance of 132.84 feet to a point at land Assessor’s Parcel 27 on Assessor’s Map now or formerly of Douglas Porter Bristol County, State of Massachusetts 108 and as Lot 13 on a plan by Field Trustee; ° ′ ″ Tract 1—TDC—Lot 9 Engineering Co., Inc. entitled THENCE S 79 40 32 W along land now or formerly of Douglas Porter Description of land in the ‘‘Definitive Subdivision Plan of Land, Liberty and Union Industrial Park— Trustee a distance of 21.00 feet to a Commonwealth of Massachusetts, point also being the end point of a tie County of Bristol, City of Taunton, on Phase II’’ and revised dated 3/08/2006, recorded in Plan Book 458, Page 21, line; the west side of O’Connell Way off of THENCE continuing in the same S Stevens Street owned by the Taunton bounded and described as follows. (For ° ′ ″ the purposes of these drawings, the 79 40 32 W direction along land now Development Corporation and shown as or formerly of Douglas Porter Trustee a Assessor’s Parcel 49 on Assessor’s Map portion of the property boundary defined by the centerline of the Cotley distance of 190.04 feet to a point on the 118 and as Lot 9 on a plan by Field easterly sideline of Massachusetts State River has been approximated by line Engineering Co., Inc. entitled Highway Route 24, Layout #3719; segments with bearings and distances). ‘‘Definitive Subdivision Plan of Land, THENCE N 01°00′57″ E along said Liberty and Union Industrial Park— Beginning on the westerly sideline of easterly sideline of Route 24 a distance Phase II’’ and revised dated 3/08/2006, O’Connell Way, at the southerly corner of 438.59 feet to a Massachusetts recorded in Plan Book 446, Pages 34–36, of the lot to be described and point Highway bound; bounded and described as follows: being the easterly corner of Lot 14 THENCE N 45°35′25″ W along said Beginning on the westerly sideline of owned by Taunton Development easterly sideline of Route 24 a distance O’Connell Way, at the most Corporation (TDC); of 463.25 feet to a Massachusetts ° ′ ″ southeasterly corner of the lot to be THENCE N 69 59 17 W along land Highway bound; described; said point being N 13°10′38″ now or formerly of TDC (Lot 14) a THENCE N 11°44′56″ E along said W and 321.23 feet from a point of distance of 749.99 feet to a point; easterly sideline of Route 24 a distance tangency in the westerly side line of THENCE S 19°57′56″ W along land of 862.24 feet to the southerly sideline O’Connell Way; now or formerly of TDC (Lot 14) a of a railroad right of way owned now or THENCE S 76°49′22″ W along land distance of 301.44 feet to a point and at formerly by the Commonwealth of now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a land now or formerly of Two Stevens Massachusetts; distance of 225.11 feet to a point; LLC; THENCE N 59°53′38″ E along the THENCE N 20°56′02″ W along land THENCE N 69°49′06″ W along land southerly sideline of the railroad right of now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a way a distance of 239.15 feet to a point; distance of 547.76 feet to a point at Lot distance of 200.62 feet to a point also THENCE S 68°51′04″ E along land 14 and land now or formerly of Taunton being the end point of a tie line; now or formerly of James L. Read, Development Corporation (TDC); THENCE continuing in the same N Trustee a distance of 235.00 feet to a THENCE N 87°34′23’’ E along land 69°49′06″ W direction along land now point at the land now or formerly of PR- now or formerly of TDC a distance of or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a Crossroads Commerce Center LLC;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 954 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

THENCE S 24°15′25″ E along land southeasterly corner of the lot to be northwesterly corner of land now or now or formerly of PR-Crossroads described and point being the formerly of Tracey and Troy Hixon; Commerce Center LLC a distance of northeasterly corner of Lot 9 owned by THENCE S 01°02′56″ W along land 500.20 feet to a point; Taunton Development Corporation now or formerly of Hixon a distance of THENCE S 62°44′24″ E along land (TDC); 166.30 feet to an angle point; now or formerly of PR-Crossroads THENCE S 87°34′23″ W along land THENCE S 04°39′04″ E along land Commerce Center LLC a distance of now or formerly of TDC (Lot 9), a now or formerly of Hixon a distance of 203.55 feet to a point; distance of 186.89 feet to a point at land 98.65 feet to a point; ° ′ ″ THENCE N 78°08′37″ E along land now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC; THENCE S 76 07 35 E along land now or formerly of PR-Crossroads THENCE N 70°07′42″ W along land now or formerly of Hixon a distance of Commerce Center LLC a distance of now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a 106.06 feet to a point; ° ′ ″ 227.00 feet to a point; distance of 636.23 feet to a point; THENCE S 73 49 19 E along land THENCE S 14°16′09″ E along land THENCE N 69 °49′06″ W along land now or formerly of Ray A. Nacaula and now or formerly of PR-Crossroads now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a Donnelly a distance of 241.70 feet to a Commerce Center LLC a distance of distance of 46.27 feet to a point at land point at land now or formerly of 77.84 feet to a point on the cul-de-sac now or formerly of TDC (Lot 13); Waterman; ° ′ ″ sideline of O’Connell Way; THENCE N 19 °57′56″ E along land THENCE S 18 49 20 W along land THENCE westerly and southerly along now or formerly of TDC (Lot 13) a now or formerly of Waterman a distance of 151.72 feet to an iron pipe; the sideline of O’Connell Way on a distance of 301.44 feet to a point; ° ′ ″ curve to the left having a radius 75.00 THENCE S 69°59′17″ E along land THENCE N 85 34 00 E along land feet, an arc distance of 190.17 feet, a now or formerly of TDC (Lot 13) a now or formerly of Waterman a distance chord bearing S 21°30′01″ E and a chord distance of 749.99 feet to a point on the of 74.85 feet to an iron pipe at land now length of 143.17 feet to a point of westerly sideline of O’Connell Way; or formerly of Mora and Bell; THENCE S 09°35′20″ E along land reverse curvature; THENCE southerly along the westerly THENCE easterly and southerly along sideline of O’Connell Way on a curve to now or formerly of Mora and Bell and the sideline of O’Connell Way on a the right having a radius of 270.00 feet, land formerly of Oldfield but now of curve to the right having a radius of an arc distance of 59.38 feet, a chord TDC a distance of 279.18 feet to a stone 40.00 feet, an arc distance of 49.33 feet, bearing S 06°48′53″ E and a chord bound; THENCE N 85°33′36″ E along land a chord bearing S 58°48′43″ E and a length of 59.27 feet to a point of formerly of Oldfield but now of TDC a chord length of 46.26 feet to a point of tangency; distance of 304.45 feet to a point on the reverse curvature; THENCE S 00°30′50″ E along the westerly sideline of O’Connell Way a westerly sideline of Stevens Street; THENCE southerly along the westerly THENCE S 09°01′27″ E along the distance of 118.63 feet to a point of sideline of O’Connell Way on a curve to westerly sideline of Stevens Street a curvature; the left having a radius of 330.00 feet, distance of 35.74 feet to a Massachusetts THENCE southerly along the westerly an arc distance of 93.55 feet, a chord Highway bound; ° ′ ″ sideline of O’Connell Way on a curve to bearing S 31 36 18 E and a chord THENCE S 59°54′40″ W along the length of 93.23 feet to a point of the left having a radius of 230.00 feet, land now or formerly of the tangency; an arc distance of 74.93 feet, a chord ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Commonwealth of Massachusetts a THENCE S 39 43 33 E along the bearing S 09 50 48 E and a chord distance of 16.08 feet to a Massachusetts westerly sideline of O’Connell Way a length of 74.60 feet to the Point of Highway bound; distance of 100.06 feet to a point of Beginning. THENCE S 04°25′09″ E along the land curvature; The above described lot contains ¥ now or formerly of the Commonwealth THENCE southerly along the westerly 5.473 +/ acres. of Massachusetts a distance of 11.29 feet sideline of O’Connell Way on a curve to Tract 1—TDC—North side Railroad 45 to a point along the northerly sideline the right having a radius of 270.00 feet, acres of railroad right of way; an arc distance of 125.40 feet, a chord THENCE S 59°53′38″ W along the bearing S 26°25′15″ E and a chord Description of land in the northerly sideline of the railroad right of length of 124.27 feet to the Point of Commonwealth of Massachusetts, way a distance of 884.09 feet to an angle Beginning. County of Bristol, City of Taunton, on point; The above described lot contains the south side of Middleboro Avenue THENCE S 54°50′33″ W along the 22.238 +/¥ acres. and west side of Stevens Street owned northerly sideline of the railroad right of by the Taunton Development Tract 1—TDC—Lot 14 way a distance of 187.40 feet to an angle Corporation and shown as Assessor’s point; Description of land in the Parcel 156 on Assessor’s Map 94 and as THENCE S 59°53′38″ W along the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, shown on a plan by Tibbetts northerly sideline of the railroad right of County of Bristol, City of Taunton, on Engineering Corp. entitled ‘‘Plan of way a distance of 1299.46 feet to a point the west side of O’Connell Way off of Land’’, Prepared for Taunton also being the end point of a tie line; Stevens Street owned by the Taunton Development Corporation (TDC) dated THENCE continuing in the same Development Corporation and shown as 4/25/2002, recorded in Plan Book 406, direction S 59°53′38″ W along the Assessor’s Parcel 26 on Assessor’s Map Pages 66–68, bounded and described as northerly sideline of the railroad right of 108 and as Lot 14 on a plan by Field follows. (For the purposes of these way a distance of 30.01 feet to the Engineering Co., Inc. entitled drawings, the portion of the property approximate centerline of the Cotley ‘‘Definitive Subdivision Plan of Land, boundary defined by the centerline of River channel; Liberty and Union Industrial Park— the Cotley River or the westerly edge of THENCE N 03°10′26″ E along the Phase II’’ and revised dated 3/08/2006, Barstow’s Pond has been approximated approximate centerline of the Cotley recorded in Plan Book 446, Pages 34–36, by line segments with bearings and River channel a distance of 47.17 feet; bounded and described as follows: distances). THENCE N 33°36′32″ E along the Beginning on the westerly sideline of Beginning on the southerly sideline of approximate centerline of the Cotley O’Connell Way, at the most Middleboro Avenue at the River channel a distance of 113.25 feet;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 955

THENCE N 52°39′30″ E along the THENCE S 15°09′39″ E by the distance of 183.57 feet to a corner of approximate centerline of the Cotley approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s land now or formerly of Taunton River channel a distance of 66.39 feet; Pond a distance of 35.95 feet; Development Corporation (TDC); THENCE N 09°47′41″ E along the THENCE S 05°46′00″ E by the THENCE S 85°33′36″ W along land approximate centerline of the Cotley approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s now or formerly of TDC (Assessor Map River channel a distance of 173.55 feet; Pond a distance of 44.65 feet; 94 Lot 156) a distance of 304.45 feet to ° ′ ″ THENCE N 18°32′41″ W along the THENCE S 81 38 17 E by the a stone bound; approximate centerline of the Cotley approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s THENCE N 09°35′20″ W along land River channel a distance of 70.11 feet; Pond a distance of 27.39 feet; ° ′ ″ now or formerly of TDC (Assessor Map THENCE N 25°28′18″ W along the THENCE N 54 43 56 E by the 94 Lot 156) a distance of 184.00 feet to approximate centerline of the Cotley approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s a point at land now or formerly of Mora River channel a distance of 105.43 feet; Pond a distance of 128.51 feet; and Bell; ° ′ ″ THENCE N 01°46′23″ W by the THENCE N 07 01 49 W along the THENCE N 85°33′36″ E along land approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s approximate centerline of the Cotley now or formerly of Mora and Bell a Pond a distance of 113.99 feet; River channel a distance of 127.91 feet; distance of 310.25 feet to the Point of ° ′ ″ THENCE N 25°38′16″ E by the THENCE N 33 55 21 E along the Beginning. approximate centerline of the Cotley approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s Pond a distance of 151.73 feet; The above described lot contains River channel a distance of 103.89 feet; ° ′ ″ 1.293 +/¥ acres. THENCE N 07°23′01″ W along the THENCE N 74 41 23 E by the approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s The above described parcel has taken approximate centerline of the Cotley into consideration the roadway taking River channel a distance of 199.55 feet; Pond a distance of 106.65 feet; ° ′ ″ THENCE N 27°43′59″ E by the by the Commonwealth of THENCE N 13 51 57 E along the Massachusetts, Department of approximate centerline of the Cotley approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s Pond a distance of 20.70 feet to a point Highways, for the relocation of Stevens River channel a distance of 64.35 feet; Street, by taking dated September 8, THENCE N 31°51′07″ E along the near the dam; THENCE N 32°19′00″ E a distance of 1993, recorded with Bristol County approximate centerline of the Cotley 110.00 feet to an iron pipe being the end North District Registry of Deeds in Deed River channel a distance of 175.31 feet; point of a tie line and also being a point Book 5683, Page 12. THENCE N 21°19′23″ E along the on a curve on the southerly sideline of approximate centerline of the Cotley Tract 2—61R Stevens Street and Middleboro Avenue; River channel a distance of 142.74 feet; THENCE easterly along the southerly O’Connell Way, Taunton, MA THENCE N 38°11′09″ E along the sideline of Middleboro Avenue on a Description of land in the approximate centerline of the otley curve to the right having a radius of Commonwealth of Massachusetts, River channel a distance of 173.51 feet; 1975.00 feet, an arc distance of 131.00 County of Bristol, City of Taunton, on THENCE N 63°56′17″ W a distance of feet, a chord bearing S 68°43′59″ E and the west side of Stevens Street and the 96.16 feet to the approximate westerly a chord length of 130.98 feet to a east side of O’Connell Way and more edge of Barstow’s Pond; ° ′ ″ Massachusetts Highway bound; particularly shown as Lot 3A on a plan THENCE N 51 45 07 E by the THENCE S 43°35′26″ E along the approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s by Cullinan Engineering Co. Inc., southerly sideline of Middleboro entitled ‘‘Plan of Land Stevens Street, Pond a distance of 156.13 feet; Avenue a distance of 17.94 feet to a THENCE N 65°12′52″ E by the East Taunton, Massachusetts’’, revised Massachusetts Highway bound; dated May 31, 2005 recorded in Plan approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s THENCE S 55°00′28″ E along the Pond a distance of 162.77 feet; Book 437, Page 30. Also a portion of ° ′ ″ southerly sideline of Middleboro said property is shown on a plan by THENCE N 82 19 48 E by the Avenue a distance of 93.78 feet to at approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s Field Engineering Co. Inc., entitled Massachusetts Highway bound; ‘‘Definitive Subdivision Plan of Land, Pond a distance of 106.19 feet; THENCE S 64°48′14″ E along the THENCE N 35°36′23″ E by the Liberty and Union Industrial Park— southerly sideline of Middleboro Phase II, Taunton Development approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s Avenue a distance of 35.92 feet to the Pond a distance of 22.65 feet; Corporation’’, revised dated March 8, Point of Beginning; 2006, recorded in Plan Book 446, Page THENCE N 08°39′34″ W by the The above described lot contains 35 bounded and described as follows. approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s 45.222 +/¥ acres. Pond a distance of 44.34 feet; Also see Tract 10 (Gap Parcel) THENCE N 17°22′26″ E by the Tract 1—TDC—Stevens Street Single Beginning on the westerly sideline of approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s Lot, Oldfield Stevens Street at the most easterly Pond a distance of 48.53 feet; Description of land in the corner of lot to be described; and point THENCE N 17°23′37″ W by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, being the northeast corner of property approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s County of Bristol, City of Taunton, on now or formerly of Allen; ° ′ ″ Pond a distance of 75.14 feet; the west side of Stevens Street owned THENCE N 68 39 51 W along land THENCE N 03°05′14″ E by the by Taunton Development Corporation now or formerly of Allen and land now approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s and shown as Assessor’s Parcel 36 on or formerly of 71 Stevens Street, LLC a Pond a distance of 41.87 feet; Assessor’s Map 95, bounded and distance of 313.86 feet to a point; THENCE N 76°36′55″ E by the described as follows: THENCE N 69°12′22″ W continuing approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s Beginning at a stake on the westerly along land now or formerly of 71 Pond a distance of 45.99 feet; side of Stevens Street at the most north Stevens Street, LLC a distance of 225.17 THENCE S 37°12′19″ E by the easterly corner of the lot to be described; feet to a point; approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s and point being the south easterly THENCE S 47°56′00″ W along land Pond a distance of 46.41 feet; corner of land now or formerly of Mora now or formerly of 71 Stevens Street, THENCE S 10°11′37″ E by the and Bell; LLC a distance of 87.00 feet to a point; approximate westerly edge of Barstow’s THENCE S 07°47′36″ E along the THENCE S 44°58′21″ W continuing Pond a distance of 55.96 feet; westerly sideline of Stevens Street a along land now or formerly of 71

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 956 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Stevens Street, LLC a distance of 155.46 distance of 325.24 feet to a point of THENCE S 46°27′27″ W along Parcel feet to a point; curvature; B–R as shown on the above referenced THENCE N 13°10′38″ W a distance of THENCE northwesterly along the plan a distance of 53.00 feet to a point 349.05 feet along land now or formerly easterly sideline of O’Connell Way on a at the land now or formerly of One of Taunton Development Corp. (Gap curve to the right having a radius of Stevens LLC; Parcel, see Tract 10) to a point; 250.00 feet, an arc distance of 207.68 THENCE N 73°40′17″ W along land THENCE N 42°19′18″ W a distance of feet, a chord bearing N 36°58′32″ W and now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a 215.61 feet along land now or formerly a chord length of 201.76 feet to a point distance of 73.36 feet to a point; of Taunton Development Corp. (Gap of tangency; THENCE N 04°17′52″ W along land Parcel, see Tract 10) to a point at land THENCE N 13°10′38″ W along the now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a now or formerly of Bellas, Trustee; easterly sideline of O’Connell Way a distance of 281.12 feet to a point of THENCE S 72°20′47″ E a distance of distance of 283.78 feet to a point at land curvature; 491.45 feet along land now or formerly now or formerly Taunton Development THENCE northwesterly along a curve of Bellas, Trustee and land now or Corporation (TDC) (Gap Parcel, Tract to the left having a radius of 110.00 feet, formerly of DeBrum to a point; 10); an arc distance of 108.43 feet, a chord ° ′ ″ THENCE continuing S 72 20 47 E THENCE S 41°25′18″ E along land bearing N 32°32′10″ W and a chord along land now or formerly of DeBrum now or formerly of TDC (Gap Parcel, length of 104.09 feet to a point of a distance of 20.32 feet to a point; Tract 10) a distance of 28.35 feet to a ° ′ ″ tangency; THENCE S 70 48 53 E a distance of point at land now or formerly DaRosa; THENCE N 60°46′27″ W along land ° ′ ″ 141.08 feet along land now or formerly THENCE N 44 58 21 E along land now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a of DeBrum to an iron pipe; now or formerly of DaRosa a distance of ° ′ ″ distance of 50.91 feet to a point; THENCE S 63 11 08 E along land 155.46 feet to a point; THENCE S 85°42′06″ W along land ° ′ ″ now or formerly of DeBrum a distance THENCE N 47 56 00 E along land now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a of 211.40 feet to a point at the land now now or formerly of DaRosa a distance of distance of 60.47 feet to a point of or formerly of Haskins; 87.00 feet to a point; ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ curvature; THENCE S 26 48 58 W along land THENCE S 69 12 22 E along land THENCE northerly along a curve to now or formerly of Haskins a distance now or formerly of DaRosa a distance of the right having a radius of 51.00 feet, of 134.62 feet to a point; 225.17 feet to a point; an arc distance of 110.83 feet, a chord THENCE S 69°41′20″ E along land ° ′ ″ THENCE S 68 39 51 E along land bearing N 32°02′26″ W and a chord now or formerly of Haskins a distance now or formerly of DaRosa a distance of length of 90.28 feet to a point of non- of 167.82 feet to a point at the westerly 192.94 feet to a point at land now or tangency; sideline of Stevens Street; formerly of Allen; THENCE S 60°46′27″ E along land THENCE S 04°48′11″ W along the THENCE S 14°26′52″ W along land now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a westerly sideline of Stevens Street a now or formerly of Allen and land now distance of 112.61 feet to a point on the distance of 50.00 feet to the Point of or formerly of Williams a distance of southerly sideline of O’Connell Way; Beginning; 324.60 feet to a point; THENCE S 60°46′27″ E along the The above described parcel contains THENCE S 65°33′57″ E along land southerly sideline of O’Connell Way a 3.895 +/¥ acres. now or formerly of Williams a distance distance of 421.27 feet to the Point of Tract 3—71 Stevens Street, Taunton, of 150.00 feet to the Point of Beginning; The above described parcel contains Beginning. MA ¥ The above described parcel contains 6.875 +/ acres. ¥ Description of land in the 1.502 +/ acres. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Tract 4—73 Stevens Street, Taunton, MA Tract 5—Lot 11 O’Connell Way County of Bristol, City of Taunton on Taunton, MA the west side of Stevens Street more Description of land in the particularly shown as Lot 2 on a plan by Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Description of land in the Cullinan Engineering Co. Inc., entitled County of Bristol, City of Taunton on Commonwealth of Massachusetts, ‘‘Plan of Land Stevens Street, County the west side of Stevens Street more County of Bristol, City of Taunton on Street and Rte. 24 East Taunton, particularly shown as Lot 2 on a plan by the east side of O’Connell Way off Massachusetts Prepared for Robert Cullinan Engineering Co. Inc., entitled Stevens Street, more particularly shown DiCroce’’, dated March 23, 2005, ‘‘Plan of Land Stevens Street and as Lot 11 on a plan by Cullinan recorded in Plan Book 436, Page 22, O’Connell Way East Taunton, Engineering Co. Inc., entitled bounded and described as follows. Massachusetts, prepared for One ‘‘Definitive Subdivision Modification Beginning on the westerly sideline of Stevens, LLC’’, dated August 13, 2007, Plan of Land Liberty and Union Stevens Street at the southeast corner of recorded in Plan Book 459, Page 72, Industrial Park—Phase II Taunton property now or formerly of Williams; bounded and described as follows. Development Corporation’’, dated THENCE S 19°18′52″ W along the Beginning at the intersection of the March 23, 2007, recorded in Plan Book westerly sideline of Stevens Street a westerly sideline of Stevens Street and 458, Page 21, bounded and described as distance of 186.64 feet to a point of the southerly sideline of O’Connell Way follows. curvature at the beginning of the road and being the most northeasterly corner Beginning at a point along a curve on layout for O’Connell Way; of the property herein described; the easterly sideline of O’Connell Way THENCE southwesterly along the THENCE S 19°26′59″ W along the and said point being the northwesterly northerly sideline of O’Connell Way on westerly sideline of Stevens Street a corner of land now or formerly of a curve to the right having a radius of distance of 66.65 feet to a point; Taunton Development Corporation (Gap 75.00 feet, an arc distance of 130.78, feet THENCE S 29°25′10″ W along the Parcel, Tract 10); a chord bearing S 69°16′13″ W and a westerly sideline of Stevens Street a THENCE northwesterly along the chord length of 114.83 feet to a point of distance of 134.03 feet to a point; easterly sideline of O’Connell Way on a tangency; THENCE S 77°25′54″ W along Parcel curve to the right having a radius of THENCE N 60°46′27″ W along the E as shown on the above referenced 170.00 feet, an arc distance of 94.29 feet, northerly sideline of O’Connell Way a plan a distance of 40.36 feet to a point; a chord bearing N 16°24′14″ W and a

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 957

chord length of 93.09 feet to a point of Tract 10) a distance of 16.65 feet to the THENCE N 15°19′02″ E along land tangency; Point of Beginning. now or formerly of Two Stevens, LLC a THENCE N 00°30′50″ W along the The above described parcel contains distance of 146.85 feet to a point; easterly sideline of O’Connell Way a 14.021 +/¥ acres. THENCE N 85°42′06″ E along land distance of 118.63 feet to a point of now or formerly of Two Stevens, LLC a curvature; Tract 6—50 O’Connell Way distance of 414.39 feet to a point of THENCE northwesterly along the Description of land in the curvature; easterly sideline of O’Connell Way on a Commonwealth of Massachusetts, THENCE northeasterly along land curve to the left having a radius of County of Bristol, City of Taunton on now or formerly of Two Stevens, LLC on 330.00 feet, an arc distance of 225.84 the west side of Stevens Street and the a curve to the left having a radius of feet, a chord bearing N 20°07′12″ W and west side on O’Connell Way more 100.00 feet, an arc distance of 94.52 feet, a chord length of 221.46 feet to a point particularly shown as Lot 1A–R on a a chord bearing N 58°37′25″ E and a of tangency; plan by Cullinan Engineering Co. Inc., chord length of 91.04 feet to a point of THENCE N 39°43′33″ W along the entitled ‘‘Plan of Land Stevens Street tangency; easterly sideline of O’Connell Way a and O’Connell Way East Taunton, THENCE N 31°32′45″ E along land distance of 100.06 feet to a point of Massachusetts prepared for One Stevens now or formerly of Two Stevens, LLC a curvature; LLC’’, dated August 13, 2007, recorded distance of 59.36 feet to a point; ° ′ ″ THENCE northwesterly along the in Plan Book 459, Page 72, bounded and THENCE N 03 58 05 W along land easterly sideline of O’Connell Way on a described as follows. now or formerly of Two Stevens, LLC a curve to the right having a radius of distance of 73.82 feet to a point; Beginning on the southerly sideline of ° ′ ″ 270.00 feet, an arc distance of 119.96 O’Connell Way at the land now or THENCE N 54 21 17 E along land feet, a chord bearing N 26°59′51″ W and formerly of Jamins LLC; now or formerly of Two Stevens, LLC a a chord length of 118.98 feet to a point THENCE N 60°46′27″ W along land distance of 45.25 feet to a point on the of tangency; now or formerly of Jamins LLC a curve of the westerly sideline of ° ′ ″ THENCE N 14 16 09 W along the distance of 112.61 feet to a point at the O’Connell Way; easterly sideline of O’Connell Way and beginning of a non-tangent curve; THENCE southeasterly along the land now or formerly PR-Crossroads THENCE southeasterly along land westerly sideline of O’Connell Way on Commerce Center LLC a distance of now or formerly Jamins LLC on a curve a curve to the left having a radius of 153.52 feet to a point; 310.00 feet, an arc distance of 214.85 ° ′ ″ to the left having a radius of 51.00 feet, ° ′ ″ THENCE N 28 14 17 E along land an arc distance of 110.83 feet, a chord feet, a chord bearing S 40 55 09 E and now or formerly PR-Crossroads bearing S 32°02′26″ E and a chord a chord length of 210.58 feet to a point Commerce Center LLC a distance of length of 90.28 feet to a point of of tangency and at the Point of 220.00 feet to a point; tangency; Beginning. THENCE N 68°59′27″ E along land The above described parcel contains THENCE N 85°42′06″ E along land now or formerly PR-Crossroads 9.146 +/¥ acres. now or formerly of Jamins LLC a Commerce Center LLC a distance of distance of 60.47 feet to a point; Tract 7—60 O’Connell Way, Taunton, 100.00 feet to a point; THENCE S 60°46′27″ E along land MA THENCE N 89°40′32″ E along land now or formerly of Jamins LLC a now or formerly PR-Crossroads Description of land in the distance of 50.91 feet to a point of Commerce Center LLC a distance of Commonwealth of Massachusetts, curvature; 602.55 feet to a point at the land now County of Bristol, City of Taunton on or formerly of Christ Community THENCE southerly along land now or the west side of O’Connell Way off Church, Inc.; formerly of Jamins LLC on a curve to the Stevens Street, more particularly shown THENCE S 13°44′43″ E along land right having a radius of 110.00 feet, an as Lot 1B on plan by Cullinan arc distance of 108.43 feet, a chord Engineering Co. Inc., entitled ‘‘Plan of now or formerly of Christ Community ° ′ ″ Church, Inc. a distance of 223.37 feet to bearing S 32 32 10 E and a chord Land Stevens Street, County Street and a point; length of 104.09 feet to a point of Route 24 East Taunton, Massachusetts THENCE S 08°06′20″ W along land tangency; Prepared for the Maggiore Companies’’, ° ′ ″ now or formerly of Christ Community THENCE S 04 17 52 E along land dated May 29, 2007, rev. June 13, 2007, Church, Inc. a distance of 70.79 feet to now or formerly of Jamins LLC a recorded in Plan Book 458, Page 22, a point; distance of 281.12 feet to a point; bounded and described as follows. (For ° ′ ″ THENCE S 01°38′59″ E along land THENCE S 73 40 17 E along land the purposes of these drawings, the now or formerly of Christ Community now or formerly of Jamins LLC a portion of the property boundary Church, Inc. and land now or formerly distance of 73.36 feet to a point at the defined by the centerline of the Cotley of Bellas, Trustee a distance of 214.50 land now or formerly of Porter, Trustee; River has been approximated by line ° ′ ″ feet to a point; THENCE S 46 27 27 W along land segments with defined bearings and THENCE S 23°51′01″ W along land now or formerly of Porter, Trustee a distances). now or formerly of Bellas, Trustee a distance of 235.54 feet to a point; Beginning on the westerly sideline of distance of 311.52 feet to a point; THENCE N 88°13′45″ W along land O’Connell Way at the most easterly THENCE S 67°36′01″ W along land now or formerly of Porter, Trustee a corner of land now or formerly of now or formerly of Bellas, Trustee a distance of 139.98 feet to a point; Taunton Development Corporation distance of 486.60 feet to a point at land THENCE N 70°55′10″ W along land (TDC) (Lot 9); now or formerly of DaRosa and land now or formerly of Porter, Trustee a THENCE S 13°10′38″ E along the now or formerly of Taunton distance of 530.08 feet to a point; westerly sideline of O’Connell Way a Development Corporation (Gap Parcel, THENCE N 30°37′46″ W along land distance of 321.23 feet to a point of Tract 10); now or formerly of Porter, Trustee a curvature; THENCE S 57°42′31″ W along land distance of 236.68 feet to a point at the THENCE southeasterly along the now or formerly of Taunton land now or formerly of Two Stevens, westerly sideline of O’Connell Way on Development Corporation (Gap Parcel, LLC; a curve to the left having a radius of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 958 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

310.00 feet, an arc distance of 42.67 feet, THENCE N 58°48′35″ W along the Street a distance of 45.36 feet to a a chord bearing S 17°07′14″ E and a approximate centerline of Cotley River a concrete bound; chord length of 42.64 feet to a point at distance of 35.99 feet; THENCE S 36°03′59″ W along the the land now or formerly of One Stevens THENCE N 54°00′16″ W along the westerly sideline of Stevens Street a LLC; approximate centerline of Cotley River a distance of 69.00 feet to a point; ° ′ ″ THENCE S 54°21′17″ W along land distance of 31.07 feet; THENCE S 51 31 40 W along the now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a THENCE N 05°31′51″ W along the westerly sideline of Stevens Street a distance of 45.25 feet to a point; approximate centerline of Cotley River a distance of 178.97 feet to a point at land ° ′ ″ THENCE S 03 58 05 E along land distance of 43.77 feet; now or formerly of Silver City Galleria now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a THENCE N 10°39′46″ E along the LLC; distance of 73.82 feet to a point; THENCE N 88°13′45″ W along land ° ′ ″ approximate centerline of Cotley River a THENCE S 31 32 45 W along land distance of 110.86 feet to a point; now or formerly of Silver City Galleria now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a THENCE S 69°49′06″ E along land LLC a distance of 142.82 feet to a point; THENCE N 72°05′20″ W along land distance of 59.36 feet to a point of now or formerly of TDC (Lot 13) a now or formerly of Silver City Galleria curvature; distance of 30.00 feet to a point also THENCE southwesterly along land LLC a distance of 331.46 feet to a point; being the end point of a tie line; ° ′ ″ now or formerly of One Stevens LLC on ° ′ ″ THENCE N 70 46 43 W along land a curve to the right having a radius of THENCE continuing S 69 49 06 E now or formerly of Silver City Galleria 100.00 feet, an arc distance of 94.52 feet, along land now or formerly of TDC (Lot LLC a distance of 246.11 feet to a a chord bearing S 58°37′25″ W and a 13 & Lot 14) a distance of 246.89 feet to Massachusetts Highway bound; a point; THENCE S 41°20′14″ W along land chord length of 91.04 feet to a point of ° ′ ″ tangency; THENCE S 70 07 42 E along land now or formerly of Silver City Galleria THENCE S 85°42′06″ W along land now or formerly of TDC (Lot 14) a LLC a distance of 70.00 feet to a now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a distance of 636.23 feet to a point at the Massachusetts Highway bound and at distance of 414.39 feet to a point; land of TDC (Lot 9); the northerly sideline of County Street, THENCE S 15°19′02″ W along land THENCE S 20°56′02″ E along land State Highway Route 140, Layout #4865; now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a now or formerly of TDC (Lot 9) a THENCE N 52°11′42″ W along the distance of 146.85 feet to a point at the distance of 547.76 feet to a point; northerly sideline of County Street, land now or formerly of Porter, Trustee; THENCE N 76°49′22″ E along land State Highway Route 140, Layout #4865 THENCE N 30°37′46″ W along land now or formerly of TDC (Lot 9) a a distance of 200.37 feet to a now or formerly of Porter, Trustee a distance of 225.11 feet to the Point of Massachusetts Highway bound; distance of 72.02 feet to a point; Beginning. THENCE N 48°39′46″ W along the THENCE N 60°57′07″ W along land The above described parcel contains northerly sideline of County Street, now or formerly of Porter, Trustee a 26.249 +/¥ acres. State Highway Route 140, Layout #4865 distance of 554.83 feet to a point; a distance of 1040.93 feet to a THENCE N 05°23′38″ W along land Tract 8—Stevens Street and O’Connell Massachusetts Highway bound and at now or formerly of Porter, Trustee a Way the easterly sideline of State Highway distance of 141.69 feet to a point; Description of land in the Route 24, Layout #3719; THENCE N 75°19′32″ W along land Commonwealth of Massachusetts, THENCE N 01°00′57″ E along the now or formerly of Porter, Trustee a County of Bristol, City of Taunton on easterly sideline of State Highway Route distance of 66.89 feet to a point; Stevens Street and Route 140, more 24, Layout #3719 a distance of 290.43 ° ′ ″ THENCE N 10 07 19 W along land particularly shown as Parcels A and B feet to a point and at land now or now or formerly of Porter, Trustee a on a plan by Cullinan Engineering Co. formerly of the Taunton Development distance of 365.13 feet to a point; Inc., entitled ‘‘Plan of Land Stevens Corporation; ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ THENCE S 79 40 32 W along land Street, County Street and Rte. 24 East THENCE N 79 40 32 E along land now or formerly of Porter, Trustee a Taunton, Massachusetts, prepared for now or formerly of Taunton distance of 37.82 feet to the approximate the Maggiore Companies’’, dated May Development Corporation a distance of centerline of the Cotley River and at 29, 2007, recorded in Plan Book 458, 190.04 feet to a point also being the end land now or formerly of TDC (Lot 13); point of a tie line; ° ′ ″ Page 22 and as Parcel E on a plan by ° ′ ″ THENCE N 10 19 41 W along the Cullinan Engineering Co. Inc., entitled THENCE continuing N 79 40 32 E approximate centerline of Cotley River a ‘‘Plan of Land Stevens Street and along land now or formerly of Taunton distance of 132.84 feet; O’Connell Way East Taunton, Development Corporation a distance of THENCE N 00°51′38″ W along the Massachusetts, Prepared for One 21.00 feet to the approximate centerline approximate centerline of Cotley River a Stevens LLC’’, dated August 13, 2007, of the Cotley River and at land now or distance of 102.63 feet; recorded in Plan Book 459, Page 72, formerly of Two Stevens LLC; THENCE N 22°05′23″ E along the THENCE N 79°40′32″ E along land bounded and described as follows: approximate centerline of Cotley River a now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a distance of 37.53 feet; Beginning at a point on the westerly distance of 37.82 feet to a point; THENCE N 36°31′36″ E along the sideline of Stevens Street at the land THENCE S 10°07′19″ E along land approximate centerline of Cotley River a now or formerly of 73 Stevens Street now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a distance of 36.78 feet; Jamins LLC; ° ′ ″ distance of 365.13 feet to a point; THENCE N 07°35′17″ E along the THENCE S 29 25 10 W along the THENCE S 75°19′32″ E along land approximate centerline of Cotley River a westerly sideline of Stevens Street a now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a distance of 30.90 feet; distance of 67.00 feet to a point. distance of 66.89 feet to a point; THENCE N 15°02′05″ W along the THENCE N 56°43′22″ W along the THENCE S 05°23′38″ E along land approximate centerline of Cotley River a sideline of Stevens Street a distance of now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a distance of 115.27 feet; 8.25 feet to a Massachusetts Highway distance of 141.69 feet to a point; THENCE N 22°35′20″ W along the bound; THENCE S 60°57′07″ E along land approximate centerline of Cotley River a THENCE continuing S 36°03′59″ W now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a distance of 27.33 feet; along the westerly sideline of Stevens distance of 554.83 feet to a point;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 959

THENCE S 30°37′46″ E along land distance of 539.91 feet to a point of distance of 100.06 feet to a point of now or formerly of Two Stevens LLC a curvature; curvature; distance of 72.02 feet to a point and at THENCE northwesterly along the THENCE southeasterly along the land now or formerly of One Stevens westerly sideline of O’Connell Way on easterly sideline of O’Connell Way on a LLC; a curve to the left having a radius of curve to the right having a radius of THENCE S 30°37′46″ E along land 170.00 feet, an arc distance of 86.47 feet, 330.00 feet, an arc distance of 225.84 now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a a chord bearing N 27°44′58″ W and a feet, a chord bearing S 20°07′12″ E and distance of 236.68 feet to a point; chord length of 85.54 feet to a point of a chord length of 221.46 feet to a point THENCE S 70°55′10″ E along land tangency; of tangency; now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a THENCE N 42°19′18″ W along the THENCE S 00°30′50″ E along the distance of 530.08 feet to a point; westerly sideline of O’Connell Way a easterly sideline of O’Connell Way a THENCE S 88°13′45″ E along land distance of 135.62 feet to a point of distance of 118.63 feet to a point of now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a curvature; curvature; distance of 139.98 feet to a point; THENCE northwesterly along the THENCE southeasterly along the THENCE N 46°27′27″ E along land westerly sideline of O’Connell Way on easterly sideline of O’Connell Way on a now or formerly of One Stevens LLC a a curve to the right having a radius of curve to the left having a radius of 230.00 feet, an arc distance of 167.83 170.00 feet, an arc distance of 124.05 distance of 235.54 feet to a point and at ° ′ ″ land now or formerly of Jamins LLC; feet, a chord bearing N 21°25′04″ W and feet, a chord bearing S 21 25 04 E and THENCE continuing N 46°27′27″ E a chord length of 164.13 feet to a point a chord length of 121.31 feet to a point of tangency; along land now or formerly of Jamins of tangency; ° ′ ″ LLC a distance of 53.00 feet to a point; THENCE N 00°30′50″ W along the THENCE S 42 19 18 E along the easterly sideline of O’Connell Way a THENCE N 77°25′54″ E along land westerly sideline of O’Connell Way a distance of 135.62 feet to a point of now or formerly of Jamins LLC a distance of 118.63 feet to a point of curvature; distance of 40.36 feet to a point on the curvature; THENCE southeasterly along the westerly sideline of Stevens Street and THENCE northerly along the westerly easterly sideline of O’Connell Way on a the Point of Beginning; The above sideline of O’Connell Way on a curve to curve to the right having a radius of described parcel contains 7.966 +/¥ the left having a radius of 270.00 feet, 230.00 feet, an arc distance of 116.99 acres. an arc distance of 184.78 feet, a chord feet, a chord bearing S 27°44′58″ E and bearing N 20°07′11″ W and a chord a chord length of 115.74 feet to a point Tract 9—O’Connell Way Layout length of 181.20 feet to a point of of tangency; Description of land in the tangency; THENCE S 13°10′38″ E along the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, THENCE N 39°43′33″ W along the easterly sideline of O’Connell Way a County of Bristol, City of Taunton on westerly sideline of O’Connell Way a distance of 533.14 feet to a point of the west side of Stevens Street owned distance of 100.06 feet to a point of curvature; by the Taunton Development curvature; THENCE southeasterly along the Corporation and shown as a proposed THENCE northwesterly along the easterly sideline of O’Connell Way on a roadway layout on a plan by Field westerly sideline of O’Connell Way on curve to the left having a radius of Engineering Co., Inc., entitled a curve to the right having a radius of 250.00 feet, an arc distance of 207.68 ‘‘Definitive Subdivision Plan of Land, 330.00 feet, an arc distance of 93.55 feet, ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ feet, a chord bearing S 36 58 32 E and Liberty and Union Industrial Park— a chord bearing N 31 36 18 W and a a chord length of 201.76 feet to a point Phase II’’ and revised dated 3/08/2006, chord length of 93.23 feet to a point of of tangency; recorded in Plan Book 446, Page 35, and reverse curvature; THENCE S 60°46′27″ E along the a plan entitled, ‘‘Definitive Subdivision THENCE northwesterly along the easterly sideline of O’Connell Way a Modification Plan of Land, Liberty and westerly sideline of O’Connell Way on distance of 325.24 feet to a point of Union Industrial Park—Phase II’’ and a curve to the left having a radius of curvature; dated 3/23/2007, recorded in Plan Book 40.00 feet, an arc distance of 49.33 feet, THENCE northeasterly along the 458, Page 21, bounded and described as a chord bearing N 58°48′43″ W and a easterly sideline of O’Connell Way on a follows. chord length of 46.26 feet to a point of curve to the left having a radius of 75.00 Beginning on the westerly sideline of reverse curvature; feet, an arc distance of 130.78 feet, a Stevens Street at the southeasterly THENCE northerly along the sideline chord bearing N 69°16′13″ E and a chord corner of the parcel to be described; of O’Connell Way on a curve to the right length of 114.83 feet to the Point of THENCE S 19°18′52″ W along the having a radius of 75.00 feet, an arc Beginning; westerly sideline of Stevens Street a distance of 340.17 feet, a chord bearing The above described roadway parcel distance of 155.23 feet to a point at land N 35°47′44″ E and a chord length of contains 3.442 +/¥ acres which, now or formerly Jamins LLC; 115.02 feet to a point of tangency; together with a 512 square foot THENCE N 60°46′27″ W along the THENCE S 14°16′09″ E along the easement on land now or formerly of westerly sideline of O’Connell Way a easterly sideline of O’Connell Way a Jamins LLC, constitute the O’Connell distance of 421.27 feet to a point of distance of 53.96 feet to a point of Way layout. curvature; curvature; The 512 square foot easement THENCE northwesterly along the THENCE southerly along the easterly description begins at a point on the westerly sideline of O’Connell Way on sideline of O’Connell Way on a curve to northerly sideline of Stevens Street a curve to the right having a radius of the left having a radius of 270.00 feet, being S 19°18′52″ W and 155.23 feet 310.00 feet, an arc distance of 257.52 an arc distance of 119.96 feet, a chord distant from the beginning point of feet, a chord bearing N 36°58′32″ W and bearing S 26°59′51″ E and a chord O’Connell Way described above; a chord length of 250.18 feet to a point length of 118.98 feet to a point of THENCE N 60°46′27″ W along the of tangency; tangency; westerly sideline of O’Connell Way a THENCE N 13°10′38″ W along the THENCE S 39°43′33″ E along the distance of 50.55 feet to a point of westerly sideline of O’Connell Way a easterly sideline of O’Connell Way a curvature;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jan 15, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 960 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

THENCE southerly on a curve to the THENCE N 41°25′18″ W along land County Northern District Registry of right having a radius of 60.00 feet, an now or formerly of 71 Stevens Street Deeds, Plan Book 94, Page 9 and being arc distance of 84.01 feet, a chord LLC a distance of 28.35 feet to the Point more particularly described as follows: bearing S 20°39′44″ E and a chord of Beginning. Beginning on the westerly sideline of length of 77.31 feet to a point on the The above described parcel contains Stevens Street, at the most northeasterly northerly sideline of Stevens Street; 0.203 +/¥ acres. corner of the lot to be herein described ° ′ ″ THENCE N 19 26 59 E along the Tract 11—67 Stevens Street and at the southeasterly corner of land northerly sideline of Stevens Street a now or formerly Daniel & Laurie distance of 50.55 feet to the Point of Description of parcel of land in DaRosa; Beginning. Taunton, Massachusetts shown as Tax THENCE S 02°11′22″ W along the Said 512 square foot easement is on Parcel 119–2–0 on the City of Taunton westerly sideline of Stevens Street, a land now or formerly of Jamins LLC and Assessor’s plans, bounded and distance of 116.64 feet to an angle point is intended to be included with and for described as follows: in the westerly sideline of Stevens the use of O’Connell Way. Beginning on the westerly sideline of Street; Stevens Street, at the most northeasterly THENCE S 05°24′21″ W along the Tract 10—Gap of Land Between Land of corner of the lot to be herein described westerly sideline of Stevens Street, a DaRosa and O’Connell Way and at the southeasterly corner of land distance of 22.67 feet to a point at the Description of land in the now or formerly John & Betty Jean land now or formerly of Kathleen & Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Allen; ° ′ ″ Kenneth Williams; County of Bristol, City of Taunton, on THENCE S 07 26 15 W along the THENCE N 65°30′42″ W along land the east side of O’Connell Way off westerly sideline of Stevens Street, a now or formerly of Kathleen & Kenneth Stevens Street being a land gap between distance of 50.49 feet to an angle point Williams, a distance of 150.68 feet to a the layout of O’Connell Way and Lot 10 in the westerly sideline of Stevens concrete bound at the land now or in Plan Book 446, Page 35 and Parcel 2 Street; formerly of 71 Stevens Street LLC; THENCE S 13°24′15″ W along the described in a the deed from Taunton THENCE N 14°26′52″ E along land westerly sideline of Stevens Street, a Development Corporation to Daniel G. now or formerly of 71 Stevens Street distance of 46.49 feet to an angle point DaRosa and Laurie B. DaRosa, dated LLC, a distance of 124.60 feet to a in the westerly sideline of Stevens July 18, 2005, recorded in Deed Book concrete bound at the land of Daniel & Street; 15013, Page 42, bounded and described Laurie DaRosa; THENCE S 18°41′39″ W along the as follows. THENCE S 68°39′51″ E along Beginning on the easterly sideline of westerly sideline of Stevens Street, a distance of 103.43 feet to land now or stonewall remains and land now or O’Connell Way at the most formerly of Daniel & Laurie DaRosa, a southwesterly corner of the parcel to be formerly of 71 Stevens Street LLC; THENCE N 65°33′57″ W along land distance of 120.92 feet to the Point of described; now or formerly of 71 Stevens Street Beginning. THENCE N 13°10′38″ W along the LLC, a distance of 150.00 feet to corner The above described lot contains easterly sideline of O’Connell Way a ¥ of land now or formerly of 71 Stevens 0.396 +/ acres. distance of 249.36 feet to a point of Street LLC; Being the same premises conveyed to curvature; THENCE N 14°26′52″ E along land John M. Allen by deed of John M. Allen THENCE northwesterly along the now or formerly of 71 Stevens Street and Betty Jean Allen dated June 4, 2011 easterly sideline of O’Connell Way on a LLC, a distance of 200.00 feet to a and recorded in Deed Book 20376, page curve to the left having a radius of concrete bound at the land of John & 275. 230.00 feet, an arc distance of 116.99 ° ′ ″ Betty Jean Allen; Tract 13—61F Stevens Street feet, a chord bearing N 27 44 58 W and THENCE S 65°30′42″ E along land a chord length of 115.74 feet to a point now or formerly of John & Betty Jean Description of parcel of land in of tangency; Taunton, Massachusetts shown as Tax ° ′ ″ Allen, a distance of 150.68 feet to the THENCE N 42 19 18 W along the Point of Beginning. Parcel 109–17–0 on the City of Taunton easterly sideline of O’Connell Way a The above described lot contains Assessors’ Plans and being more distance of 135.62 feet to a point of 0.699 +/¥ acres. particularly described as follows: curvature; Being the same premises conveyed to The land located on the westerly side THENCE northwesterly along the Kathleen Williams and Kenneth of Stevens Street, East Taunton, Bristol easterly sideline of O’Connell Way on a Williams by deed of Ernestina R. Torres County, Massachusetts shown as Lot 3B curve to the right having a radius of and Nelson Henriquez, dated July 28, on a plan entitled, ‘‘Plan of Land 170.00 feet an arc distance of 29.76 feet, 2005 and recorded in Deed Book 15029, Stevens Street, East Taunton, ° ′ ″ a chord bearing N 37 18 28 W and a Page 189. Massachusetts, prepared for Taunton chord length of 29.72 feet to a point at Development Corporation’’, prepared by land now or formerly L & U LLC; Tract 12—65 Stevens Street Cullinan Engineering, Scale 1″ = 30′ THENCE N 57°42′31″ E along land Description of parcel of land in revised dated May 31, 2005 which plan now or formerly L & U LLC distance of Taunton, Massachusetts shown as tax is recorded with the Bristol County 16.65 feet to a point at land now or parcel 119–3–0 on the City of Taunton Northern District Registry of Deeds in formerly of Darosa (Tract 2); Assessor’s plans, bounded and Plan Book 437, Page 30, containing THENCE S 42°19′18″ E along land described as follows: approximately 0.42 acres and known as now or formerly of DaRosa (Tract 2) a The land in Taunton, on the and numbered 61F Stevens Street, distance of 215.61 feet to a point; northwesterly side of Stevens Street, bounded and described as follows: THENCE S 13°10′38″ E along land being shown as Lot #9A on a plan Beginning on the westerly sideline of now or formerly of DaRosa (Tract 2) a entitled ‘‘Property of Richard C. Tilton Stevens Street, at the most northeasterly distance of 349.05 feet to a point at land et ux Taunton, Mass. Scale 1″ = 20′ July corner of the lot to be herein described now or formerly of 71 Stevens Street 8, 1964 John P. Gonzals, Surveyor’’, and at the southeasterly corner of land LLC; which plan is recorded with Bristol now or formerly Edwin DeBrum;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 961

THENCE S 04°48′11″ W along the ADDRESSES: The meeting will be ACTION: Notice of public meeting. westerly sideline of Stevens Street, a conducted at the BLM Rock Springs distance of 124.70 feet to a point at the Field Office, 280 Highway 191 North, SUMMARY: In accordance with the land now or formerly of Daniel & Laurie Rock Springs, Wyoming. Federal Land Policy and Management DaRosa; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ° ′ ″ Act and the Federal Advisory THENCE N 69 41 20 W along land Christian Venhuizen, Wyoming Committee Act, the Bureau of Land now or formerly of Daniel & Laurie Resource Advisory Council Coordinator, Management’s (BLM) Las Cruces District DaRosa, a distance of 167.82 feet to a Wyoming State Office, 5353 Resource Advisory Council (RAC) will point at the corner of land now or Yellowstone Road, Cheyenne, WY meet as indicated below. formerly of Daniel & Laurie DaRosa; ° ′ ″ 82009; telephone 307–775–6103; email THENCE N 26 48 58 E along land [email protected]. Persons who use a DATES: The RAC will meet on January now or formerly of Daniel & Laurie telecommunications device for the deaf 28, 2016. DaRosa, a distance of 134.62 feet to a may call the Federal Information Relay ADDRESSES: The meeting will be point at the land of Edwin DeBrum; Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 to THENCE S 63°11′08″ E along land conducted at the BLM Las Cruces contact the above individual during District Office, 1800 Marquess Street, now or formerly of Edwin DeBrum, a normal business hours. The FIRS is Las Cruces, New Mexico from 9:00 distance of 120.00 feet to the Point of available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, a.m.–12 p.m. Following the meeting, the Beginning. to leave a message or question with the The above described lot contains BLM and RAC will tour the Pen˜ a Blanca above individual. You will receive a 0.416 +/¥ acres. reply during normal business hours. Wilderness Study Area (WSA) located Being the same premises conveyed to in the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 10- Edward A. Haskins, Jr. and Sheri L. National Monument. The field tour will member RAC advises the Secretary of Haskins by deed of Jeffrey D. Smith depart from the BLM office at 1:30 p.m. dated December 30, 2005, recorded in the Interior on a variety of management issues associated with public land and conclude at 5:00 p.m. Both the Deed Book 15519, Pa meeting and field tour is open to the The above-described lands contain a management in Wyoming. Planned public. total of 321.34 acres, more or less, agenda topics for the February meeting DATES which are subject to all valid rights, (see ) include discussions on fees FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: for the National Historic Trails reservations, rights-of-way, and Deborah Stevens, BLM Las Cruces Interpretive Center, invasive species, easements of record. District, 1800 Marquess Street, Las and the Rock Springs RMP revision and This proclamation does not affect title Cruces, NM 88001, 575–525–4421. follow-up to previous RAC meetings. On to the land described above, nor does it Persons who use a telecommunications affect any valid existing easements for Friday, February 5, the meeting will device for the deaf (TDD) may call the public roads, highways, public utilities, begin with a public comment period, at Federal Information Relay Service railroads, and pipelines or any other 8 a.m. Depending on the number of valid easements of rights-of-way or persons wishing to comment and time (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8229, to contact reservations of record. available, the time for individual oral the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 Dated: December 30, 2015. comments may be limited. If there are no members of the public interested in hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a Kevin K. Washburn, speaking, the meeting will move message or question with the above Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. promptly to the next agenda item. The individual. You will receive a reply [FR Doc. 2016–00310 Filed 1–6–16; 4:15 pm] public may also submit written during normal business hours. BILLING CODE 4337–15–P comments to the RAC by emailing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 10- [email protected], with the subject member Las Cruces District RAC advises line ‘‘RAC Public Comment’’ or by DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR the Secretary of the Interior, through the submitting comments during the BLM, on a variety of planning and Bureau of Land Management meeting to the RAC coordinator. Typed or written comments will be provided to management issues associated with [LLWY910000 L16100000 XX0000] RAC members as part of the meeting’s public land management in New minutes. Mexico. Notice of Public Meeting; Wyoming Planned agenda items include Resource Advisory Council Dated: December 31, 2015. Mary Jo Rugwell, updates on the proposed Organ AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, State Director (acting). Mountains-Desert Peaks Resource Interior. Management Plan and Environmental [FR Doc. 2016–00001 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] ACTION: Notice of public meeting. Impact Statement (EIS); the Afton Solar BILLING CODE 4310–22–P Energy Zone (SEZ) and Regional SUMMARY: In accordance with the Mitigation Plan; and other major Federal Land Policy and Management projects in the Las Cruces District. Act of 1976 and the Federal Advisory DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR A half-hour public comment period, Committee Act of 1972, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management Department of the Interior, Bureau of during which the public may address Land Management (BLM) Wyoming [LLNML00000 L12200000.DF0000 the Council, will begin at 11:30 a.m. Resource Advisory Council (RAC) will 16XL1109AF] Depending on the number of meet as indicated below. individuals wishing to comment and Notice of Public Meeting, Las Cruces DATES: time available, the time for individual The meeting is scheduled for, District Resource Advisory Council oral comments may be limited. In Wednesday, February 3, 2016, from 1 Meeting, New Mexico p.m. to 5 p.m.; Thursday, February 4, addition, the public may send written 2016, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.; and Friday, AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, comments to the RAC at the BLM Las February 5, 2016, from 8 a.m. to noon. Interior.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 962 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Cruces District Office, 1800 Marquess CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that to withhold your personal identifying Street, Las Cruces, NM 88001. the renewal of the National Park System information from public review, we Advisory Board is necessary and in the cannot guarantee that we will be able to Melanie Barnes, public interest in connection with the do so. Acting Deputy State Director, Lands and performance of duties imposed on the Resources. Department of the Interior by the ALABAMA [FR Doc. 2016–00177 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] National Park Service Organic Act (54 Tuscaloosa County BILLING CODE 4310–FB–P U.S.C. 100101(a) et seq.), and other Downtown Tuscaloosa Historic District statutes relating to the administration of (Boundary Increase III and Boundary the National Park Service. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Decrease), Bounded by 3rd & 6th Sts., 21st Dated: December 22, 2015. & Lurleen Wallace South Aves., National Park Service Sally Jewell, Tuscaloosa, 15000990 Secretary of the Interior. ARKANSAS [NPS–WASO–DPOL–18874: [FR Doc. 2015–33277 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Carroll County PPWODIREP0][PPMPSPD1Y.YM0000] BILLING CODE 4310–EE–P Crescent Hotel, 75 Prospect Ave., Eureka National Park System Advisory Board; Springs, 15000991 Charter Renewal DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Columbia County AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. Overstreet Hall, (New Deal Recovery Efforts National Park Service in Arkansas MPS) NW. of jct. of E. ACTION: Charter renewal. [NPS–WASO–NRNHL–19984; University & N. Jackson Sts., Magnolia, 15000992 SUMMARY: The Secretary of the Interior PPWOCRADI0, PCU00RP14.R50000] intends to renew the National Park Conway County System Advisory Board, in accordance National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations Union Chapel School and Shop Building, with section 14(b) of the Federal (Public Schools in the Ozarks MPS) 298 Advisory Committee Act. This action is and Related Actions Union Chapel Rd. & 28 Acker Ln., necessary and in the public interest in AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. Springfield, 15000993 connection with the performance of ACTION: Notice. Little River County statutory duties imposed upon the Little River County Training School Historic Department of the Interior and the SUMMARY : The National Park Service is District, 100 W. Hamilton St., Ashdown, National Park Service. soliciting comments on the significance 15000994 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of properties nominated before Shirley Sears, Office of Policy, National December 12, 2015, for listing or related Monroe County Park Service, 202–354–3955. actions in the National Register of Monroe County Bank Building, 225–227 W. Cypress Sts., Brinkley, 15000995 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board Historic Places. is authorized by 54 U.S.C. 102303 (part DATES: Comments should be submitted GEORGIA by January 25, 2016. of the 1935 Historic Sites, Buildings and Bibb County Antiquities Act) and has been in ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent via U.S. Postal Service to the National Levitt, William and Jane, House, 3720 existence almost continuously since Overlook Dr., Macon, 15000996 1935. Pursuant to 54 U.S.C. 102303, the Register of Historic Places, National legislative authorization for the Board Park Service, 1849 C St. NW., MS 2280, IOWA expired January 1, 2010. However, due Washington, DC 20240; by all other Sac County carriers, National Register of Historic to the importance of the issues on which Perkins, George and Lola, House, 803 W. the Board advises, the Secretary of the Places, National Park Service, 1201 Eye Main St., Sac City, 15000997 Interior exercised the authority St. NW., 8th floor, Washington, DC Sac City Chicago and North Western Depot, contained in 54 U.S.C. 100906 to re- 20005; or by fax, 202–371–6447. (Advent & Development of Railroads in establish and continue the Board as a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Iowa MPS) 103 N. 13th St., Sac City, discretionary committee from January 1, The properties listed in this notice are 15000998 2010, until such time as it may be being considered for listing or related LOUISIANA legislatively reauthorized. If the Board is actions in the National Register of reauthorized legislatively within 2 years Historic Places. Nominations for their Grant Parish of the date of the renewal charter, the consideration were received by the Hotel Lesage, 101 Main St., Colfax, 15000999 Board will revert to a legislative Board. National Park Service before December Iberville Parish The advice and recommendations 12, 2015. Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 Bayou Paul Colored School, 915 Bayou Paul provided by the Board and its CFR part 60, written comments are Rd., St. Gabriel, 15001000 subcommittees fulfill an important need being accepted concerning the within the Department of the Interior significance of the nominated properties Orleans Parish and the National Park Service, and it is under the National Register criteria for Bristow Tower, 4537 Magnolia St., New necessary to re-establish the Board to evaluation. Orleans, 15001001 ensure its work is not disrupted. The Before including your address, phone Gem Theater, 3940 Thalia St., New Orleans, Board’s 12 members will be balanced to number, email address, or other 15001002 represent a cross-section of disciplines personal identifying information in your Lafitte Avenue Project Buildings C–47, E–45 and No. 46, (United States Housing and expertise relevant to the National comment, you should be aware that Authority Funded Public Housing in Park Service mission. The renewal of your entire comment—including your Louisiana MPS) Corner of Lafitte Ave. & N. the Board comports with the personal identifying information—may Johnson St., New Orleans, 15001003 requirements of the Federal Advisory be made publicly available at any time. Louisiana Superdome, 1500 Sugar Bowl Dr., Committee Act, as amended. While you can ask us in your comment New Orleans, 15001004

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 963

Rapides Parish appropriate experimental and Mr. Rob Billerbeck, National Park Rapides Parish Library, 411 Washington St., management actions that will meet the Service, [email protected], Alexandria, 15001005 requirements of the Grand Canyon 303–987–6789. West Carroll Parish Protection Act, maintain or improve SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The hydropower production, and minimize purpose of the proposed action is to Oak Grove Community House, 414 James St., impacts on resources, including those of Oak Grove, 15001006 provide a comprehensive framework for importance to American Indian Tribes. adaptively managing Glen Canyon Dam MASSACHUSETTS DATES: Written comments on the DEIS over the next 20 years consistent with Worcester County should be submitted by April 7, 2016. the Grand Canyon Protection Act and Barnes—Hill House, 12 N. Brookfield Rd., Public meetings and webinars to other provisions of applicable Federal Spencer, 15001007 provide information and receive written law. The proposed action will help comments will be held on: determine specific dam operations and MISSOURI • Webinar—Tuesday, February 16, actions that could be implemented to St. Louis Independent city 2016, at 6:30 p.m. MST; improve conditions and continue to • Gravois—Jefferson Streetcar Suburb Historic Meeting—Monday, February 22, meet the Grand Canyon Protection Act’s District (Boundary Increase), (South St. 2016, at 6:00 p.m. MST, Flagstaff, requirements and to minimize— Louis Historic Working and Middle Class Arizona; consistent with law—adverse impacts Streetcar Suburbs MPS) 2644–54 Gravois • Meeting—Thursday, February 25, on the downstream natural, recreational, Ave., St. Louis (Independent City), 2016, at 6:00 p.m. MST, Phoenix, and cultural resources in Glen Canyon 15001008 Arizona; and National Recreation Area and Grand • SOUTH CAROLINA Webinar—Tuesday, March 1, 2016, Canyon National Park, including at 1:00 p.m. MST. resources of importance to American Spartanburg County Staff will be available to take Indian Tribes. Duncan Park Stadium, 0 W. Park Dr., comments and answer questions during The need for the proposed action Spartanburg, 15001009 this time. stems from the need to use scientific Authority: 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60. ADDRESSES: You may submit written information developed since the 1996 Dated: December 15, 2015. comments by the following methods: Record of Decision (ROD) to better • J. Paul Loether, Web site: http:// inform the public of Department of the parkplanning.nps.gov/LTEMPEIS. Interior decisions on dam operations Chief, National Register of Historic Places/ • National Historic Landmarks Program. Mail: Glen Canyon Dam LTEMP and other management and Draft EIS, Argonne National Laboratory, [FR Doc. 2016–00101 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] experimental actions so that the 9700 South Cass Avenue—EVS/240, Secretary of the Interior may continue to BILLING CODE 4312–51–P Argonne, Illinois 60439. meet statutory responsibilities for Comments will not be accepted by protecting downstream resources for DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR facsimile, email, or in any other way future generations, conserving than those specified above. Bulk Endangered Species Act-listed species, Bureau of Reclamation comments in any format (hard copy or avoiding or mitigating impacts on electronic) submitted on behalf of others National Register of Historic Properties- [RR02013000, XXXR5537F3, will not be accepted. RX.19871110.1000000] eligible properties, and protecting the Public meetings will be held at the interests of American Indian Tribes, National Park Service following locations: while meeting obligations for water • Flagstaff—USGS Grand Canyon delivery and the generation of [PPIMIMRO3L, PPMRSNR1Y.AR0000, Monitoring and Research Center, 2255 hydroelectric power. FPDEFAULT] N. Gemini Road, Flagstaff, Arizona 86001. The DEIS Analyzes Seven Alternatives Notice of Availability and Notice of • Phoenix—Embassy Suites Phoenix- The DEIS assesses the potential Public Meetings for the Draft Tempe, 4400 S. Rural Road, Tempe, environmental effects of seven Environmental Impact Statement for Arizona 85282. alternatives being considered: The No- the Long-Term Experimental and For specific information about the Action Alternative (Alternative A) and Management Plan for the Operation of web-based meetings, please refer to the six Action Alternatives (Alternatives B, Glen Canyon Dam, Page, Arizona LTEMP EIS Web site at: http:// C, D, E, F, and G), which are described AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation and ltempeis.anl.gov/. below. There are a number of National Park Service, Interior. The DEIS may be viewed at the experimental and management actions LTEMP EIS Web site at: http:// ACTION: Notice. that would be incorporated into all of ltempeis.anl.gov/. Compact disc copies the LTEMP Action Alternatives, except SUMMARY: The Department of the of the DEIS are available for public where noted: Interior, through the Bureau of inspection at several libraries and • High-flow experimental releases for Reclamation and National Park Service government offices. To request a sediment conservation— (NPS), has made available for public compact disc of the DEIS, please contact Implementation of high-flow review and comment the Draft Argonne at the address cited above or experiments (HFEs) under all Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) call 630–252–3169. alternatives are patterned after the for the Long-Term Experimental and See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION current HFE protocol (adopted in 2012), Management Plan for the Operation of section for specific locations where the but each alternative includes specific Glen Canyon Dam (LTEMP). The DEIS is available for public inspection. modifications related to the frequency of LTEMP would determine specific FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. spring and fall HFEs, the triggers for options for dam operations (including Beverley Heffernan, EIS Project HFEs, and the overall process for hourly, daily, and monthly release Manager, Bureau of Reclamation, implementation of HFEs, including patterns), non-flow actions, and [email protected], 801–524–3712; or implementation considerations and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 964 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

conditions that would result in Management Program, including a live removal fails, in which case fish discontinuing specific experiments. research and monitoring component. would be euthanized and used for later • beneficial use. Nonnative fish control actions— Alternative A: The No-Action Implementation of control actions for Alternative Alternative B nonnative brown and rainbow trout are patterned after those identified in the Alternative A represents continued The objective of Alternative B is to Nonnative Fish Control Environmental operation of Glen Canyon Dam as increase hydropower generation while Assessment (EA) and Finding of No guided by the 1996 ROD for operations limiting impacts on other resources and Significant Impact (adopted in 2012). of Glen Canyon Dam: Modified low relying on flow and non-flow actions to Nonnative fish control actions are not fluctuating flow, as modified by recent the extent possible to mitigate impacts included in Alternative F. Department of the Interior decisions, of higher fluctuations. Alternative B • Conservation measures identified in including those specified in the 2007 focuses on non-flow actions and the 2011 biological opinion on ROD on Colorado River Interim experiments to address sediment operations of Glen Canyon Dam— Guidelines for Lower Basin Shortages resources, nonnative fish control, and Potential measures include the and Coordinated Operations for Lakes on native and nonnative fish establishment of a humpback chub Powell and Mead (Interim Guidelines) communities. refuge, evaluation of the suitability of (until 2026), the HFE EA, and the Under Alternative B, monthly habitat in the lower Grand Canyon for Nonnative Fish Control EA (both volumes would be the same as under the razorback sucker, and establishment expiring in 2020). As is the case for all current operations, but daily flow alternatives, Alternative A also includes of an augmentation program for the fluctuations would be higher than under implementation of existing and planned razorback sucker, if appropriate. Other current operations in most months. NPS management activities, with measures include humpback chub Compared to current operations, the durations as specified in NPS translocation, Bright Angel Creek brown hourly up-ramp rate would remain management documents. trout control, Kanab ambersnail Under Alternative A, daily flow unchanged at 4,000 cfs/hour, but the monitoring, determination of the fluctuations would continue to be hourly down-ramp rate would be feasibility of flow options to control determined according to monthly increased to 4,000 cfs/hour in November trout including increasing daily down- volume brackets as follows: 5,000 cubic through March and 3,000 cfs/hour in ramp rates to strand or displace age-0 feet per second (cfs) daily range for other months. trout and high flow followed by low monthly volumes less than 600 Alternative B includes flow to strand or displace age-0 trout, thousand acre-feet (kaf); 6,000 cfs daily implementation of the nonnative fish assessments of the effects of actions on range for monthly volumes between 600 control protocol and HFE protocol humpback chub populations, sediment kaf and 800 kaf; and 8,000 cfs for through the entire LTEMP period, but research to determine effects of monthly volumes greater than 800 kaf. HFEs would be limited to a maximum equalization flows, and Asian tapeworm Under Alternative A, the current HFE of one in spring or fall every other year. monitoring. Most of these conservation protocol would be followed until it In addition to these experimental measures are ongoing and are elements expired in 2020. Under this protocol, actions, Alternative B would test trout of existing management practices (e.g., high-flow releases may be made in management flows and hydropower brown trout control, humpback chub spring (March and April) or fall improvement flows. With trout translocation, and sediment research to (October and November). HFE management flows, high flows (e.g., determine the effects of equalization magnitude would range from 31,500 cfs 20,000 cfs) would be maintained for 2 flows), while others are being to 45,000 cfs. The duration would range or 3 days followed by a very sharp drop considered for further action under the from less than 1 hour to 96 hours. in flows to a minimum level (e.g., 5,000 LTEMP (e.g., trout management flows). Frequency of HFEs would be cfs) for the purpose of reducing annual • Experimental and management determined by tributary sediment recruitment of trout. Hydropower actions at specific sites such as inputs, resource conditions, and a improvement experiments would test nonnative plant removal, revegetation decision process carried out by the maximum powerplant capacity flows up with native species, and mitigation at Department of the Interior. The HFE to four times during the LTEMP period, specific and appropriate cultural sites— protocol uses a ‘‘store and release’’ but only in years with annual volumes included are pilot experimental riparian approach in which sediment inputs are ≤8.23 million acre-feet (maf). vegetation restoration actions planned tracked over two accounting periods, Alternative C by the NPS. These actions would also one for each seasonal HFE: Spring have involvement from tribes to capture (December through June) and fall (July The objective of Alternative C is to concerns regarding culturally significant through November). Under the protocol, adaptively operate Glen Canyon Dam to native plants, and would provide an the maximum possible magnitude and achieve a balance of resource objectives opportunity to integrate Traditional duration of HFE that would achieve a with priorities placed on humpback Ecological Knowledge in a more applied positive sand mass balance in Marble chub, sediment, and minimizing manner into the long-term adaptive Canyon, as determined by modeling, impacts on hydropower. Alternative C management program (described in would be implemented. features a number of condition- more detail below). Under Alternative A, the current dependent flow and non-flow actions • Preservation of historic properties nonnative fish control protocol would that would be triggered by resource through a program of research, be followed until it expired in 2020. conditions. The alternative uses monitoring, and mitigation to address Mechanical removal would primarily decision trees to identify when erosion and preservation of consist of the use of boat-mounted experimental changes in base operations archeological and ethnographic sites electrofishing equipment to remove all or other planned action is needed to and minimize loss of integrity at nonnative fish captured. Captured protect resources. Operational changes National Register historic properties. nonnative fish would be removed alive or implementation of non-flow actions • Continued adaptive management and potentially stocked into areas that could be triggered by changes in under the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive have an approved stocking plan, unless sediment input, humpback chub

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 965

numbers and population structure, trout contract rate of delivery. This produced July, and August, and 10 × monthly numbers, and water temperature. a redistribution of monthly release volume in kaf in other months). Monthly release volumes under volumes under Alternative D that would Experimentation under Alternative E Alternative C in August through result in the most even distribution of includes testing the effects of the November would be lower than those flows of any alternative except for following actions: (1) Sediment- under most other alternatives to reduce Alternative G. The allowable within-day triggered fall HFEs through the entire sediment transport rates during the fluctuation range from Glen Canyon 20-year LTEMP period, (2) sediment- monsoon period. Release volumes in the Dam would be proportional to the triggered spring HFEs only in the high power demand months of volume of water scheduled to be second 10 years of the LTEMP period, December, January, and July would be released during the month (10 × (3) 24-hour proactive spring HFEs in increased to compensate for water not monthly volume in kaf in the high- high volume years (≥10 maf release released in August through November, demand months of June, July, and volume), (4) reducing fluctuations and volumes in February through June August and 9 × monthly volume in kaf before fall HFEs, (5) mechanical removal would be patterned to follow the in other months). Up- and down-ramp of trout near the Little Colorado River monthly hydropower demand as rates would be the same as Alternative confluence, (6) trout management flows, defined by the contract rate of delivery. C. and (7) low summer flows in the second Under Alternative C, the allowable Experimentation under Alternative D 10 years of the LTEMP period to allow within-day fluctuation range from Glen includes testing the effects of the greater warming. Canyon Dam would be proportional to following actions: (1) Sediment- Alternative F monthly volume (7 × monthly volume triggered spring and fall HFEs through in kaf). The down-ramp rate would be the entire 20-year LTEMP period, (2) 24- The objective of Alternative F is to a increased to 2,500 cfs/hour, but the up- hour proactive spring HFEs in high provide flows that follow a more natural ramp rate would remain unchanged at volume years (≥10 maf release volume), pattern of high spring, and low summer, 4,000 cfs/hour. (3) extension of the duration of up to fall, and winter flows while limiting Experimentation under Alternative C 45,000 cfs fall HFEs for as many as 250 sediment transport and providing for includes testing the effects of the hours depending on sediment warming in summer months. In keeping following actions: (1) Sediment- availability, (4) reducing fluctuations with this objective, Alternative F does triggered spring and fall HFEs through after fall HFEs, (5) mechanical removal not feature some of the flow and non- the entire 20-year LTEMP period, (2) 24- of trout near the Little Colorado River flow actions of the other alternatives. hour proactive spring HFEs in high confluence, (6) trout management flows, Under Alternative F, peak flows volume years (≥10 maf release volume), (7) low summer flows in the second 10 would be lower than pre-dam (3) extension of the possible duration of years of the LTEMP period to allow magnitudes to reduce sediment fall HFEs while maintaining a maximum greater warming, and (8) sustained low transport and erosion given the reduced total volume of a 96-hour 45,000 cfs flows to improve the aquatic food base. sand supply downstream of the dam. release, (4) reducing fluctuations before Peak flows would be provided in May and after HFEs, (5) mechanical removal Alternative E and June, which corresponds well with of trout near the Little Colorado River The objective of Alternative E is to the timing of the pre-dam peak. The confluence, (6) trout management flows, provide for recovery of the humpback overall peak flow in an 8.23 maf year and (7) low summer flows during the chub while protecting other important would be 20,000 cfs (scaled entire LTEMP period to allow greater resources including sediment, the proportionately in drier and wetter warming. rainbow trout fishery at Lees Ferry, years), and would include a 24 hour aquatic food base, and hydropower 45,000 cfs flow at the beginning of the Alternative D: The Preferred resources. Alternative E features a spring peak period (e.g., on May 1) if Alternative number of condition-dependent flow there was no triggered spring HFE in Alternative D is the preferred and non-flow actions that would be same year, and a 168 hour (7 day) alternative for the LTEMP. The objective triggered by resource conditions. 25,000 cfs flow at the end of June. of Alternative D is to adaptively operate Under Alternative E, monthly Following this peak, there would be a Glen Canyon Dam to best meet the volumes would closely follow the rapid drop to the summer base flow. resource goals of the LTEMP. Like monthly hydropower demand as The initial annual 45,000 cfs flow Alternative C, Alternative D features a defined by the contract rate of delivery. would serve to store sediment above the number of condition-dependent flow The total monthly release volume of flows of the remainder of the peak, thus and non-flow actions that would be October, November, and December, limiting sand transport further triggered by resource conditions. however, would be equal to that under downstream and helping to conserve Under Alternative D, the total Alternative A to minimize the sandbars. The variability in flows monthly release volume of October, possibility of the operational tier within the peak would also serve to November, and December would be differing from that of Alternative A as water higher elevation vegetation. There equal to that under Alternative A to established in the Interim Guidelines. In would be no within-day fluctuations in avoid the possibility of the operational addition, lower monthly volumes flow under Alternative F. tier differing from that of Alternative A, (relative to Alternative A) would be Low base flows would be provided as established in the Interim Guidelines. targeted in August and September to from July through January. These low The August volume was set to a reduce sediment transport during the flows would provide for warmer water moderate volume level (800 kaf in an monsoon period, when most sediment is temperatures, especially in years when 8.23 maf release year) to balance delivered by the Paria River. The releases are warm, and would also serve sediment conservation prior to a allowable within-day fluctuation range to reduce overall sand transport during potential HFE and to address power from Glen Canyon Dam would be the remainder of the year. production and capacity concerns. proportional to the volume of water Other than testing the effectiveness of January through July monthly volumes scheduled to be released during the sediment-triggered HFEs, which would were set at levels that roughly track month (12 × monthly volume in kaf in continue through the entire LTEMP Western Area Power Administration’s high power demand months of June, period, there would be no explicit

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 966 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

experimental or condition-dependent working days prior to the meeting. A comments should be submitted to OMB triggered actions under Alternative F. telephone device for the hearing by February 8, 2016, in order to be impaired (TTY) is available at 1–800– assured of consideration. Alternative G 877–8339. ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the The objective of Alternative G is to Public Disclosure Office of Information and Regulatory maximize the conservation of sediment, Affairs, Office of Management and in order to maintain and increase Before including your address, phone Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the sandbar size. Under Alternative G, flows number, email address, or other Department of the Interior (1035–0003), would be delivered in a steady pattern personal identifying information in your by telefax at (202) 395–5806 or via email throughout the year with no monthly comment, you should be aware that to [email protected]. differences in flow other than those your entire comment—including your Also, please send a copy of your needed to adjust operations in response personal identifying information—may comments to the Office of the Special to changes in forecast and other be made publicly available at any time. Trustee, Office of External Affairs, Attn: operating requirements such as While you can ask us in your comment Roberson D. Becenti, 4400 Masthead St. equalization. In an 8.23 maf year, steady to withhold your personal identifying NE., Room 259A, Albuquerque, New flow would be approximately 11,400 information from public review, we Mexico 87109. You may also email cfs. cannot guarantee that we will be able to comments to Experimentation under Alternative G do so. [email protected]. includes testing the effects of the Dated: December 21, 2015. Individuals providing comments should following actions: (1) Sediment- Jennifer Gimbel, reference OMB control number 1035– triggered spring and fall HFEs through 0003, ‘‘Application to Withdraw Tribal the entire 20-year LTEMP period, (2) 24- Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—Water and Science. Funds from Trust Status, 25 CFR 1200.’’ hour proactive spring HFEs in high FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To volume years (≥10 maf release volume), Michael Bean, request more information on this (3) extension of the duration of up to Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—Fish information collection or to obtain a 45,000 cfs fall HFEs for as many as 250 and Wildlife and Parks. copy of the collection instrument, see hours depending on sediment [FR Doc. 2015–33274 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] the contact information provided in the availability, (4) mechanical removal of BILLING CODE 4332–90–P 4312–CB–P ADDRESSES section above. To see a copy trout near the Little Colorado River of the entire ICR submitted to OMB, go confluence, and (5) trout management to: http://www.reginfo.gov and select flows. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Information Collection Review, Public Review and Where to Find Office of the Special Trustee for Currently Under Review. Copies of the DEIS American Indians SUPPLEMTARY INFORMATION: The DEIS is available for reviewing on [15XD0120AF-DT21200000-DST000000- I. Abstract the internet at: http://ltempeis.anl.gov/. T7AC00.241A] Compact disc copies of the DEIS are Office of Management and Budget available for public review at the Notice of Proposed Renewal of (OMB) regulations at 5 CFR 1320, which following locations: Information Collection: OMB Control implement the Paperwork Reduction • J. Willard Marriott Library, Number 1035–0003, Application to Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–131), require University of Utah, 295 South 1500 East, Withdraw Tribal Funds From Trust that interested members of the public Salt Lake City, Utah 84112. Status and affected parties have an opportunity • Cline Library, Northern Arizona to comment on information collection AGENCY: Office of the Special Trustee for University, 1001 S. Knoles Drive, and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR American Indians, Interior. Flagstaff, Arizona 86011–6022. 1320.8(d). This notice identifies an • Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 ACTION: Notice and request for information collection activity that the North Central Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona comments. Office of the Special Trustee for 85004. American Indians has submitted to SUMMARY: In compliance with section • Page Public Library, 479 South Lake OMB for renewal. 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Powell Boulevard, Page, Arizona 86040. Public Law 103–412, The American Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the • Grand County Library, Moab Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Special Trustee for American Indians, Branch, 257 East Center Street, Moab, Act of 1994 (Act), allows Indian tribes Department of the Interior, is Utah 84532. on a voluntary basis to take their funds • Sunrise Library, 5400 East Harris announcing its intention to request out of trust status within the Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada 89110. renewal approval for the collection of Department of the Interior (and the • Denver Public Library, 10 West 14th information for Application to Federal Government) in order to manage Avenue Parkway, Denver, Colorado Withdraw Tribal Funds from Trust and invest such funds on their own. 25 80204. Status, OMB Control Number 1035– CFR part 1200, subpart B, Sec. 1200.13, • Natural Resources Library, U.S. 0003. This collection request has been ‘‘How does a tribe apply to withdraw Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street forwarded to the Office of Management funds?’’ describes the requirements for NW., Main Interior Building, and Budget (OMB) for review and application for withdrawal. The Act Washington, DC 20240–0001. approval. The information collection covers all tribal trust funds including request (ICR) describes the nature of the judgment funds as well as some Special Assistance for Public Meetings information collection and the expected settlements funds, but excludes funds If special assistance is required to burden and cost. held in Individual Indian Money participate in the public meeting, please DATES: OMB has up to 60 days to accounts. Both the Act and the contact Ms. Jayne Kelleher at 801–524– approve or disapprove the information regulations state that upon withdrawal 3680 or via email at [email protected]. collection request, but may respond of the funds, the Department of the Please contact Ms. Kelleher at least 10 after 30 days; therefore, public Interior (and the Federal Government)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 967

have no further liability for such funds. and the validity of the methodology and DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Accompanying their application for assumptions used; Office of the Secretary withdrawal of trust funds, tribes are (c) Ways to enhance the quality, required to submit a Management Plan utility, and clarity of the information to for managing the funds being Request for Information; Comment be collected; and withdrawn, to protect the funds once Request; Department of Labor they are out of trust status. (d) Ways to minimize the burden of Research and Evaluation Plan for 2016 This information collection allows the the collection of information on those AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Office of the Special Trustee for who are to respond, including through Secretary for Policy, Chief Evaluation American Indians to collect the tribes’ the use of appropriate automated, Office. applications for withdrawal of funds electronic, mechanical, or other ACTION: Request for information. held in trust by the Department of the collection techniques or other forms of Interior. If this information were not information techniques. SUMMARY: The Department of Labor collected, the Office of the Special ‘‘Burden’’ means the total time, effort, (DOL), as part of its continuing effort to Trustee for American Indians would not improve the quality and use of research or financial resources expended by be able to comply with the American and evaluation, is requesting comments persons to generate, maintain, retain, Indian Trust Fund Management Reform from the public on its 2016 Research Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103–412), and disclose or provide information to or for and Evaluation Plan. a Federal agency. This includes the time tribes would not be able to withdraw DATES: Written comments must be funds held for them in trust by the needed to review instructions; to received by the office listed in the Department of the Interior. develop, acquire, install and utilize addressee section below on or before technology and systems for the purpose February 8, 2016. II. Data of collecting, validating and verifying ADDRESSES: A copy of this research and (1) Title: Application to Withdraw information, processing and evaluation plan may be obtained free of Tribal Funds from Trust Status, 25 CFR maintaining information, and disclosing charge by contacting Jonathan 1200. and providing information; to train Simonetta, Chief Evaluation Office, U.S. OMB Control Number: 1035–0003. personnel and to be able to respond to Current Expiration Date: January 31, Department of Labor, Room S–2312, 200 a collection of information, to search 2016 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, Type of Review: Extension without data sources, to complete and review DC 20210, Email: change of a currently approved the collection of information; and to [email protected]. collection. transmit or otherwise disclose the You may submit comments by one of Affected Entities: Tribal Governments. information. the following methods: Email: Estimated annual number of It is our policy to make all comments [email protected]; Mail or Courier: Jonathan Simonetta, Chief respondents: One respondent per year. available to the public for review. Before Evaluation Office, U.S. Department of Frequency of response: Once per tribe including Personally Identifiable per trust fund withdrawal application. Labor, Room S–2312, 200 Constitution Information (PII), such as your address, (2) Annual reporting and record Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. keeping burden: phone number, email address, or other Instructions: Please submit one copy of Total annualized reporting per personal information in your your comments, preferably by email. We respondent: 1. comments(s), you should be aware that continue to experience delays in Total annualized reporting: 750 your entire comment (including PII) receiving mail in the Washington, DC hours. may be made available to the public at area, therefore commenters are strongly (3) Description of the need and use of any time. While you may ask us in your encouraged to transmit their comments the information: The statutorily- comment to withhold PII from public electronically via email or to submit required information is needed to view, we cannot guarantee that we will them early by mail. approve tribal applications to withdraw be able to do so. If you wish to view any FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: funds from accounts held in trust for comments received, you may do so by Jonathan Simonetta, Chief Evaluation tribes by the United States Government, scheduling an appointment with the Office, U.S. Department of Labor, Room for self-management. Office of the Special Trustee for S–2312, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., (4) As required under 5 CFR American Indians by using the contact Washington, DC, 20210, by telephone at 1320.8(d), a Federal Register notice information in the ADDRESSES section 202–693–5959 (this is not a toll-free soliciting comments on the information above. A valid picture identification is number), or by email at collection was published on October 19, required for entry into the Department [email protected]. 2015 (80 FR 63253). No comments were received. This notice provides the of the Interior. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. public with an additional 30 days in An agency may not conduct or Department of Labor, Chief Evaluation which to comment on the proposed sponsor, and a person is not required to Office, Fiscal Year 2016 Evaluation Plan information collection activity. respond to, a collection of information Priorities and Themes. unless it displays a currently valid The U.S. Department of Labor’s Chief III. Request for Comments Office of Management and Budget Evaluation Office (CEO) directly funds The Department of the Interior invites control number. and sponsors evaluations and also comments on: collaborates with other DOL agencies (a) Whether the collection of Dated: December 30, 2015. and programs to design and conduct information is necessary for the proper David Beeksma, evaluations that those agencies sponsor. performance of the functions of the Director, Office of External Affairs, Office of The Department’s annual evaluation agency, including whether the the Special Trustee for American Indians. plan is based mainly on agencies’ information will have practical utility; [FR Doc. 2016–00109 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] priorities, the Department’s Strategic (b) The accuracy of the agency’s BILLING CODE 4334–63–P Plan priorities, statutory requirements estimate of the burden of the collection for evaluations, and continuing

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 968 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

discussions with agency leadership and the evaluation question of interest, • Employment of Veterans; and program staff. particularly experimental designs, but • Analysis of Adult Skills and In addition to funds appropriated for also non-experimental designs, in a Competencies. Departmental Program Evaluations manner that is realistic given the B. Exploratory, Formative and (DPE), Division G, Title I, Section 107 of programmatic missions/goals, Implementation Evaluations, Public Law 113–235 of the Consolidated programmatic maturity, data Evaluability Assessments, Feasibility and Further Continuing Appropriations availability, and analytic capability. Act, 2015 (the Act) authorizes the 3. Expand the capacity, knowledge, Studies, and Structured Evidence/ Secretary of Labor to reserve not more and utilization of high quality Literature Reviews than 0.5 percent from specific budget evaluation designs and methods In FY 2016, CEO is exploring the accounts for transfer to and use by the department-wide; and improve the following priorities and types of studies, Office of the Chief Evaluation Officer for quality of data that can be used for possibly through exploratory departmental program evaluation. The evaluations. evaluations using formative and accounts referred to in subsection (a) of Agency Learning Agendas identify implementation analysis methods, and the Act are: Training and Employment priorities for evaluations that can help evidence reviews. Services, Job Corps, Community Service agencies measure their effectiveness, • Evidence and Literature Reviews Employment for Older Americans, State their progress towards goals and Æ CLEAR Reviews. Structured Unemployment Insurance and outcomes, continuous improvement, literature and evidence reviews will be Employment Service Operations, and, in some cases, meet Congressional conducted using the review standards Employee Benefits Security requirements for reports and and guidelines established for the Administration, Office of Workers’ evaluations. Evaluations focus on Clearinghouse for Labor Evaluation and Compensation Programs, Wage and program performance and outcomes, Research (CLEAR); Hour Division, Office of Federal measuring the impacts of core programs Æ Active Labor Market Policies and Contract Compliance Programs, Office and services, evaluating new programs Livelihood Services in Developing of Labor-Management Standards, and initiatives, and testing the relative Countries; Occupational Safety and Health effectiveness of alternative program Æ Policies and Strategies to Address Administration, Mine Safety and Health practices, using the most rigorous Child Labor and Forced Labor; and Administration, funding made available methodologies possible. Æ Education, Training and to the Bureau of International Affairs Certification Pathways. Evaluation Priorities and Themes for • and Women’s Bureau within the FY 2016 Job Driven Skills and Training Departmental Management, Salaries and Æ Models for Improving Basic Skills Expenses account, and Veterans These themes reflect a diverse mix of and Career Preparation (e.g., GED and Employment and Training. Set-aside potential activities designed to build new testing mode, career education); funds are transferred to CEO and are evidence about what works and the Æ Occupational Credentialing and available for evaluations of programs factors that influence or are related to Training Program Practices; administered by the agencies Departmental programs. Broadly, four Æ Characteristics of, Services to, and responsible for those budget accounts. types of projects are considered in Employment Outcomes for Unemployed pursuing the priorities: and Dislocated Workers; Evaluation funding (core and set- • aside) must be obligated within two Statistical Analyses of Trends in Æ Employment Effects of Soft Skills years. The following sections present Programs, Labor Supply and Demand, Training and Job Search Strategies for principles followed in developing the Economic Conditions, and the Labor Adults and Youth; and Market as they Relate to DOL Programs; Æ evaluation plan and a summary of the • Models of Engagement with, and priorities and themes for potential Exploratory, Formative and Effect of Programs on, Businesses and evaluation projects expected to be Implementation Evaluations, and Employers (e.g., Job Corps and other Designs and Evaluability Assessments initiated in FY 2016. Of particular note youth programs, adult workforce for Pilots and Demonstrations; is that the Workforce Innovation and programs, job training programs, • Formal Evaluations of Programs and veterans programs). Opportunity Act (WIOA) of 2014 Demonstrations; and • WIOA Implementation requires several specific evaluations, • Research and Evaluation Capacity Æ Implementation of WIOA; and which will be carried out Building Activities. collaboratively by CEO and the Æ Strategies and Services Delivery in Employment and Training A. Statistical Analysis of Trends and One Stop Centers/American Job Centers. Administration (ETA); some WIOA- Surveys • Veterans Æ specific studies are included in this In FY 2016, CEO is exploring the Strategies and Models of plan and others will be included in following themes, possibly through Employment Services for Serving subsequent years’ plans. statistical analyses using agency Veterans and Alternative Models; and Æ Models for Improving the Guiding Principles administrative data, surveys or statistical databases: Transition of Individuals from Active Three principles guide the • Labor Market and Occupational Military Duty to Civilian Employment. Department’s overall evaluation plan • Other Special Populations Trends in Selected Industry Sectors; Æ and all studies initiated by the CEO: • Gender Patterns and Pay in DOL Programs and Services in 1. Prioritize studies that focus on Occupations and Industries; Native American, Tribal, and Pacific measuring the effectiveness of key • Caregiving and Women’s Islander Urban and Rural Communities; program outputs and outcomes Retirement Security; Æ Employer Practices Regarding consistent with Departmental priorities, • Unemployment and Unemployment Accommodation and Talent- the Departmental Strategic Plan, Agency Insurance; development of Employees with Learning Agendas, and Agency • Labor Enforcement Program Data Disabilities; and Operating Plans. (OSHA, WHD, OFCCP); Æ Role of Intermediaries, including 2. Encourage the most rigorous • Immigration, Immigrants, and Work Non-Farm Labor Contractors, in the evaluation designs possible to address Visas; Hiring of Farmworkers.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 969

• Labor Standards, Worker Safety and Æ Effect of Worker Benefits on Instructions, Who Should Respond: Health, Compliance, and Compliance Family, Worker, and Child Well-being; We invite practitioners, policy makers, Assistance and program directors, business and Æ Worker Rights in Developing Æ Effectiveness of Tax Credits and industry associations, nonprofit Countries; Wage Subsidy Strategies on organizations, and researchers to Æ Child Labor Information and Employment Outcomes. provide feedback on the priorities, the Technical Assistance Efforts in • Outreach, Information, Training, themes and the types of studies and Developing Countries; and and Technical Assistance approaches included in the 2016 plan, Æ Labor Standards in Supply Chains Æ Effective Translation and Adoption and suggestions for related evaluation in Selected Industries. of Federal Policies by States and areas topics, for example: Localities; • Are there other themes or topics C. Formal Evaluations of Programs and Æ Demonstrations Effectiveness of Inspector Training that should be considered for inclusion Programs; and in the evaluation plan? In FY 2016, CEO is exploring the Æ Effectiveness of Technical • What types of evaluations or topics following themes, possibly through Assistance and Outreach. would be of most relevance to program formal evaluations to test promising practitioners? strategies, replicate proven models, and D. Research and Evaluation Capacity • Building Activities Are there any particular data or estimate the effectiveness of program resource constraints that should be components and service delivery It is important to complement considered? approaches: evaluation studies with other activities • Youth designed to continuously reinforce the Guidance for Submitting Documents Æ National Guard Youth ChalleNGe role of evaluation at DOL: The On page one of your submission, Job ChalleNGe Demonstration; importance of evaluation for achieving Æ please indicate your name, the name of Performance Partnership Pilots (P3) performance goals and objectives; the your organization (if applicable), and for Disconnected Youth; integration of evaluation into ongoing your contact information (including Æ Job Corps Innovations Pilots; and Æ management; and the expectation of phone number, postal address, and Youth Build. high quality products and reports. email address). While not required, it • Job-Driven Skills and Training Dissemination of evaluation reports and would assist us in reviewing your Æ American Apprenticeship Initiative access to accumulating evidence is also information if you also included the Grants; essential, as is the commitment to type of organization you represent Æ Employment and Training Services developing a pipeline of labor-focused (public, private, not-for-profit, or for Adults, Dislocated Workers, Out of young evaluators/scholars. This philanthropic), the field(s) in which you School Youth, and Foster Youth; category includes various activities to Æ Innovative Career Pathways work and the level at which you operate continue to build DOL’s evaluation Models; and (national, state, regional, local or tribal). capacity, such as: Æ Subsidized Employment and Tax Rights to Materials: By submitting • DOL Scholars Research Program Credit Strategies to Increase material in response to this RFI, the (with priority given to young scholars); Employment. respondent is agreeing to grant the • Collaborative Cross-Agency • Employment and Reemployment Department a worldwide, royalty-free, Æ Statistical Analysis; and perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive Innovative Strategies for Improving • Employment Outcomes for Incarcerated Wage Record Data Exchanges for license to use the material and to make and Formerly Incarcerated Individuals Evaluations. it publicly available. Further, the and Acronyms respondent agrees that it owns, has a Æ Effective Reemployment Strategies valid license, or is otherwise authorized BLS, Bureau of Labor Statistics to provide the material to the for Unemployed Workers and CEO, Chief Evaluation Office Recipients of Unemployment Insurance. Department. The Department will not • EBSA, Employee Benefits Security provide any compensation for material Behavioral Economics and Insights Administration Æ Evaluations Using Behavioral ETA, Employment and Training submitted in response to this RFI. Insights to Improve Program Outcomes Administration Electronic Access to This Document: in DOL Employment and Training and ILAB, Bureau of International Labor Affairs The official version of this document is Worker Protection Programs. MSHA, Mine Safety and Health the document published in the Federal • Labor Standards, Worker Health Administration Register. Free Internet access to the and Safety, Compliance and Compliance OASP, Office of the Assistant Secretary for official edition of the Federal Register Assistance Policy and the Code of Federal Regulations is ODEP, Office of Disability Employment Æ Deterrence Strategies for Improving available via the Federal Digital System Policy at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you Compliance with Labor Standards Laws OFCCP, Office of Federal Contract and Regulations; Compliance Programs can view this document, as well as all Æ Evaluation of Voluntary OLMS, Office of Labor-Management other documents of the Department Compliance with Labor Standards Laws Standards published in the Federal Register, in and Regulations; OSEC, Office of the Secretary text or Adobe Portable Document Æ Effectiveness of Various Methods OSHA, Occupational Safety and Health Format (PDF). To use PDF you must and Strategies for Inspection, Administration have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is Compliance, and Enforcement; and OWCP, Office of Workers’ Compensation available free at the site. Æ Improving Injury and Illness Programs You may also access documents of the SOL, Office of the Solicitor Reporting. Department published in the Federal • UI, Unemployment Insurance Worker Security, Benefits, and Tax VETS, Veterans’ Employment & Training Register by using the article search Strategies Service feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Æ Effectiveness of Financial Literacy WHD, Wage and Hour Division Specifically, through the advanced Strategies; WB, Women’s Bureau search feature at this site, you can limit

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 970 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

your search to documents published by approval. This program helps to ensure • Evaluate the accuracy of the the Department. requested data will be provided in the agency’s estimate of the burden of the Signed: at Washington, DC this 17th day of desired format, reporting burden (time proposed collection of information, December, 2015. and financial resources) is minimized, including the validity of the Sharon I. Block, collection instruments are clearly methodology and assumptions used; understood, and the impact of collection • Enhance the quality, utility, and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Labor. requirements can be properly assessed. clarity of the information to be The forms and formats contained in collected; and [FR Doc. 2016–00170 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] this information collection request • Minimize the burden of the BILLING CODE 4510–HX–P apply to the following competitive collection of information on those who grants (CG): Homeless Veterans’ are to respond, including through the Reintegration Program (HVRP) and the DEPARTMENT OF LABOR use of appropriate automated, Stand Down Grants Program (38 U.S.C. electronic, mechanical, or other Office of the Assistant Secretary for 2021); Homeless Female Veterans and technological collection techniques or Veterans’ Employment and Training Homeless Veterans with Families other forms of information technology, (OASVET); Agency Information (HFVHVF) reintegration grant program e.g. permitting electronic submission of Collection Activities; Comment (38 U.S.C. 2021A); Incarcerated responses. Request; VETS’ Competitive Grant Veterans’ Transition Program (IVTP) (38 Agency: DOL—VETS. Programs Reporting U.S.C. 2023); and the Veterans’ Type of Review: New. Workforce Investment Program (VWIP), Title of Collection: VETS’ Competitive ACTION: Notice. (29 U.S.C. 2913). This information Grant Programs Reporting. collection is authorized by the Forms: SUMMARY: The Department of Labor provisions at 38 U.S.C. 2021(b); 38 1. VETS–700, Competitive Grants (DOL) is soliciting comments U.S.C. 2021A(c); 29 U.S.C. 2913(b)(2); (CG) Planned Goals Chart; concerning a proposed approval for the and section 200.328, title II, Code of 2. VETS–701, CG Technical authority to conduct the information Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.328). Performance Report (TPR); collection request (ICR) titled, ‘‘VETS’ This information collection is subject 3. VETS–702, CG Technical Competitive Grant Programs Reporting to the PRA. A Federal agency generally Performance Narrative (TPN); Data Collection.’’ This comment request cannot conduct or sponsor a collection 4. VETS–703, Stand Down After is part of continuing Departmental of information, and the public is Action Report (SDAAR) efforts to reduce paperwork and generally not required to respond to an OMB Control Number: 1293–0NEW. respondent burden in accordance with information collection, unless the OMB Affected Public: State, Local, and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 approves it under the PRA and it Tribal Governments; Private Sector— (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. displays a currently valid OMB Control businesses or other for-profits and not- DATES: Consideration will be given to all Number. In addition, notwithstanding for-profit institutions. written comments received by March 8, any other provisions of law, no person Estimated Number of Respondents: 2016. shall generally be subject to penalty for 325. ADDRESSES: A copy of this ICR with failing to comply with a collection of Frequency: Quarterly. applicable supporting documentation, information that does not display a Total Estimated Annual Responses: including a description of the likely valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1,300. respondents, proposed frequency of 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. Estimated Average Time per response, and estimated total burden, Interested parties are encouraged to Response: 12 Hours. may be obtained for free by contacting provide comments to the contact shown Estimated Total Annual Burden Bradley Sickles by telephone at (202) in the addresses section. Comments Hours: 15,600 hours. 693–4741 (this is not a toll-free number) must be written to receive Total Estimated Annual Other Cost or by email at [email protected]. consideration, and they will be Burden: $0. summarized and included in the request Submit written comments about, or Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A). for OMB approval of the final ICR. In requests for a copy of, this ICR by mail Dated: Signed in Washington, DC, this 4th or courier to the U.S. Department of order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should day of January, 2016. Labor, Veterans’ Employment and Teresa W. Gerton, Training Service, Room S1325, 200 mention ‘‘VETS’ CG Programs Reporting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Veterans’ Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, Data Collection.’’ Submitted comments will also be a Employment and Training. DC 20210; by email: bradley.sickles.a@ matter of public record for this ICR and [FR Doc. 2016–00164 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] dol.gov; or by fax (202–693–4755). posted on the Internet without BILLING CODE 4510–79–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: redaction. The DOL encourages Bradley Sickles, by telephone at (202) commenters not to include personally 693–4741 (this is not a toll-free number) identifiable information, confidential DEPARTMENT OF LABOR or by email at [email protected]. business data, or other sensitive SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The DOL, statements/information in any Office of the Secretary as part of continuing efforts to reduce comments. paperwork and respondent burden, The DOL is particularly interested in Agency Information Collection conducts a pre-clearance consultation comments that: Activities; Submission for OMB program to provide the general public • Evaluate whether the proposed Review; Comment Request; and Federal agencies an opportunity to collection of information is necessary Agreement Approval Process for Use comment on proposed and/or for the proper performance of the of Functional Affirmative Action continuing collections of information functions of the agency, including Programs before submitting them to the Office of whether the information will have ACTION: Notice. Management and Budget (OMB) for final practical utility;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 971

SUMMARY: The Department of Labor business units rather than AAPs based published in the Federal Register on (DOL) is submitting the Office of on establishments. Functional July 16, 2015 (80 FR 42127). Federal Contract Compliance Programs affirmative action programs (FAAPs) are Interested parties are encouraged to (OFCCP) sponsored information designed to provide contractors with the send comments to the OMB, Office of collection request (ICR) revision titled, option of creating AAPs that better fit Information and Regulatory Affairs at ‘‘Agreement Approval Process for Use of their business needs. To develop and the address shown in the ADDRESSES Functional Affirmative Action implement a FAAP, Federal contractors section within thirty (30) days of Programs,’’ to the Office of Management must receive written approval from the publication of this notice in the Federal and Budget (OMB) for review and Director of OFCCP. This Information Register. In order to help ensure approval for use in accordance with the Collection Request (ICR) addresses the appropriate consideration, comments Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 collection of information associated should mention OMB Control Number (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Public with the process for obtaining, 1250–0006. The OMB is particularly comments on the ICR are invited. modifying, updating, and renewing an interested in comments that: DATES: The OMB will consider all agreement that allows contractors to • Evaluate whether the proposed written comments that agency receives develop and use functional AAPs. This collection of information is necessary on or before February 8, 2016. information collection has been for the proper performance of the ADDRESSES: A copy of this ICR with classified as a revision, because OFCCP functions of the agency, including applicable supporting documentation; is requesting Office of Management and whether the information will have including a description of the likely Budget (OMB) approval of 1,427 hours practical utility; respondents, proposed frequency of (9.5 hour per contractor) in reporting • Evaluate the accuracy of the response, and estimated total burden burden for its approval process to allow agency’s estimate of the burden of the may be obtained free of charge from the contractors to develop function based proposed collection of information, RegInfo.gov Web site at http:// affirmative action programs. This is an including the validity of the www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ increase over the previous request of methodology and assumptions used; PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201511–1250–001 926 hours (7.6 hours per contractor). • Enhance the quality, utility, and (this link will only become active on the The increase is primarily attributed to clarity of the information to be day following publication of this notice) the addition of a certification collected; and or by contacting Seleda Perryman by requirement. Additionally, in response • Minimize the burden of the telephone at 202–693–4131, TTY 202– to contractor comments, OFCCP collection of information on those who 693–8064, (these are not toll-free removed the requirement in the are to respond, including through the numbers) or sending an email to previous directive that contractors use of appropriate automated, [email protected]. requesting to use functional or business electronic, mechanical, or other Submit comments about this request unit affirmative action programs provide technological collection techniques or by mail or courier to the Office of a copy of a Federal contract. There are other forms of information technology, Information and Regulatory Affairs, no recordkeeping or third party e.g., permitting electronic submission of Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL– disclosure burdens associated with this responses. OFCCP, Office of Management and Information Collection Request. Those Agency: DOL–OFCCP. Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street requirements are accounted for under Title of Collection: Agreement NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 1250–0003. 41 CFR 60–2.1(d)(4) Approval Process for Use of Functional 202–395–5806 (this is not a toll-free authorizes this information collection. Affirmative Action Programs. number); or by email: OMB Control Number: 1250–0006. _ This information collection is subject OIRA [email protected]. to the PRA. A Federal agency generally Affected Public: Private Sector. Commenters are encouraged, but not cannot conduct or sponsor a collection Total Estimated Number of required, to send a courtesy copy of any of information, and the public is Respondents: 150. comments by mail or courier to the U.S. generally not required to respond to an Total Estimated Number of Department of Labor—OASAM, Office information collection, unless it is Responses: 150. of the Chief Information Officer, Attn: approved by the OMB under the PRA Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: Departmental Information Compliance and displays a currently valid OMB 1,427 hours. Management Program, Room N1301, Control Number. In addition, Total Estimated Annual Other Costs 200 Constitution Avenue NW., notwithstanding any other provisions of Burden: $89. Washington, DC 20210; or by email: law, no person shall generally be subject [email protected]. Dated: December 31, 2015. to penalty for failing to comply with a Linda Watts Thomas, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Contact collection of information that does not Acting Departmental Clearance Officer. Seleda Perryman by telephone at 202– display a valid Control Number. See 5 693–4131, TTY 202–693–8064, (these CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The DOL [FR Doc. 2016–00168 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] are not toll-free numbers) or sending an obtains OMB approval for this BILLING CODE 4510–CM–P email to [email protected]. information collection under Control Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D). Number 1250–0006. The current SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This ICR approval is scheduled to expire on OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND seeks approval under the PRA for December 31, 2015, however, the DOL BUDGET revisions to the Agreement Approval notes that existing information Process for Use of Functional collection requirements submitted to the OMB Final Sequestration Report to the Affirmative Action Programs. The OMB receive a month-to-month President and Congress for Fiscal Year regulations implementing Executive extension while they undergo review. 2016 Order 11246 permit Federal supply and New requirements would only take service contractors to develop effect upon OMB approval. For AGENCY: Executive Office of the affirmative action programs (AAPs) that additional substantive information President, Office of Management and are based on business functions or about this ICR, see the related notice Budget.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 972 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

ACTION: Notice of availability of the 13 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), and as part respondent, will result from the OMB Final Sequestration Report to the of its continuing effort to reduce emergency response plan requirement President and Congress for FY 2016. paperwork and respondent burden, the contained in the rule. Presently, all National Science Foundation (NSF) is respondents have been providing SUMMARY: OMB is issuing its Final inviting the general public and other expedition members with a copy of the Sequestration Report to the President Federal agencies to comment on this Guidance for Visitors to the Antarctic and Congress for FY 2016 to report on proposed information collection. (prepared and adopted at the Eighteenth compliance of enacted 2016 DATES: Written comments on this notice Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting discretionary appropriations legislation must be received by March 8, 2016 to as Recommendation XVIII–1). Because with the discretionary caps. The report be assured of consideration. Comments this Antarctic Treaty System document finds that enacted appropriations are received after that date will be satisfies the environmental protection within the current law defense and non- considered to the extent practicable. information requirements of the rule, no defense discretionary limits for 2016; additional burden shall result from the therefore, a sequestration of ADDRESSES: Written comments regarding the information collection and environmental information discretionary budget authority is not requirements in the proposed rule. required. requests for copies of the proposed information collection request should be Dated: January 5, 2016. DATES: Effective Date: January 4, 2016. addressed to Suzanne Plimpton, Reports Suzanne H. Plimpton, Section 254 of the Balanced Budget and Clearance Officer, National Science Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Foundation. as amended, requires the Office of Room 1265, Arlington, VA 22230, or by [FR Doc. 2016–00137 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Management and Budget (OMB) to issue email to [email protected]. its Final Sequestration Report 15 BILLING CODE 7555–01–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: calendar days after the end of a Suzanne Plimpton on (703) 292–7556 or congressional session. With regard to send email to [email protected]. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION this final report and to each of the three Individuals who use a required sequestration reports, section telecommunications device for the deaf Notice of Permit Applications Received 254(b) specifically states the following: (TDD) may call the Federal Information Under the Antarctic Conservation Act SUBMISSION AND AVAILABILITY OF Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– of 1978 REPORTS.—Each report required by this 8339, which is accessible 24 hours a AGENCY: National Science Foundation. section shall be submitted, in the case of day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year ACTION: Notice of permit applications CBO, to the House of Representatives, the (including federal holidays). Senate and OMB and, in the case of OMB, received under the Antarctic to the House of Representatives, the Senate, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Conservation Act of 1978, Public Law and the President on the day it is issued. On Title of Collection: Antarctic 95–541. the following day a notice of the report shall emergency response plan and be printed in the Federal Register. environmental protection information. SUMMARY: The National Science OMB Approval Number: 3145–0180. Foundation (NSF) is required to publish ADDRESSES: The OMB Sequestration Expiration Date of Approval: June 30, a notice of permit applications received Reports to the President and Congress is 2016. to conduct activities regulated under the available on-line on the OMB home Abstract: The NSF, pursuant to the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. page at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/ Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (16 NSF has published regulations under omb/legislative_reports/sequestration U.S.C. 2401 et seq.) (‘‘ACA’’) regulates the Antarctic Conservation Act at title FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: certain non-governmental activities in 45 part 670 of the Code of Federal Thomas Tobasko, 6202 New Executive Antarctica. The ACA was amended in Regulations. This is the required notice Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, 1996 by the Antarctic Science, Tourism, of permit applications received. Email address: [email protected], and Conservation Act. On September 7, DATES: Interested parties are invited to telephone number: (202) 395–5745, FAX 2001, NSF published a final rule in the submit written data, comments, or number: (202) 395–4768. Because of Federal Register (66 FR 46739) views with respect to this permit delays in the receipt of regular mail implementing certain of these statutory application by February 8, 2016. This related to security screening, amendments. The rule requires non- application may be inspected by respondents are encouraged to use governmental Antarctic expeditions interested parties at the Permit Office, electronic communications. using non-U.S. flagged vessels to ensure address below. that the vessel owner has an emergency Shaun Donovan, ADDRESSES: Comments should be response plan. The rule also requires Director. addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, persons organizing a non-governmental Division of Polar Programs, National [FR Doc. 2016–00087 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] expedition to provide expedition BILLING CODE P Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson members with information on their Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. environmental protection obligations FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: under the Antarctic Conservation Act. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Expected Respondents. Respondents Nature McGinn, ACA Permit Officer, at may include non-profit organizations the above address or Information Collection Activities: and small and large businesses. The [email protected]. Proposed Collection; Comment majority of respondents are anticipated SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Request to be U.S. tour operators, currently National Science Foundation, as AGENCY: National Science Foundation. estimated to number fifteen. directed by the Antarctic Conservation ACTION: Notice. Burden on the Public. The Foundation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95–541), as estimates that a one-time paperwork and amended by the Antarctic Science, SUMMARY: Under the Paperwork recordkeeping burden of 40 hours or Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104– less, at a cost of $500 to $1400 per has developed regulations for the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 973

establishment of a permit system for Dates braille, large print), please notify various activities in Antarctica and February 29, 2016 to February 28, Kimberly Meyer, NRC Disability designation of certain animals and 2021. Program Manager, at 301–287–0739, by certain geographic areas a requiring videophone at 240–428–3217, or by special protection. The regulations Nadene G. Kennedy, email at Kimberly.Meyer- establish such a permit system to Polar Coordination Specialist, Division of [email protected]. Determinations on designate Antarctic Specially Protected Polar Programs. requests for reasonable accommodation Areas. [FR Doc. 2016–00085 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] will be made on a case-by-case basis. BILLING CODE 7555–01–P * * * * * Application Details Members of the public may request to 1. Applicant Permit Application: 2016– receive this information electronically. If you would like to be added to the 018 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION distribution, please contact the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of the Michael Gooseff, INSTAAR, 1560 [NRC–2016–0001] 30th Street, Boulder, CO 80309 Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301– Sunshine Act Meeting Notice 415–1969), or email Activity for Which Permit Is Requested [email protected] or [email protected]. Enter Antarctic Specially Protected DATE: January 11, 18, 25, February 1, 8, Areas. The applicant plans to enter 15, 2016. Dated: January 6, 2016. Canada Glacier, Lake Fryxell, to PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference Denise L. McGovern, continue operation of a previously Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Policy Coordinator, Office of the Secretary. installed, continuously recording stream Maryland. [FR Doc. 2016–00306 Filed 1–6–16; 4:15 pm] gauge station, perform maintenance, STATUS: Public and Closed. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P conduct stream flow measurements and Week of January 11, 2016 collect water quality samples near the There are no meetings scheduled for NUCLEAR REGULATORY stream gauge site. The applicant will the week of January 11, 2016. COMMISSION also collect water quality samples of the melt-water of the Canada Glacier and Week of January 18, 2016—Tentative Request To Amend a License To along the length of the stream to study There are no meetings scheduled for Import Radioactive Waste in-stream biogeochemical processes. the week of January 18, 2016. The applicant plans to collect a Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 110.70(b) maximum of five moss samples per year Week of January 25, 2016—Tentative ‘‘Public Notice of Receipt of an using a 3 cm corer to a depth of about There are no meetings scheduled for the week of January 25, 2016. Application,’’ please take notice that the 3 cm and a maximum of five soil U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission samples of approximately 200 g per year Week of February 1, 2016—Tentative (NRC) has received the following from which to extract nematodes. requests for import and export license Photography, LIDAR, and other survey There are no meetings scheduled for the week of February 1, 2016. amendments. Copies of the requests are and monitoring techniques may be used available electronically through the to detect changes in the stream bed and Week of February 8, 2016—Tentative Agencywide Documents Access and algal mat distribution over time, and/or There are no meetings scheduled for Management System (ADAMS) and can to monitor the change in the stream the week of February 8, 2016. be accessed through the Public gauge system through time. Electronic Reading Room (PERR) link Week of February 15, 2016—Tentative The applicant also plans to enter http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html at Lower Taylor Glacier and Blood Falls to There are no meetings scheduled for the NRC Homepage. A request for a hearing or petition for continue measurements of the Santa Fe the week of February 15, 2016. leave to intervene may be filed within Stream including: Stream-flow using * * * * * thirty days after publication of this velocity meters; pH, temperature, and The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice in the Federal Register. Any conductivity via meters; and collection request for hearing or petition for leave notice. For more information or to verify of water quality samples. The collection to intervene shall be served by the the status of meetings, contact Denise of water from the Blood Falls area requestor or petitioner upon the McGovern at 301–415–0681 or via email occurs on the glacial moraine, not the applicant, the Office of the General at [email protected]. glacier itself, and the sample is small Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory (< 1 L) and comprised of both brine * * * * * Commission, Washington, DC 20555; reservoir discharge (when present) and The NRC Commission Meeting the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory surface ice melt-water. Schedule can be found on the Internet Commission, Washington, DC 20555; at: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/ and the Executive Secretary, U.S. Location public-meetings/schedule.html. Department of State, Washington, DC ASPA no. 131, Canada Glacier, Lake * * * * * 20520. The NRC provides reasonable Fryxell, Taylor Valley, Victoria Land; A request for a hearing or petition for accommodation to individuals with leave to intervene may be filed with the ASPA No. 172, Lower Taylor Glacier disabilities where appropriate. If you NRC electronically in accordance with and Blood Falls, Taylor Valley, need a reasonable accommodation to NRC’s E-Filing rule promulgated in McMurdo Dry Valleys, Victoria Land. participate in these public meetings, or August 2007, 72 FR. 49139 (Aug. 28, need this meeting notice or the 2007). Information about filing transcript or other information from the electronically is available on the NRC’s public meetings in another format (e.g. public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 974 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

site-help/e-submittals.html. To ensure digital ID certificate and allow for the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory timely electronic filing, at least five days creation of an electronic docket. Commission, Washington, DC 20555, prior to the filing deadline, the In addition to a request for hearing or Attention: Rulemaking and petitioner/requestor should contact the petition for leave to intervene, written Adjudications. comments, in accordance with 10 CFR Office of the Secretary by email at The information concerning this 110.81, should be submitted within 30 [email protected], or by import license amendment application calling (301) 415–1677, to request a days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register to Office of the follows.

NRC IMPORT LICENSE AMENDMENT APPLICATION DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

Name of applicant, date of application, date received, application Material type Total quantity End use Country from No., docket No.

EnergySolutions ...... Class A radioactive Increase (up from 5,500 Amend to add three domestic suppliers located Canada. November 2, 2015 waste. All materials tons to a new max- in Tennessee, and to extend the expiration November 6, 2015 subject to this author- imum total of 10,000 date from December 31, 2017 to December XW010/03 ization are materials tons of low-level 31, 2020. Amend to remove the restriction 11005620 imported under En- waste). that the imported radioactive material cannot ergySolutions Import exceed the Class A definition as defined in 10 license XW010/03. CFR 61.55. The attributed Canadian waste will be returned under XW010 (and subse- quent amendments).

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Table of Contents the captioned dockets are consistent Dated this 28th day of December 2015, at I. Introduction with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, Rockville, Maryland. II. Notice of Commission Action 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 Elizabeth Smiroldo, III. Ordering Paragraphs CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are Acting Director, Office of International due no later than January 11, 2016. The Programs. I. Introduction public portions of these filings can be [FR Doc. 2016–00162 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 accessed via the Commission’s Web site BILLING CODE 7590–01–P and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal (http://www.prc.gov). Service filed a formal request and The Commission appoints Nina Yeh associated supporting information to to serve as Public Representative in POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION add Parcel Select Contract 13 to the these dockets. 1 competitive product list. III. Ordering Paragraphs [Docket Nos. MC2016–75 and CP2016–93; The Postal Service Order No. 2974] contemporaneously filed a redacted It is ordered: 1. The Commission establishes Docket New Postal Product contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and Nos. MC2016–75 and CP2016–93 to AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B. consider the matters raised in each ACTION: Notice. To support its Request, the Postal docket. Service filed a copy of the contract, a 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Nina SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a copy of the Governors’ Decision Yeh is appointed to serve as an officer recent Postal Service filing concerning authorizing the product, proposed of the Commission to represent the the addition of Parcel Select Contract 13 changes to the Mail Classification interests of the general public in these negotiated service agreement to the Schedule, a Statement of Supporting proceedings (Public Representative). competitive product list. This notice Justification, a certification of 3. Comments are due no later than informs the public of the filing, invites compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and January 11, 2016. public comment, and takes other an application for non-public treatment 4. The Secretary shall arrange for administrative steps. of certain materials. It also filed publication of this order in the Federal DATES: Comments are due: January 11, supporting financial workpapers. Register. 2016. II. Notice of Commission Action By the Commission. ADDRESSES: Submit comments Stacy L. Ruble, The Commission establishes Docket electronically via the Commission’s Secretary. Nos. MC2016–75 and CP2016–93 to Filing Online system at http:// consider the Request pertaining to the [FR Doc. 2016–00132 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit proposed Parcel Select Contract 13 BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P comments electronically should contact product and the related contract, the person identified in the FOR FURTHER respectively. INFORMATION CONTACT POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION section by The Commission invites comments on telephone for advice on filing whether the Postal Service’s filings in [Docket No. CP2014–75; Order No. 2972] alternatives. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1 Request of the United States Postal Service to New Postal Product David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at Add Parcel Select Contract 13 to Competitive AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 202–789–6820. Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors’ Decision, Contract, and ACTION: Notice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting Data, December 31, 2015 (Request).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 975

SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a impair the ability of the contract to INFORMATION CONTACT section by recent Postal Service filing concerning comply with 39 U.S.C. 3633. Id. telephone for advice on filing an amendment to First-Class Package alternatives. II. Notice of Filings Service Contract 37 negotiated service FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Commission invites comments on agreement. This notice informs the David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at whether the changes presented in the public of the filing, invites public 202–789–6820. comment, and takes other Postal Service’s Notice are consistent administrative steps. with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: Comments are due: January 11, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR 3015.5, and 39 Table of Contents 2016. CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 11, 2016. The I. Introduction ADDRESSES: II. Notice of Commission Action Submit comments public portions of these filings can be III. Ordering Paragraphs electronically via the Commission’s accessed via the Commission’s Web site Filing Online system at http:// (http://www.prc.gov). I. Introduction www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit The Commission appoints Kenneth R. In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 comments electronically should contact Moeller to represent the interests of the the person identified in the FOR FURTHER and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal general public (Public Representative) Service filed a formal request and INFORMATION CONTACT section by in this docket. telephone for advice on filing associated supporting information to alternatives. III. Ordering Paragraphs add First-Class Package Service Contract 42 to the competitive product list.1 It is ordered: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Postal Service 1. The Commission reopens Docket David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at contemporaneously filed a redacted No. CP2014–75 for consideration of 202–789–6820. contract related to the proposed new matters raised by the Postal Service’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and Notice. 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B. Table of Contents 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the To support its Request, the Postal I. Introduction Commission appoints Kenneth R. Moeller to serve as an officer of the Service filed a copy of the contract, a II. Notice of Filings copy of the Governors’ Decision III. Ordering Paragraphs Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general authorizing the product, proposed I. Introduction public in this proceeding. changes to the Mail Classification On December 31, 2015, the Postal 3. Comments are due no later than Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Service filed notice that it has agreed to January 11, 2016. Justification, a certification of an Amendment to the existing First- 4. The Secretary shall arrange for compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and Class Package Service Contract 37 publication of this order in the Federal an application for non-public treatment negotiated service agreement approved Register. of certain materials. It also filed 1 supporting financial workpapers. in this docket. In support of its Notice, By the Commission. the Postal Service includes a redacted Stacy L. Ruble, II. Notice of Commission Action copy of the Amendment. Notice, Secretary. The Commission establishes Docket Attachment A. Because it states that the Nos. MC2016–74 and CP2016–91 to Amendment will not materially affect [FR Doc. 2016–00130 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] consider the Request pertaining to the the cost coverage of the existing BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P proposed First-Class Package Service agreement, it asserts the original Contract 42 product and the related financial documentation and POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION contract, respectively. certification of compliance with 39 The Commission invites comments on U.S.C. 3633(a) remain applicable. Notice [Docket Nos. MC2016–74 and CP2016–91; whether the Postal Service’s filings in at 1. Order No. 2976] the captioned dockets are consistent The Postal Service also filed the with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, unredacted Amendment under seal. The New Postal Product 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 Postal Service seeks to incorporate by AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are reference the Application for Non- ACTION: Notice. due no later than January 11, 2016. The Public Treatment originally filed in this public portions of these filings can be docket for the protection of information SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a accessed via the Commission’s Web site that it has filed under seal. Id. recent Postal Service filing concerning (http://www.prc.gov). The Amendment modifies the Annual the addition of First-Class Package The Commission appoints Kenneth R. Adjustment provision in section II. 1 of Service Contract 42 negotiated service Moeller to serve as Public the existing agreement. Notice, agreement to the competitive product Representative in these dockets. Attachment A at 1. list. This notice informs the public of The Postal Service intends for the the filing, invites public comment, and III. Ordering Paragraphs Amendment to become effective two takes other administrative steps. It is ordered: business days after the date that the DATES: Comments are due: January 11, 1. The Commission establishes Docket Commission completes its review of the 2016. Nos. MC2016–74 and CP2016–91 to Notice. Notice at 1. The Postal Service ADDRESSES: Submit comments asserts that the Amendment will not electronically via the Commission’s 1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Filing Online system at http:// Add First-Class Package Service Contract 42 to 1 Notice of United States Postal Service of Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Amendment to First-Class Package Service Contract www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors’ Decision, 37, with Portions Filed Under Seal, December 31, comments electronically should contact Contract, and Supporting Data, December 30, 2015 2015 (Notice). the person identified in the FOR FURTHER (Request).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 976 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

consider the matters raised in each Amendment and a certification of ACTION: Notice. docket. compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), as 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth required by 39 CFR 3015.5. SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a R. Moeller is appointed to serve as an The Postal Service also filed the recent Postal Service filing concerning officer of the Commission to represent unredacted Amendment and supporting an additional Global Reseller Expedited the interests of the general public in financial information under seal. The Package Services 2 negotiated service these proceedings (Public Postal Service seeks to incorporate by agreement. This notice informs the Representative). reference the Application for Non- public of the filing, invites public 3. Comments are due no later than Public Treatment originally filed in this comment, and takes other January 11, 2016. docket for the protection of information administrative steps. 4. The Secretary shall arrange for that it has filed under seal. Id. at 1. The DATES: Comments are due: January 11, publication of this order in the Federal Amendment changes prices under 2016. Register. Priority Mail Contract 41. Id. ADDRESSES: Submit comments By the Commission. The Postal Service intends for the electronically via the Commission’s Stacy L. Ruble, Amendment to become effective one Filing Online system at http:// Secretary. business day after the date that the www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit Commission completes its review of the [FR Doc. 2016–00134 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] comments electronically should contact Notice. Id. The Postal Service asserts the person identified in the FOR FURTHER BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P that the Amendment will not impair the INFORMATION CONTACT section by ability of the contract to comply with 39 telephone for advice on filing POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION U.S.C. 3633. Id., Attachment B. alternatives. [Docket No. CP2012–47; Order No. 2971] II. Notice of Filings FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Commission invites comments on David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at New Postal Product whether the changes presented in the 202–789–6820. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. Postal Service’s Notice are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, ACTION: Notice. Table of Contents 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR 3015.5, and 39 I. Introduction SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 11, 2016. The II. Notice of Commission Action recent Postal Service filing concerning III. Ordering Paragraphs an amendment to Priority Mail Contract public portions of these filings can be 41 negotiated service agreement. This accessed via the Commission’s Web site I. Introduction notice informs the public of the filing, (http://www.prc.gov). On December 31, 2015, the Postal invites public comment, and takes other The Commission appoints Nina Yeh Service filed notice that it has entered administrative steps. to represent the interests of the general into an additional Global Reseller public (Public Representative) in this DATES: Comments are due: January 11, Expedited Package Services 2 (GREPS 2) 2016. docket. negotiated service agreement ADDRESSES: Submit comments III. Ordering Paragraphs (Agreement).1 To support its Notice, the Postal electronically via the Commission’s It is ordered: Service filed a copy of the Agreement, Filing Online system at http:// 1. The Commission reopens Docket a copy of the Governors’ Decision www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit No. CP2012–47 for consideration of authorizing the product, and an comments electronically should contact matters raised by the Postal Service’s application for non-public treatment of the person identified in the FOR FURTHER Notice. certain materials. It also filed supporting INFORMATION CONTACT section by 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the financial workpapers under seal. telephone for advice on filing Commission appoints Nina Yeh to serve Pursuant to 39 CFR 3015.5(c)(2), a alternatives. as an officer of the Commission (Public certification of compliance with 39 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Representative) to represent the U.S.C. 3633(a) was filed with the interests of the general public in this David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at Commission on January 4, 2016.2 202–789–6820. proceeding. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 3. Comments are due no later than II. Notice of Commission Action January 11, 2016. Table of Contents The Commission establishes Docket 4. The Secretary shall arrange for No. CP2016–92 for consideration of I. Introduction publication of this order in the Federal matters raised by the Notice. II. Notice of Filings Register. The Commission invites comments on III. Ordering Paragraphs By the Commission. whether the Postal Service’s filing is I. Introduction Stacy L. Ruble, consistent with 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or On December 31, 2015, the Postal Secretary. 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR Service filed notice that it has agreed to [FR Doc. 2016–00129 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due an Amendment to the existing Priority BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P no later than January 11, 2016. The Mail Contract 41 negotiated service public portions of the filing can be agreement approved in this docket.1 In support of its Notice, the Postal Service POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 1 Notice of United States Postal Service of Filing a Functionally Equivalent Global Reseller includes a redacted copy of the [Docket No. CP2016–92; Order No. 2975] Expedited Package 2 Negotiated Service Agreement, December 31, 2015 (Notice). 1 Notice of United States Postal Service of Change New Postal Product 2 Notice of the United States Postal Service of in Prices Pursuant to Amendment to Priority Mail Filing Financial Workpapers and Certified Contract 41, December 31, 2015 (Notice). AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. Statement, January 4, 2016.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 977

accessed via the Commission’s Web site an Amendment to the existing Priority By the Commission. (http://www.prc.gov). Mail Contract 138 negotiated service Stacy L. Ruble, The Commission appoints Kenneth R. agreement approved in this docket.1 In Secretary. Moeller to serve as Public support of its Notice, the Postal Service [FR Doc. 2016–00131 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Representative in this docket. includes a redacted copy of the BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P Amendment and a certification of III. Ordering Paragraphs compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), as It is ordered: required by 39 CFR 3015.5. POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 1. The Commission establishes Docket The Postal Service also filed the No. CP2016–92 for consideration of the [Docket No. CP2015–55; Order No. 2970] unredacted Amendment and supporting matters raised by the Postal Service’s financial information under seal. Id. at New Postal Product Notice. 1. The Postal Service seeks to 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. incorporate by reference the Application R. Moeller is appointed to serve as an ACTION: Notice. officer of the Commission to represent for Non-Public Treatment originally the interests of the general public in this filed in this docket for the protection of SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a proceeding (Public Representative). information that it has filed under seal. recent Postal Service filing concerning 3. Comments are due no later than Id. The Amendment changes prices an amendment to Parcel Select Contract January 11, 2016. under Priority Mail Contract 138 as 9 negotiated service agreement. This 4. The Secretary shall arrange for contemplated by the contract’s terms. notice informs the public of the filing, publication of this order in the Federal Id. invites public comment, and takes other Register. The Postal Service intends for the administrative steps. By the Commission. Amendment to become effective one DATES: Comments are due: January 11, 2016. Stacy L. Ruble, business day after the date that the Commission completes its review of the ADDRESSES: Secretary. Submit comments Notice. Id. The Postal Service asserts electronically via the Commission’s [FR Doc. 2016–00133 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] that the Amendment will not impair the Filing Online system at http:// BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P ability of the contract to comply with 39 www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit U.S.C. 3633. Id., Attachment B. comments electronically should contact FOR FURTHER POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION II. Notice of Filings the person identified in the INFORMATION CONTACT section by [Docket No. CP2015–112; Order No. 2973] The Commission invites comments on telephone for advice on filing whether the changes presented in the alternatives. New Postal Product Postal Service’s Notice are consistent FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at ACTION: Notice. 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR 3015.5, and 39 202–789–6820. CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a due no later than January 11, 2016. The recent Postal Service filing concerning public portions of these filings can be Table of Contents an amendment to Priority Mail Contract accessed via the Commission’s Web site I. Introduction 138 negotiated service agreement. This (http://www.prc.gov). II. Notice of Filings notice informs the public of the filing, The Commission appoints Curtis E. III. Ordering Paragraphs invites public comment, and takes other Kidd to represent the interests of the administrative steps. general public (Public Representative) I. Introduction DATES: Comments are due: January 11, in this docket. On December 31, 2015, the Postal 2016. III. Ordering Paragraphs Service filed notice that it has agreed to ADDRESSES: Submit comments an Amendment to the existing Parcel electronically via the Commission’s It is ordered: Select Contract 9 negotiated service Filing Online system at http:// 1 1. The Commission reopens Docket agreement approved in this docket. In www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit No. CP2015–112 for consideration of support of its Notice, the Postal Service comments electronically should contact matters raised by the Postal Service’s includes a redacted copy of the the person identified in the FOR FURTHER Notice. Amendment and a certification of INFORMATION CONTACT section by compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), as telephone for advice on filing 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the required by 39 CFR 3015.5. alternatives. Commission appoints Curtis E. Kidd to The Postal Service also filed the serve as an officer of the Commission FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: unredacted Amendment and supporting (Public Representative) to represent the financial information under seal. The David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at interests of the general public in this 202–789–6820. Postal Service seeks to incorporate by proceeding. reference the Application for Non- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 3. Comments are due no later than Public Treatment originally filed in this Table of Contents January 11, 2016. docket for the protection of information that it has filed under seal. Notice at 1. 4. The Secretary shall arrange for I. Introduction The Amendment seeks to adjust the II. Notice of Filings publication of this order in the Federal prices listed in Table 2 of section I.E.3, III. Ordering Paragraphs Register. I. Introduction 1 Notice of United States Postal Service of 1 Notice of United States Postal Service of Change Amendment to Parcel Select Contract 9, with On December 31, 2015, the Postal in Prices Pursuant to Amendment to Priority Mail Portions Filed Under Seal, December 31, 2015 Service filed notice that it has agreed to Contract 138, December 31, 2015 (Notice). (Notice).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 978 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

as contemplated by the original contract gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE terms. Id. Attachment A. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 30, COMMISSION The Postal Service intends for the 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory [Release No. 34–76817; File No. SR– Amendment to become effective one Commission a Request of the United NASDAQ–2015–161] business day after the date that the States Postal Service to Add First-Class Commission completes its review of the Package Service Contract 42 to Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Notice. Notice at 1. Competitive Product List. Documents NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of II. Notice of Filings are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Filing of Proposed Rule Change Nos. MC2016–74, CP2016–91. Relating to the Listing and Trading of The Commission invites comments on the Shares of the First Trust RiverFront whether the changes presented in the Stanley F. Mires, Dynamic Europe ETF, First Trust Postal Service’s Notice are consistent Attorney, Federal Compliance. RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF, with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, [FR Doc. 2016–00090 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] First Trust RiverFront Dynamic 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR 3015.5, and 39 BILLING CODE 7710–12–P Emerging Markets ETF, and the First CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed due no later than January 11, 2016. The International ETF of First Trust public portions of these filings can be POSTAL SERVICE Exchange-Traded Fund III accessed via the Commission’s Web site (http://www.prc.gov). Product Change—Parcel Select January 4, 2016. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the The Commission appoints Derrick D. Negotiated Service Agreement Dennis to represent the interests of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 general public (Public Representative) AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. in this docket. notice is hereby given that on December ACTION: Notice. 22, 2015, The NASDAQ Stock Market III. Ordering Paragraphs LLC (‘‘Nasdaq’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed It is ordered: SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives with the Securities and Exchange 1. The Commission reopens Docket notice of filing a request with the Postal Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the No. CP2015–55 for consideration of Regulatory Commission to add a proposed rule change as described in matters raised by the Postal Service’s domestic shipping services contract to Items I, II, and III below, which Items Notice. the list of Negotiated Service have been prepared by Nasdaq. The 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Agreements in the Mail Classification Commission is publishing this notice to Commission appoints Derrick D. Dennis Schedule’s Competitive Products List. solicit comments on the proposed rule to serve as an officer of the Commission change from interested persons. DATES: Effective date: January 8, 2016. (Public Representative) to represent the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s interests of the general public in this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Statement of the Terms of Substance of proceeding. Maria W. Votsch, 202–268–6525. the Proposed Rule Change 3. Comments are due no later than January 11, 2016. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Nasdaq proposes to list and trade the 4. The Secretary shall arrange for United States Postal Service® hereby shares of the following under Nasdaq 3 publication of this order in the Federal gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. Rule 5735 (‘‘Managed Fund Shares’’): Register. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 31, First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF (the ‘‘Europe Fund’’); First Trust 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory By the Commission. RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF Commission a Request of the United Stacy L. Ruble, (the ‘‘Asia Pacific Fund’’); First Trust Secretary. States Postal Service to Add Parcel RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets [FR Doc. 2016–00093 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Select Contract 13 to Competitive ETF (the ‘‘Emerging Markets Fund’’); BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P Product List. Documents are available at and First Trust RiverFront Dynamic www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016–75, Developed International ETF (the CP2016–93. ‘‘Developed International Fund’’). The POSTAL SERVICE Stanley F. Mires, Europe Fund, Asia Pacific Fund, Emerging Markets Fund and Developed Product Change—First-Class Package Attorney, Federal Compliance. Service Negotiated Service Agreement [FR Doc. 2016–00091 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). BILLING CODE 7710–12–P 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. TM AGENCY: Postal Service . 3 The Commission approved Nasdaq Rule 5735 in ACTION: Notice. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57962 (June 13, 2008), 73 FR 35175 (June 20, 2008) (SR– SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives NASDAQ–2008–039). There are already multiple actively managed funds listed on the Exchange; see, notice of filing a request with the Postal e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 72506 Regulatory Commission to add a (July 1, 2014), 79 FR 38631 (July 8, 2014) (SR– domestic shipping services contract to NASDAQ–2014–050) (order approving listing and trading of First Trust Strategic Income ETF); 69464 the list of Negotiated Service (April 26, 2013), 78 FR 25774 (May 2, 2013) (SR– Agreements in the Mail Classification NASDAQ–2013–036) (order approving listing and Schedule’s Competitive Products List. trading of First Trust Senior Loan Fund); and 66489 (February 29, 2012), 77 FR 13379 (March 6, 2012) DATES : Effective date: January 8, 2016. (SR–NASDAQ–2012–004) (order approving listing FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and trading of WisdomTree Emerging Markets Valerie J. Pelton, 202–268–3049. Corporate Bond Fund). The Exchange believes the proposed rule change raises no significant issues SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The not previously addressed in those prior United States Postal Service® hereby Commission orders.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 979

International Fund are each a ‘‘Fund’’ First Trust Advisors L.P. will be the Adviser is a broker-dealer, although the and collectively, the ‘‘Funds.’’ Each investment adviser (‘‘Adviser’’) to the Adviser is affiliated with the Fund is a series of First Trust Exchange- Funds. RiverFront Investment Group, Distributor, a broker-dealer, and the Traded Fund III (the ‘‘Trust’’). The LLC will serve as investment sub- Sub-Adviser is affiliated with Robert W. shares of each Fund are collectively adviser (‘‘Sub-Adviser’’) to the Funds Baird & Co. Incorporated, a broker- referred to herein as the ‘‘Shares.’’ and provide day-to-day portfolio dealer, and each has implemented a fire The text of the proposed rule change management. First Trust Portfolios L.P. wall with respect to its respective is available at http:// (the ‘‘Distributor’’) will be the principal broker-dealer affiliate regarding access nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com/, at Nasdaq’s underwriter and distributor of each to information concerning the principal office, and at the Fund’s Shares. Brown Brothers composition and/or changes to a Commission’s Public Reference Room. Harriman & Co. (‘‘BBH’’) will act as the portfolio. II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s administrator, accounting agent, In addition, personnel who make Statement of the Purpose of, and custodian and transfer agent to the decisions on each Fund’s portfolio Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Funds. composition will be subject to Paragraph (g) of Rule 5735 provides Change procedures designed to prevent the use that if the investment adviser to the and dissemination of material non- In its filing with the Commission, investment company issuing Managed public information regarding such Nasdaq included statements concerning Fund Shares is affiliated with a broker- Fund’s portfolio. In the event (a) the the purpose of, and basis for, the dealer, such investment adviser shall Adviser or the Sub-Adviser registers as proposed rule change. The text of these erect a ‘‘fire wall’’ between the a broker-dealer, or becomes newly statements may be examined at the investment adviser and the broker- affiliated with a broker-dealer, or (b) any places specified in Item IV below. dealer with respect to access to new adviser or sub-adviser is a Nasdaq has prepared summaries, set information concerning the composition registered broker-dealer or becomes forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of and/or changes to such investment affiliated with another broker-dealer, it the most significant aspects of such 7 company portfolio. In addition, will implement a fire wall with respect statements. paragraph (g) further requires that to its relevant personnel and/or such A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s personnel who make decisions on the broker-dealer affiliate, as applicable, Statement of the Purpose of, and the open-end fund’s portfolio composition regarding access to information Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule must be subject to procedures designed concerning the composition and/or Change to prevent the use and dissemination of changes to a portfolio and will be material, non-public information 1. Purpose subject to procedures designed to regarding the open-end fund’s portfolio. prevent the use and dissemination of The Exchange proposes to list and Rule 5735(g) is similar to Nasdaq Rule material non-public information trade the Shares of each Fund under 5705(b)(5)(A)(i); however, paragraph (g) regarding such portfolio. Nasdaq Rule 5735, which governs the in connection with the establishment of Each Fund intends to qualify each listing and trading of Managed Fund a ‘‘fire wall’’ between the investment year as a regulated investment company Shares 4 on the Exchange. Each Fund adviser and the broker-dealer reflects under Subchapter M of the Internal will be an actively managed exchange- the applicable open-end fund’s Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. traded fund (‘‘ETF’’). The Shares will be portfolio, not an underlying benchmark offered by the Trust, which was index, as is the case with index-based Principal Investment Strategies established as a Massachusetts business funds. Neither the Adviser nor the Sub- Applicable to Each Fund trust on January 9, 2008.5 The Trust is Each Fund’s investment objective will registered with the Commission as an and 811–22245). The descriptions of the Funds and the Shares contained herein are based, in part, on be to provide capital appreciation. 8 investment company and has filed a information in the Registration Statement. Under normal market conditions, each registration statement on Form N–1A 7 An investment adviser to an open-end fund is Fund will seek to achieve its investment (‘‘Registration Statement’’) with the required to be registered under the Investment objective by investing at least 80% of its Commission.6 Each Fund will be a Advisers Act of 1940 (the ‘‘Advisers Act’’). As a net assets (including investment series of the Trust. result, the Adviser, the Sub-Adviser and their related personnel are subject to the provisions of borrowings) in a combination of (i) Rule 204A–1 under the Advisers Act relating to 4 A Managed Fund Share is a security that codes of ethics. This Rule requires investment 8 The term ‘‘under normal market conditions’’ as represents an interest in an investment company advisers to adopt a code of ethics that reflects the used herein includes, but is not limited to, the registered under the Investment Company Act of fiduciary nature of the relationship to clients as absence of adverse market, economic, political or 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a–1) (the ‘‘1940 Act’’) organized well as compliance with other applicable securities other conditions, including extreme volatility or as an open-end investment company or similar laws. Accordingly, procedures designed to prevent trading halts in the securities markets or the entity that invests in a portfolio of securities the communication and misuse of non-public financial markets generally; operational issues selected by its investment adviser consistent with information by an investment adviser must be causing dissemination of inaccurate market its investment objectives and policies. In contrast, consistent with Rule 204A–1 under the Advisers information; or force majeure type events such as an open-end investment company that issues Index Act. In addition, Rule 206(4)–7 under the Advisers systems failure, natural or man-made disaster, act Fund Shares, listed and traded on the Exchange Act makes it unlawful for an investment adviser to of God, armed conflict, act of terrorism, riot or labor under Nasdaq Rule 5705, seeks to provide provide investment advice to clients unless such disruption or any similar intervening circumstance. investment results that correspond generally to the investment adviser has (i) adopted and On a temporary basis, including for defensive price and yield performance of a specific foreign or implemented written policies and procedures purposes, during the initial invest-up period and domestic stock index, fixed income securities index reasonably designed to prevent violation, by the during periods of high cash inflows or outflows, a or combination thereof. investment adviser and its supervised persons, of Fund may depart from its principal investment 5 The Commission has issued an order, upon the Advisers Act and the Commission rules adopted strategies; for example, it may hold a higher than which the Trust may rely, granting certain thereunder; (ii) implemented, at a minimum, an normal proportion of its assets in cash. During such exemptive relief under the 1940 Act. See annual review regarding the adequacy of the periods, a Fund may not be able to achieve its Investment Company Act Release No. 28468 policies and procedures established pursuant to investment objective. A Fund may adopt a (October 27, 2008) (File No. 812–13477) (the subparagraph (i) above and the effectiveness of their defensive strategy when the Adviser and/or the ‘‘Exemptive Relief’’). implementation; and (iii) designated an individual Sub-Adviser believes securities in which such Fund 6 See Post-Effective Amendment No. 29 to (who is a supervised person) responsible for normally invests have elevated risks due to political Registration Statement on Form N–1A for the Trust, administering the policies and procedures adopted or economic factors and in other extraordinary dated November 19, 2015 (File Nos. 333–176976 under subparagraph (i) above. circumstances.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 980 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

‘‘Principal Fund Equity Securities’’ (as Principal Equity Securities of emerging Other Investments for the Funds 16 defined below), (ii) forward currency market companies; and Each Fund may invest (in the contracts and non-deliverable forward (iv) for the Developed International aggregate) up to 20% of its net assets in 9 currency contracts (collectively, Fund, Principal Fund Equity Securities the following securities and ‘‘Forward Contracts’’), and (iii) currency will be Principal Equity Securities of 17 instruments: transactions on a spot (i.e., cash) basis.10 developed market companies. Each Fund may invest in the For each Fund, (a) ‘‘Principal Equity In selecting securities for a Fund, the following U.S. and non-U.S. exchange- Securities’’ will consist of the following Sub-Adviser will score individual listed securities (other than Principal securities from a portfolio of eligible U.S. and non-U.S. exchange-listed Fund Equity Securities): (i) Common securities according to several core securities: (i) Common stocks; (ii) stocks; (ii) common and preferred shares attributes, including, but not limited to, common and preferred shares of real of REITs; (iii) Depositary Receipts; and 11 value, quality and momentum, using estate investment trusts (‘‘REITs’’); (iv) equity securities of business multiple proprietary factors within each and (iii) American Depositary Receipts development companies (‘‘BDCs’’) core attribute.18 The Sub-Adviser will (‘‘ADRs’’), European Depositary (collectively, ‘‘Other Equity then rank each qualifying security based Receipts (‘‘EDRs’’), and Global Securities’’).20 Depositary Receipts (‘‘GDRs’’ and, on its core attribute score, and the Each Fund may invest in short-term together with ADRs and EDRs, highest scoring securities will be debt securities and other short-term debt 12 considered for inclusion in the Fund’s ‘‘Depositary Receipts’’ ), and (b) instruments (described below), as well portfolio. The Sub-Adviser will utilize ‘‘Principal Fund Equity Securities’’ will as cash equivalents, or it may hold cash. its proprietary optimization process to consist of Principal Equity Securities The percentage of each Fund invested in maximize the percentage of high-scoring that are suggested by such Fund’s such holdings or held in cash will vary securities included in each Fund’s name.13 Accordingly: and will depend on several factors, portfolio. (i) For the Europe Fund, Principal including market conditions. Each Fund In addition, for each Fund, by Fund Equity Securities will be Principal may invest in the following short-term entering into Forward Contracts and Equity Securities of European debt instruments: 21 (1) Fixed rate and companies; 14 currency spot transactions, the Sub- Adviser will deploy a dynamic currency floating rate U.S. government securities, (ii) for the Asia Pacific Fund, including bills, notes and bonds Principal Fund Equity Securities will be hedge (hedging up to 100% of such Fund’s foreign currency exposure) based differing as to maturity and rates of Principal Equity Securities of Asian interest, which are either issued or Pacific companies; 15 on its proprietary hedging methodology. The Sub-Adviser’s hedging guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury or by (iii) for the Emerging Markets Fund, U.S. government agencies or Principal Fund Equity Securities will be methodology will be constructed from a combination of quantitative measures, instrumentalities; (2) certificates of deposit issued against funds deposited 9 A non-deliverable forward currency contract is such as interest-rate differentials, central bank balance sheet expansion/ in a bank or savings and loan a forward currency contract where there is no association; (3) bankers’ acceptances, physical settlement of the two currencies at contraction, and price momentum, and maturity. Instead, a net cash payment is made by qualitative measures, such as formal and which are short-term credit instruments one party to another based on the movement of the informal guidance from central bankers. used to finance commercial two currencies. transactions; (4) repurchase 10 A Fund would enter into Forward Contracts Each Fund will only enter into 22 transactions in Forward Contracts with agreements, which involve purchases and/or currency spot transactions for hedging of debt securities; (5) bank time purposes. counterparties that the Adviser and/or 11 A REIT is a company that owns and typically the Sub-Adviser reasonably believe are deposits, which are monies kept on operates income-producing real estate or related deposit with banks or savings and loan assets. capable of performing under the 19 associations for a stated period of time 12 applicable Forward Contract. Depositary Receipts are receipts, typically at a fixed rate of interest; (6) commercial issued by a bank or trust company, which evidence ownership of underlying securities issued by a 16 An emerging market company is one (i) paper, which is short-term unsecured foreign entity. The Funds will not invest in any domiciled or with a principal place of business or unsponsored Depositary Receipts. primary securities trading market in an emerging may consider the Adviser’s and/or Sub-Adviser’s 13 For the avoidance of doubt, with respect to market country, or (ii) that derives a substantial past experience with the counterparty, its known Depositary Receipts, whether such Principal Equity portion of its total revenues or profits from disciplinary history and its share of market Securities are Principal Fund Equity Securities is emerging market countries. participation. based on the underlying securities, the ownership 17 Developed market companies are those 20 For each Fund, Other Equity Securities and of which is represented by the Depositary Receipts companies (i) whose securities are traded Principal Fund Equity Securities are referred to (i.e., whether, as described below, the relevant principally on a stock exchange in a developed collectively as ‘‘Equity Securities.’’ underlying security is a security of a European market country, (ii) that are organized under the 21 Short-term debt instruments will be issued by company, an Asian Pacific company, an emerging laws of or have a principal office in a developed issuers having a long-term debt rating of at least A market company or a developed market company, market country, or (iii) that have at least 50% of by Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services, a Division as applicable). their assets in, or derive at least 50% of their of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (‘‘S&P 14 European companies are those companies (i) revenues or profits from, a developed market Ratings’’), Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. whose securities are traded principally on a stock country. (‘‘Moody’s’’) or Fitch Ratings (‘‘Fitch’’) and have a exchange in a European country, (ii) that are 18 An example of a value factor would be price- maturity of one year or less. organized under the laws of or have a principal to-book value and an example of a quality factor 22 Each Fund intends to enter into repurchase office in a European country, or (iii) that have at would be cash as a percentage of market agreements only with financial institutions and least 50% of their assets in, or derive at least 50% capitalization. dealers believed by the Adviser and/or the Sub- of their revenues or profits from, a European 19 Each Fund will seek, where possible, to use Adviser to present minimal credit risks in country. counterparties, as applicable, whose financial status accordance with criteria approved by the Board of 15 Asian Pacific companies are those companies is such that the risk of default is reduced; however, Trustees of the Trust (‘‘Trust Board’’). The Adviser (i) whose securities are traded principally on a the risk of losses resulting from default is still and/or the Sub-Adviser will review and monitor the stock exchange in an Asian Pacific country, (ii) that possible. The Adviser and/or the Sub-Adviser will creditworthiness of such institutions. The Adviser are organized under the laws of or have a principal evaluate the creditworthiness of counterparties on and/or the Sub-Adviser will monitor the value of office in an Asian Pacific country, or (iii) that have an ongoing basis. In addition to information the collateral at the time the transaction is entered at least 50% of their assets in, or derive at least 50% provided by credit agencies, the Adviser’s and/or into and at all times during the term of the of their revenues or profits from, an Asian Pacific Sub-Adviser’s analysis will evaluate each approved repurchase agreement. The Funds will not enter country. counterparty using various methods of analysis and into reverse repurchase agreements.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 981

promissory notes; 23 and (7) short-term The Funds’ Transactions in Forward illiquid assets. Illiquid assets include debt obligations issued or guaranteed by Contracts and Exchange-Listed Equity securities subject to contractual or other non-U.S. governments or by their Index Futures Contracts restrictions on resale and other agencies or instrumentalities. Each Fund’s transactions in Forward instruments that lack readily available Each Fund may invest (but only up to Contracts and exchange-listed equity markets as determined in accordance 5% of its net assets) in exchange-listed index futures contracts will be with Commission staff guidance.29 equity index futures contracts. consistent with its investment objective The Funds may not invest 25% or The Funds’ Equity Securities and the 1940 Act and will not be used more of the value of their respective total assets in securities of issuers in any Under normal market conditions, to seek to achieve a multiple or inverse multiple of an index. Each Fund will one industry. This restriction does not each Fund will invest in at least 20 apply to (a) obligations issued or Equity Securities. Each Fund will satisfy comply with the regulatory requirements of the Commission with guaranteed by the U.S. government, its the ‘‘ISG Criteria’’ (as described below) agencies or instrumentalities or (b) and/or the ‘‘Alternative Criteria’’ (as respect to coverage in connection with its transactions in Forward Contracts securities of other investment described below). companies.30 A Fund will satisfy the ISG Criteria if and exchange-listed equity index at least 90% of such Fund’s net assets futures contracts. If the applicable Creation and Redemption of Shares that are invested (in the aggregate) in guidelines prescribed under the 1940 Each Fund will issue and redeem Equity Securities will be invested in Act so require, a Fund will earmark Shares on a continuous basis at net asset Equity Securities that trade in markets cash, U.S. government securities and/or value (‘‘NAV’’) 31 only in large blocks of that are members of the Intermarket other liquid assets permitted by the Shares (‘‘Creation Units’’) in Surveillance Group (‘‘ISG’’) 24 or are Commission in the amount 27 transactions with authorized parties to a comprehensive surveillance prescribed. participants, generally including broker- sharing agreement with the Exchange. Investment Restrictions A Fund will satisfy the Alternative dealers and large institutional investors Criteria if, under normal market Each Fund may hold up to an (‘‘Authorized Participants’’). Creation conditions, its Equity Securities meet aggregate amount of 15% of its net Units generally will consist of 50,000 the following criteria at the time of assets in illiquid assets (calculated at Shares, although this may change from purchase: (1) Non-U.S. Equity the time of investment), deemed illiquid time to time. Creation Units, however, by the Adviser and/or the Sub- Securities 25 each shall have a minimum are not expected to consist of less than Adviser.28 market value of at least $100 million; (2) Each Fund will monitor its 50,000 Shares. The Fund will issue and non-U.S. Equity Securities each shall portfolio liquidity on an ongoing basis redeem Creation Units in exchange for have a minimum global monthly trading to determine whether, in light of current an in-kind portfolio of securities and/or volume of 250,000 shares, or minimum circumstances, an adequate level of cash in lieu of such securities (the global notional volume traded per liquidity is being maintained, and will ‘‘Creation Basket’’).32 In addition, if month of $25,000,000, averaged over the consider taking appropriate steps in last six months; (3) the most heavily order to maintain adequate liquidity if, 29 The Commission has stated that long-standing Commission guidelines have required open-end weighted non-U.S. Equity Security shall through a change in values, net assets, or other circumstances, more than 15% funds to hold no more than 15% of their net assets not exceed 25% of the weight of the in illiquid securities and other illiquid assets. See Fund’s entire portfolio and, to the extent of such Fund’s net assets are held in Investment Company Act Release No. 28193 (March applicable, the five most heavily 11, 2008), 73 FR 14618 (March 18, 2008), footnote Rule 8.600 based, in part, on a representation that 34. See also Investment Company Act Release No. weighted non-U.S. Equity Securities the non-U.S. equity securities in the applicable 5847 (October 21, 1969), 35 FR 19989 (December shall not exceed 60% of the weight of ETF’s portfolio would meet criteria similar to 31, 1970) (Statement Regarding ‘‘Restricted the Fund’s entire portfolio; (4) each non- certain ‘‘generic’’ listing criteria in NYSE Arca Securities’’); Investment Company Act Release No. U.S. Equity Security shall be listed and Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3), Commentary .01(a)(B), which 18612 (March 12, 1992), 57 FR 9828 (March 20, relate to criteria applicable to an index or portfolio 1992) (Revisions of Guidelines to Form N–1A). A traded on an exchange that has last-sale of (a) non-U.S. stocks or (b) both U.S. and non-U.S. fund’s portfolio security is illiquid if it cannot be reporting; and (5) all of such Fund’s net stocks underlying a series of Investment Company disposed of in the ordinary course of business assets that are invested (in the aggregate) Units to be listed and traded on NYSE Arca, Inc. within seven days at approximately the value in Equity Securities other than non-U.S. pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) under the Act. See ascribed to it by the fund. See Investment Company Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75023 (May Act Release No. 14983 (March 12, 1986), 51 FR Equity Securities shall be invested in 21, 2015), 80 FR 30519 (May 28, 2015) (SR– 9773 (March 21, 1986) (adopting amendments to Equity Securities that trade in markets NYSEArca–2014–100) (order approving listing and Rule 2a–7 under the 1940 Act); Investment that are members of ISG or are parties trading of SPDR SSgA Global Managed Volatility Company Act Release No. 17452 (April 23, 1990), to a comprehensive surveillance sharing ETF). 55 FR 17933 (April 30, 1990) (adopting Rule 144A 27 under the Securities Act of 1933). agreement with the Exchange.26 With respect to guidance under the 1940 Act, see 15 U.S.C. 80a–18; Investment Company Act 30 See Form N–1A, Item 9. The Commission has Release No. 10666 (April 18, 1979), 44 FR 25128 taken the position that a fund is concentrated if it 23 Each Fund may only invest in commercial (April 27, 1979); Dreyfus Strategic Investing, invests more than 25% of the value of its total paper rated A–1 or higher by S&P Ratings, Prime- Commission No-Action Letter (June 22, 1987); assets in any one industry. See, e.g., Investment 1 or higher by Moody’s or F1 or higher by Fitch. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, L.P., Commission Company Act Release No. 9011 (October 30, 1975), 24 See note 41, infra. No-Action Letter (July 2, 1996). 40 FR 54241 (November 21, 1975). 25 For purposes of this filing, the term ‘‘non-U.S. 28 In reaching liquidity decisions, the Adviser 31 The NAV of each Fund’s Shares generally will Equity Securities’’ means Equity Securities that are and/or the Sub-Adviser may consider the following be calculated once daily Monday through Friday as not listed on a U.S. exchange. factors: The frequency of trades and quotes for the of the close of regular trading on the New York 26 Criteria (1) through (4) are similar to certain security or other instrument; the number of dealers Stock Exchange (‘‘NYSE’’), generally 4:00 p.m., ‘‘generic’’ listing criteria in Nasdaq Rule wishing to purchase or sell the security or other Eastern Time (the ‘‘NAV Calculation Time’’). NAV 5705(b)(3)(A)(ii), which relate to criteria applicable instrument and the number of other potential per Share will be calculated by dividing a Fund’s to an index or portfolio of (a) non-U.S. stocks or (b) purchasers; dealer undertakings to make a market net assets by the number of Fund Shares both U.S. and non-U.S. stocks underlying a series in the security or other instrument; and the nature outstanding. of Index Fund Shares to be listed and traded on the of the security or other instrument and the nature 32 It is expected that each Fund will typically Exchange pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) under the Act. of the marketplace in which it trades (e.g., the time issue and redeem Creation Units on an in-kind In addition, the Commission recently issued an needed to dispose of the security or other basis; however, subject to, and in accordance with, order approving a proposed rule change relating to instrument, the method of soliciting offers and the the provisions of the Exemptive Relief, a Fund may, the listing and trading under NYSE Arca Equities mechanics of transfer). Continued

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 982 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

there is a difference between the NAV The Funds’ investments will be debt securities than for other types of attributable to a Creation Unit and the valued daily. As described more securities. market value of the Creation Basket specifically below, investments traded The information summarized below is exchanged for the Creation Unit, the on an exchange (i.e., a regulated based on the Valuation Procedures as party conveying securities with the market), will generally be valued at currently in effect; however, as noted lower value will pay to the other an market value prices that represent last above, the Valuation Procedures are amount in cash equal to the difference sale or official closing prices. In amended from time to time and, (referred to as the ‘‘Cash Component’’). addition, as described more specifically therefore, such information is subject to Creations and redemptions must be below, non-exchange traded change. made by or through an Authorized investments will generally be valued The following investments will Participant that has executed an using prices obtained from third-party typically be valued using information agreement that has been agreed to by the pricing services (each, a ‘‘Pricing provided by a Pricing Service: (a) Except Distributor and BBH with respect to Service’’).33 If, however, valuations for as provided below, short-term U.S. creations and redemptions of Creation any of the Funds’ investments cannot be government securities, commercial Units. All standard orders to create readily obtained as provided in the paper, bankers’ acceptances and short- Creation Units must be received by the preceding manner, or the Pricing term debt obligations issued or transfer agent no later than the closing Committee of the Adviser (the ‘‘Pricing guaranteed by non-U.S. governments or time of the regular trading session on Committee’’) 34 questions the accuracy by their agencies or instrumentalities, the NYSE (ordinarily 4:00 p.m., Eastern or reliability of valuations that are so all as set forth under ‘‘Other Time) (the ‘‘Closing Time’’) in each case obtained, such investments will be Investments for the Funds’’ on the date such order is placed in order valued at fair value, as determined by (collectively, ‘‘Short-Term Debt for the creation of Creation Units to be the Pricing Committee, in accordance Instruments’’) and (b) currency spot effected based on the NAV of Shares as with valuation procedures (which may transactions. Debt instruments may be next determined on such date after be revised from time to time) adopted by valued at evaluated mean prices, as receipt of the order in proper form. the Trust Board (the ‘‘Valuation provided by Pricing Services. Pricing Shares may be redeemed only in Procedures’’), and in accordance with Services typically value non-exchange- Creation Units at their NAV next provisions of the 1940 Act. The Pricing traded instruments utilizing a range of determined after receipt not later than Committee’s fair value determinations market-based inputs and assumptions, the Closing Time of a redemption may require subjective judgments about including readily available market request in proper form by a Fund the value of an investment. The fair quotations obtained from broker-dealers through the transfer agent and only on valuations attempt to estimate the value making markets in such instruments, a business day. at which an investment could be sold at cash flows, and transactions for The Funds’ custodian, through the the time of pricing, although actual sales comparable instruments. In pricing National Securities Clearing could result in price differences, which certain instruments, the Pricing Services Corporation, will make available on could be material. Valuing the Fund’s may consider information about an each business day, prior to the opening investments using fair value pricing can instrument’s issuer or market activity of business of the Exchange, the list of result in using prices for those provided by the Adviser and/or the Sub- the names and quantities of the investments (particularly investments Adviser. Short-Term Debt Instruments having a securities comprising the Creation that trade in foreign markets) that may remaining maturity of 60 days or less Basket, as well as the estimated Cash differ from current market valuations. Component (if any), for that day. The when purchased will typically be Certain securities in which a Fund published Creation Basket will apply valued at cost adjusted for amortization may invest will not be listed on any until a new Creation Basket is of premiums and accretion of discounts, securities exchange or board of trade. announced on the following business provided the Pricing Committee has Such securities will typically be bought day prior to commencement of trading determined that the use of amortized and sold by institutional investors in in the Shares. cost is an appropriate reflection of value individually negotiated private given market and issuer-specific Net Asset Value transactions that function in many conditions existing at the time of the Each Fund’s NAV will be determined respects like an over-the-counter determination. as of the close of regular trading on the secondary market, although typically no Repurchase agreements will typically NYSE on each day the NYSE is open for formal market makers will exist. Certain be valued as follows: trading. If the NYSE closes early on a securities, particularly debt securities, Overnight repurchase agreements will valuation day, the NAV will be will have few or no trades, or trade be valued at amortized cost when it determined as of that time. NAV per infrequently, and information regarding represents the best estimate of value. Share will be calculated for each Fund a specific security may not be widely Term repurchase agreements (i.e., those by taking the value of such Fund’s total available or may be incomplete. whose maturity exceeds seven days) assets, including interest or dividends Accordingly, determinations of the will be valued at the average of the bid accrued but not yet collected, less all value of debt securities may be based on quotations obtained daily from at least liabilities, including accrued expenses infrequent and dated information. two recognized dealers. and dividends declared but unpaid, and Because there is less reliable, objective Certificates of deposit and bank time dividing such amount by the total data available, elements of judgment deposits will typically be valued at cost. number of Shares outstanding. The may play a greater role in valuation of Equity Securities that are listed on result, rounded to the nearest cent, will any exchange other than the Exchange be the NAV per Share. All valuations 33 The Adviser may use various Pricing Services and the London Stock Exchange will be subject to review by the Trust or discontinue the use of any Pricing Services, as Alternative Investment Market (‘‘AIM’’) approved by the Trust Board from time to time. will typically be valued at the last sale Board or its delegate. 34 The Pricing Committee will be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and price on the exchange on which they are at times, issue and redeem Creation Units on a cash dissemination of material non-public information principally traded on the business day (or partially cash) basis. regarding each Fund’s portfolio. as of which such value is being

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 983

determined. Equity Securities listed on discount of the Bid/Ask Price against value for the components of the the Exchange or the AIM will typically the NAV; and (2) data in chart format Disclosed Portfolio and will be updated be valued at the official closing price on displaying the frequency distribution of and widely disseminated by one or the business day as of which such value discounts and premiums of the daily more major market data vendors and is being determined. If there has been no Bid/Ask Price against the NAV, within broadly displayed at least every 15 sale on such day, or no official closing appropriate ranges, for each of the four seconds during the Regular Market price in the case of securities traded on previous calendar quarters. On each Session. The Intraday Indicative Value the Exchange or the AIM, such business day, before commencement of will be based on quotes and closing securities will typically be valued using trading in Shares in the Regular Market prices from the securities’ local market fair value pricing. Equity Securities Session 36 on the Exchange, each Fund and may not reflect events that occur traded on more than one securities will disclose on its Web site the subsequent to the local market’s close. exchange will be valued at the last sale identities and quantities of the portfolio Premiums and discounts between the price or official closing price, as of securities and other assets (the Intraday Indicative Value and the applicable, on the business day as of ‘‘Disclosed Portfolio’’ as defined in market price may occur. This should not which such value is being determined at Nasdaq Rule 5735(c)(2)) held by the be viewed as a ‘‘real time’’ update of the the close of the exchange representing Fund that will form the basis for the NAV per Share of a Fund, which is the principal market for such securities. Fund’s calculation of NAV at the end of calculated only once a day. Exchange-listed equity index futures the business day.37 The dissemination of the Intraday contracts will typically be valued at the Each Fund’s disclosure of derivative Indicative Value, together with the closing price in the market where such positions in the Disclosed Portfolio will Disclosed Portfolio, will allow investors instruments are principally traded. include sufficient information for to determine the value of the underlying Forward Contracts will typically be market participants to use to value these portfolio of a Fund on a daily basis and valued at the current day’s interpolated positions intraday. On a daily basis, will provide a close estimate of that foreign exchange rate, as calculated each Fund will disclose on its Web site value throughout the trading day. using the current day’s spot rate, and the following information regarding Investors will also be able to obtain the thirty, sixty, ninety and one- each portfolio holding, as applicable to each Fund’s Statement of Additional hundred-eighty day forward rates the type of holding: Ticker symbol, Information (‘‘SAI’’), annual and semi- provided by a Pricing Service or by CUSIP number or other identifier, if annual reports (together, ‘‘Shareholder certain independent dealers in such any; a description of the holding Reports’’), and Form N–CSR and Form contracts. (including the type of holding); the N–SAR, filed twice a year. Each Fund’s Because foreign exchanges may be identity of the security, index or other SAI and Shareholder Reports will be open on different days than the days asset or instrument underlying the available free upon request from such during which an investor may purchase holding, if any; quantity held (as Fund, and those documents and the or sell Shares, the value of the Funds’ measured by, for example, par value, Form N–CSR and Form N–SAR may be assets may change on days when notional value or number of shares, viewed on-screen or downloaded from investors are not able to purchase or sell contracts or units); maturity date, if any; the Commission’s Web site at Shares. Assets denominated in foreign coupon rate, if any; effective date, if www.sec.gov. Information regarding currencies will be translated into U.S. any; market value of the holding; and market price and trading volume of the dollars at the exchange rate of such percentage weighting of the holding in Shares will be continually available on currencies against the U.S. dollar as the Fund’s portfolio. The Web site a real-time basis throughout the day on provided by a Pricing Service. The value information will be publicly available at brokers’ computer screens and other of assets denominated in foreign no charge. electronic services. Information currencies will be converted into U.S. In addition, for each Fund, an regarding the previous day’s closing dollars at the exchange rates in effect at estimated value, defined in Rule price and trading volume information the time of valuation. 5735(c)(3) as the ‘‘Intraday Indicative for the Shares will be published daily in the financial section of newspapers. Availability of Information Value,’’ that reflects an estimated intraday value of the Fund’s Disclosed Quotation and last sale information for The Funds’ Web site Portfolio, will be disseminated. the Shares will be available via Nasdaq (www.ftportfolios.com), which will be Moreover, the Intraday Indicative Value, proprietary quote and trade services, as publicly available prior to the public available on the NASDAQ OMX well as in accordance with the Unlisted offering of Shares, will include a form Information LLC proprietary index data Trading Privileges and the Consolidated of the prospectus for the Funds that may service,38 will be based upon the current Tape Association (‘‘CTA’’) plans for the be downloaded. The Web site will Shares. Quotation and last sale include the Shares’ ticker, CUSIP and 36 See Nasdaq Rule 4120(b)(4) (describing the information for the Equity Securities (to exchange information along with three trading sessions on the Exchange: (1) Pre- the extent traded on a U.S. exchange) additional quantitative information Market Session from 4 a.m. to 9:30 a.m., Eastern will be available from the exchanges on updated on a daily basis, including, for Time; (2) Regular Market Session from 9:30 a.m. to which they are traded as well as in 4 p.m. or 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time; and (3) Post- each Fund: (1) Daily trading volume, the Market Session from 4 p.m. or 4:15 p.m. to 8 p.m., accordance with any applicable CTA prior business day’s reported NAV and Eastern Time). plans. closing price, mid-point of the bid/ask 37 Under accounting procedures to be followed by Pricing information for Short-Term spread at the time of calculation of such the Funds, trades made on the prior business day Debt Instruments, repurchase NAV (the ‘‘Bid/Ask Price’’),35 and a (‘‘T’’) will be booked and reflected in NAV on the agreements, Forward Contracts, bank current business day (‘‘T+1’’). Accordingly, a Fund calculation of the premium and will be able to disclose at the beginning of the time deposits, certificates of deposit and business day the portfolio that will form the basis currency spot transactions will be 35 The Bid/Ask Price of each Fund will be for the NAV calculation at the end of the business determined using the mid-point of the highest bid day. indexes and Intraday Indicative Values for ETFs. and the lowest offer on the Exchange as of the time 38 Currently, the NASDAQ OMX Global Index GIDS provides investment professionals with the of calculation of the Fund’s NAV. The records Data Service (‘‘GIDS’’) is the Nasdaq global index daily information needed to track or trade Nasdaq relating to Bid/Ask Prices will be retained by each data feed service, offering real-time updates, daily indexes, listed ETFs, or third-party partner indexes Fund and its service providers. summary messages, and access to widely followed and ETFs.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 984 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

available from major broker-dealer firms in Managed Fund Shares traded on the the aggregate) in exchange-listed equity and/or major market data vendors and/ Exchange is $0.01. index futures contracts will be invested or Pricing Services. Pricing information in instruments that trade in markets that Surveillance for exchange-listed equity index futures are members of ISG or are parties to a contracts and non-U.S. Equity Securities The Exchange represents that trading comprehensive surveillance sharing will be available from the applicable in the Shares will be subject to the agreement with the Exchange. listing exchange and from major market existing trading surveillances, In addition, the Exchange also has a data vendors. administered by both Nasdaq and also general policy prohibiting the the Financial Industry Regulatory distribution of material, non-public Initial and Continued Listing Authority (‘‘FINRA’’) on behalf of the information by its employees. The Shares will be subject to Rule Exchange, which are designed to detect 5735, which sets forth the initial and violations of Exchange rules and Information Circular continued listing criteria applicable to applicable federal securities laws.40 The Prior to the commencement of Managed Fund Shares. The Exchange Exchange represents that these trading, the Exchange will inform its represents that, for initial and continued procedures are adequate to properly members in an Information Circular of listing, each Fund must be in monitor Exchange trading of the Shares the special characteristics and risks compliance with Rule 10A–3 39 under in all trading sessions and to deter and associated with trading the Shares. the Act. A minimum of 100,000 Shares detect violations of Exchange rules and Specifically, the Information Circular will be outstanding at the applicable federal securities laws. for each Fund will discuss the commencement of trading on the The surveillances referred to above following: (1) The procedures for Exchange. The Exchange will obtain a generally focus on detecting securities purchases and redemptions of Shares in representation from the issuer of the trading outside their normal patterns, Creation Units (and that Shares are not Shares that the NAV per Share will be which could be indicative of individually redeemable); (2) Nasdaq calculated daily and that the NAV and manipulative or other violative activity. Rule 2111A, which imposes suitability the Disclosed Portfolio will be made When such situations are detected, obligations on Nasdaq members with available to all market participants at surveillance analysis follows and respect to recommending transactions in the same time. investigations are opened, where the Shares to customers; (3) how appropriate, to review the behavior of information regarding the Intraday Trading Halts all relevant parties for all relevant Indicative Value and the Disclosed With respect to trading halts, the trading violations. Portfolio is disseminated; (4) the risks Exchange may consider all relevant FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, involved in trading the Shares during factors in exercising its discretion to will communicate as needed regarding the Pre-Market and Post-Market halt or suspend trading in the Shares of trading in the Shares and certain of the Sessions when an updated Intraday a Fund. Nasdaq will halt trading in the Equity Securities and exchange-listed Indicative Value will not be calculated Shares under the conditions specified in equity index futures contracts held by or publicly disseminated; (5) the Nasdaq Rules 4120 and 4121, including the Funds with other markets and other requirement that members deliver a the trading pauses under Nasdaq Rules entities that are members of ISG,41 and prospectus to investors purchasing 4120(a)(11) and (12). Trading may be FINRA may obtain trading information newly issued Shares prior to or halted because of market conditions or regarding trading in the Shares and such concurrently with the confirmation of a for reasons that, in the view of the securities and instruments held by the transaction; and (6) trading information. Exchange, make trading in the Shares Funds from such markets and other The Information Circular will also inadvisable. These may include: (1) The entities. In addition, the Exchange may discuss any exemptive, no-action and extent to which trading is not occurring obtain information regarding trading in interpretive relief granted by the in the securities and/or the other assets the Shares and certain of the Equity Commission from any rules under the constituting the Disclosed Portfolio of a Securities and exchange-listed equity Act. Fund; or (2) whether other unusual index futures contracts held by the Additionally, the Information Circular conditions or circumstances detrimental Funds from markets and other entities for each Fund will reference that such to the maintenance of a fair and orderly that are members of ISG, which includes Fund is subject to various fees and market are present. Trading in the securities and futures exchanges, or expenses described in the Registration Shares also will be subject to Rule with which the Exchange has in place Statement. The Information Circular for 5735(d)(2)(D), which sets forth a comprehensive surveillance sharing each Fund will also disclose the trading circumstances under which Shares of a agreement. Moreover, FINRA, on behalf hours of the Shares of such Fund and Fund may be halted. of the Exchange, will be able to access, the applicable NAV Calculation Time as needed, trade information for certain for the Shares. The Information Circular Trading Rules fixed income securities held by the for each Fund will disclose that Nasdaq deems the Shares to be equity Funds reported to FINRA’s Trade information about the Shares of such securities, thus rendering trading in the Reporting and Compliance Engine Fund will be publicly available on such Shares subject to Nasdaq’s existing rules (‘‘TRACE’’). Fund’s Web site. governing the trading of equity For each Fund, at least 90% of such securities. Nasdaq will allow trading in Fund’s net assets that are invested (in 2. Statutory Basis the Shares from 4:00 a.m. until 8:00 Nasdaq believes that the proposal is p.m., Eastern Time. The Exchange has 40 FINRA surveils trading on the Exchange consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act pursuant to a regulatory services agreement. The appropriate rules to facilitate Exchange is responsible for FINRA’s performance in general and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act transactions in the Shares during all under this regulatory services agreement. in particular in that it is designed to trading sessions. As provided in Nasdaq 41 For a list of the current members of ISG, see prevent fraudulent and manipulative Rule 5735(b)(3), the minimum price www.isgportal.org. The Exchange notes that not all acts and practices, to promote just and components of the Disclosed Portfolio for a Fund equitable principles of trade, to foster variation for quoting and entry of orders may trade on markets that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has in place a cooperation and coordination with 39 See 17 CFR 240.10A–3. comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. persons engaged in facilitating

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 985

transactions in securities, and to remove normal market conditions, each Fund Funds and the Shares, thereby impediments to and perfect the will invest in at least 20 Equity promoting market transparency. mechanism of a free and open market Securities. Moreover, each Fund will Moreover, the Intraday Indicative Value, and, in general, to protect investors and satisfy the ISG Criteria and/or the available on the NASDAQ OMX the public interest. Alternative Criteria. Information LLC proprietary index data The Exchange believes that the The investment objective of each service, will be widely disseminated by proposed rule change is designed to Fund will be to provide capital one or more major market data vendors prevent fraudulent and manipulative appreciation. Under normal market and broadly displayed at least every 15 acts and practices in that the Shares will conditions, each Fund will seek to seconds during the Regular Market be listed and traded on the Exchange achieve its investment objective by Session. On each business day, before pursuant to the initial and continued investing at least 80% of its net assets commencement of trading in Shares in listing criteria in Nasdaq Rule 5735. The (including investment borrowings) in the Regular Market Session on the Exchange represents that trading in the Principal Fund Equity Securities, Exchange, each Fund will disclose on Shares will be subject to the existing Forward Contracts and currency its Web site the Disclosed Portfolio that trading surveillances, administered by transactions entered into on a spot (i.e., will form the basis for the Fund’s both Nasdaq and FINRA on behalf of the cash) basis. Each Fund may also invest calculation of NAV at the end of the Exchange, which are designed to detect up to 5% of its net assets in exchange- business day. Information regarding violations of Exchange rules and listed equity index futures contracts. market price and trading volume of the applicable federal securities laws. Each Fund’s transactions in Forward Shares will be continually available on Neither the Adviser nor the Sub- Contracts and exchange-listed equity a real-time basis throughout the day on Adviser is a broker-dealer, but each is index futures contracts will be brokers’ computer screens and other affiliated with a broker-dealer, and is consistent with its investment objective electronic services, and quotation and required to implement a ‘‘fire wall’’ and the 1940 Act and will not be used last sale information for the Shares will with respect to its respective broker- to seek to achieve a multiple or inverse be available via Nasdaq proprietary dealer affiliate regarding access to multiple of an index. Each Fund will quote and trade services, as well as in information concerning the composition comply with the regulatory accordance with the Unlisted Trading and/or changes to each Fund’s portfolio. requirements of the Commission with Privileges and the CTA plans for the In addition, paragraph (g) of Nasdaq respect to coverage in connection with Shares. Quotation and last sale Rule 5735 further requires that its transactions in Forward Contracts information for the Equity Securities (to personnel who make decisions on the and exchange-listed equity index the extent traded on a U.S. exchange) open-end fund’s portfolio composition futures contracts. If the applicable will be available from the exchanges on must be subject to procedures designed guidelines prescribed under the 1940 which they are traded as well as in to prevent the use and dissemination of Act so require, a Fund will earmark accordance with any applicable CTA material non-public information cash, U.S. government securities and/or plans. regarding the open-end fund’s portfolio. other liquid assets permitted by the Pricing information for Short-Term FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, Commission in the amount prescribed. Debt Instruments, repurchase will communicate as needed regarding Also, each Fund may hold up to an agreements, Forward Contracts, bank trading in the Shares and certain of the aggregate amount of 15% of its net time deposits, certificates of deposit and Equity Securities and exchange-listed assets in illiquid assets (calculated at equity index futures contracts held by the time of investment), deemed illiquid currency spot transactions will be the Funds with other markets and other by the Adviser and/or the Sub-Adviser. available from major broker-dealer firms entities that are members of ISG, and Each Fund will monitor its portfolio and/or major market data vendors and/ FINRA may obtain trading information liquidity on an ongoing basis to or Pricing Services. Pricing information regarding trading in the Shares and such determine whether, in light of current for exchange-listed equity index futures securities and instruments held by the circumstances, an adequate level of contracts and non-U.S. Equity Securities Funds from such markets and other liquidity is being maintained, and will will be available from the applicable entities. In addition, the Exchange may consider taking appropriate steps in listing exchange and from major market obtain information regarding trading in order to maintain adequate liquidity if, data vendors. the Shares and certain of the Equity through a change in values, net assets, Each Fund’s Web site will include a Securities and exchange-listed equity or other circumstances, more than 15% form of the prospectus for such Fund index futures contracts held by the of the Fund’s net assets are held in and additional data relating to NAV and Funds from markets and other entities illiquid assets. Illiquid assets include other applicable quantitative that are members of ISG, which includes securities subject to contractual or other information. Trading in Shares of the securities and futures exchanges, or restrictions on resale and other Funds will be halted under the with which the Exchange has in place instruments that lack readily available conditions specified in Nasdaq Rules a comprehensive surveillance sharing markets as determined in accordance 4120 and 4121 or because of market agreement. Moreover, FINRA, on behalf with Commission staff guidance. conditions or for reasons that, in the of the Exchange, will be able to access, The proposed rule change is designed view of the Exchange, make trading in as needed, trade information for certain to promote just and equitable principles the Shares inadvisable, and trading in fixed income securities held by the of trade and to protect investors and the the Shares will be subject to Nasdaq Funds reported to FINRA’s TRACE. For public interest in that the Exchange will Rule 5735(d)(2)(D), which sets forth each Fund, at least 90% of such Fund’s obtain a representation from the issuer circumstances under which Shares of a net assets that are invested (in the of the Shares that the NAV per Share Fund may be halted. In addition, as aggregate) in exchange-listed equity will be calculated daily and that the noted above, investors will have ready index futures contracts will be invested NAV and the Disclosed Portfolio will be access to information regarding each in instruments that trade in markets that made available to all market Fund’s holdings, the Intraday Indicative are members of ISG or are parties to a participants at the same time. In Value, the Disclosed Portfolio, and comprehensive surveillance sharing addition, a large amount of information quotation and last sale information for agreement with the Exchange. Under will be publicly available regarding the the Shares.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 986 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Each Fund’s investments will be comprehensive surveillance sharing Paper Comments valued daily. Investments traded on an agreement with the Exchange. Under • exchange (i.e., a regulated market), will normal market conditions, each Fund Send paper comments in triplicate generally be valued at market value will invest in at least 20 Equity to Secretary, Securities and Exchange prices that represent last sale or official Securities. Moreover, each Fund will Commission, 100 F Street NE., closing prices. Non-exchange traded satisfy the ISG Criteria and/or the Washington, DC 20549–1090. investments will generally be valued Alternative Criteria. All submissions should refer to File using prices obtained from a Pricing For the above reasons, Nasdaq Number SR–NASDAQ–2015–161. This Service. If, however, valuations for any believes the proposed rule change is file number should be included on the of the Funds’ investments cannot be consistent with the requirements of subject line if email is used. To help the readily obtained as provided in the Section 6(b)(5) of the Act. Commission process and review your preceding manner, or the Pricing comments more efficiently, please use Committee questions the accuracy or B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s only one method. The Commission will reliability of valuations that are so Statement on Burden on Competition obtained, such investments will be post all comments on the Commission’s The Exchange does not believe that valued at fair value, as determined by Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ the Pricing Committee, in accordance the proposed rule change will impose rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the with the Valuation Procedures and in any burden on competition that is not submission, all subsequent accordance with provisions of the 1940 necessary or appropriate in furtherance amendments, all written statements Act. of the purposes of the Act. The with respect to the proposed rule The proposed rule change is designed Exchange believes that the proposed change that are filed with the to perfect the mechanism of a free and rule change will facilitate the listing and Commission, and all written open market and, in general, to protect trading of an additional type of actively- communications relating to the investors and the public interest in that managed exchange-traded fund [sic] that proposed rule change between the it will facilitate the listing and trading will enhance competition among market Commission and any person, other than participants, to the benefit of investors of additional types of actively managed those that may be withheld from the and the marketplace. exchange-traded products that will public in accordance with the enhance competition among market C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be participants, to the benefit of investors Statement on Comments on the available for Web site viewing and and the marketplace. As noted above, Proposed Rule Change Received From printing in the Commission’s Public FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, will Members, Participants, or Others Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., communicate as needed regarding Washington, DC 20549, on official trading in the Shares and certain of the Written comments were neither Equity Securities and exchange-listed solicited nor received. business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing equity index futures contracts held by III. Date of Effectiveness of the the Funds with other markets and other also will be available for inspection and Proposed Rule Change and Timing for entities that are members of ISG, and copying at the principal office of the Commission Action FINRA may obtain trading information Exchange. All comments received will regarding trading in the Shares and such Within 45 days of the date of be posted without change; the securities and instruments held by the publication of this notice in the Federal Commission does not edit personal Funds from such markets and other Register or within such longer period (i) identifying information from entities. as the Commission may designate up to submissions. You should submit only In addition, the Exchange may obtain 90 days of such date if it finds such information that you wish to make information regarding trading in the longer period to be appropriate and available publicly. All submissions Shares and certain of the Equity publishes its reasons for so finding or should refer to File Number SR– Securities and exchange-listed equity (ii) as to which the Exchange consents, NASDAQ–2015–161 and should be index futures contracts held by the the Commission shall: (a) By order submitted on or before January 29, 2016. Funds from markets and other entities approve or disapprove such proposed For the Commission, by the Division of that are members of ISG, which includes rule change, or (b) institute proceedings securities and futures exchanges, or Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated to determine whether the proposed rule authority.42 with which the Exchange has in place change should be disapproved. a comprehensive surveillance sharing Robert W. Errett, agreement. Moreover, FINRA, on behalf IV. Solicitation of Comments Deputy Secretary. of the Exchange, will be able to access, Interested persons are invited to [FR Doc. 2016–00103 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] as needed, trade information for certain submit written data, views and BILLING CODE 8011–01–P fixed income securities held by the arguments concerning the foregoing, Funds reported to FINRA’s TRACE. including whether the proposed rule Furthermore, as noted above, investors change is consistent with the Act. will have ready access to information Comments may be submitted by any of regarding the Funds’ holdings, the Intraday Indicative Value, the Disclosed the following methods: Portfolio, and quotation and last sale Electronic Comments information for the Shares. For each • Fund, at least 90% of such Fund’s net Use the Commission’s Internet assets that are invested (in the aggregate) comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ in exchange-listed equity index futures rules/sro.shtml); or contracts will be invested in • Send an email to rule-comments@ instruments that trade in markets that sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– are members of ISG or are parties to a NASDAQ–2015–161 on the subject line. 42 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:52 Jan 15, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 987

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE designates February 25, 2016, as the adopt a new tier called the Investor COMMISSION date by which the Commission shall Depth Tier under footnote 1. either approve or disapprove, or The text of the proposed rule change [Release No. 34–76819; File No. SR– institute proceedings to determine NYSEArca–2015–110] is available at the Exchange’s Web site whether to disapprove, the proposed at www.batstrading.com, at the Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE rule change (File No. SR–NYSEArca– principal office of the Exchange, and at Arca, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a 2015–110). the Commission’s Public Reference Longer Period for Commission Action For the Commission, by the Division of Room. on Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Generic Listing Standards for Managed authority.7 II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Fund Shares Robert W. Errett, Statement of the Purpose of, and Deputy Secretary. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule January 4, 2016. Change [FR Doc. 2016–00104 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] On November 6, 2015, NYSE Arca, BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Inc. (‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the In its filing with the Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission Exchange included statements (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to section concerning the purpose of and basis for SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE the proposed rule change and discussed 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act COMMISSION of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 any comments it received on the thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to [Release No. 34–76816; File No. SR–EDGX– proposed rule change. The text of these amend NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600 2015–67] statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The and to adopt generic listing standards Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX for Managed Fund Shares. The proposed Exchange has prepared summaries, set Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of rule change was published for comment Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed in the Federal Register on November 27, the most significant parts of such Rule Change Related to Fees for Use statements. 2015.3 On November 23, 2015, the of EDGX Exchange, Inc. Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposed rule change, which replaced January 4, 2016. Statement of the Purpose of, and and superseded the original proposal in Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule its entirety. The Commission has Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Change received one comment letter on the ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 proposal.4 notice is hereby given that on December 1. Purpose Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 5 provides 22, 2015, EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the Currently, the Exchange determines that within 45 days of the publication of ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘EDGX’’) filed with the the liquidity adding rebate that it will notice of the filing of a proposed rule Securities and Exchange Commission provide to Members using the change, or within such longer period up (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule Exchange’s tiered pricing structure. to 90 days as the Commission may change as described in Items I, II, and Under such pricing structure, a Member designate if it finds such longer period III below, which Items have been will receive a rebate of anywhere to be appropriate and publishes its prepared by the Exchange. The between $0.0025 and $0.0035 per share reasons for so finding, or as to which the Exchange has designated the proposed executed, depending on the volume tier self-regulatory organization consents, rule change as one establishing or for which such Member qualifies. The the Commission shall either approve the changing a member due, fee, or other Exchange proposes to adopt a new tier charge imposed by the Exchange under proposed rule change, disapprove the called the Investor Depth Tier under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and proposed rule change, or institute footnote 1 of the Fee Schedule. Rule 19b–4(f)(2) thereunder,4 which proceedings to determine whether the Members who would qualify for the renders the proposed rule change proposed rule change should be Investor Depth Tier would receive a effective upon filing with the disapproved. The 45th day after rebate of $0.0033 per share where they: Commission. The Commission is publication of the notice for this (i) Add an ADV 6 of at least 0.15% of the publishing this notice to solicit proposed rule change is January 11, TCV; 7 (ii) have an ‘‘added liquidity’’ as comments on the proposed rule change 2016. The Commission is extending this a percentage of ‘‘added plus removed from interested persons. 45-day time period. liquidity’’ of at least 85%; and (3) add The Commission finds it appropriate I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s an ADV of at least 500,000 share as Non- to designate a longer period within Statement of the Terms of Substance of displayed 8 orders that yield fee code which to take action on the proposed the Proposed Rule Change HA.9 The Exchange proposes to rule change so that it has sufficient time implement this amendment to its Fee to consider this proposed rule change. The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable to Schedule on January 4, 2016.10 Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant 5 to section 19(b)(2) of the Act,6 Members and non-members of the Exchange pursuant to EDGX Rules 6 As defined in the Exchange’s Fee Schedule 15.1(a) and (c) (‘‘Fee Schedule’’) to available at http://batstrading.com/support/ 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). fee_schedule/edgx/. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 7 Id. 6 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76486 Id. 8 See Exchange Rule 11.6(e)(2). 7 (Nov. 20, 2015), 80 FR 74169. 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(31). 9 Fee code HA is appended to Non-displayed 4 See Letter from Rob Ivanoff to the Commission 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). orders that add liquidity on the Exchange. See the dated Nov. 22, 2015. All comments on the proposed 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. Exchange’s Fee Schedule available at http:// rule change are available on the Commission’s Web 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). batstrading.com/support/fee_schedule/edgx/. site at: http://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca- 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 10 The Exchange notes that the Fee Schedule’s 2015-110/nysearca2015110.shtml. 5 The term ‘‘Member’’ is defined as ‘‘any date was amended to January 4, 2016 in file no. SR– 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). registered broker or dealer that has been admitted EDGX–2015–62. See Securities Exchange Act 6 Id. Release No. 76713 (December 21, 2015).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 988 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

2. Statutory Basis liquidity provides to the marketplace, competition, but instead, enhances The Exchange believes that the including: (i) Adding needed depth to competition, as it is intended to increase proposed rule change is consistent with the EDGX market; (ii) providing price the competitiveness of and draw the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,11 support/depth of liquidity; and (iii) additional volume to the Exchange. As in general, and furthers the objectives of increasing diversity of liquidity to stated above, the Exchange notes that it Section 6(b)(4),12 in particular, as it is EDGX. The increased liquidity benefits operates in a highly competitive market designed to provide for the equitable all investors by deepening EDGX’s in which market participants can allocation of reasonable dues, fees and liquidity pool, offering additional readily direct order flow to competing other charges among its Members and flexibility for all investors to enjoy cost venues if they deem fee structures to be other persons using its facilities. The savings, supporting the quality of price unreasonable or excessive. The Exchange also notes that it operates in discovery, promoting market proposed change is generally intended a highly-competitive market in which transparency and improving investor to enhance the rebates for liquidity market participants can readily direct protection. added to the Exchange, which is order flow to competing venues if they The Exchange also notes that the intended to draw additional liquidity to deem fee levels at a particular venue to criteria and rebate under the Investor the Exchange. The Exchange does not be excessive. The proposed rule change Depth Tier is equitable and reasonable believe the proposed tier would burden reflects a competitive pricing structure as compared to other tiers offered by the intramarket competition as it would designed to incent market participants Exchange. For example, under the apply to all Members uniformly. to direct their order flow to the Investor Tier Members may receive a rebate of $0.0032 per share where they C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Exchange. The Exchange believes that Statement on Comments on the the proposed tier is equitable and non- (i) add an ADV of at least 0.15% of the TCV; and (ii) have an ‘‘added liquidity’’ Proposed Rule Change Received From discriminatory in it would apply Members, Participants or Others uniformly to all Members. The as a percentage of ‘‘added plus removed The Exchange has not solicited, and Exchange believes the rates remain liquidity’’ of at least 85%. These does not intend to solicit, comments on competitive with those charged by other thresholds mirror the first two this proposed rule change. The venues and, therefore, reasonable and thresholds required to meet the Exchange has not received any equitably allocated to Members. proposed Investor Depth Tier. However, Volume-based rebates such as that in order to achieve the higher rebate of unsolicited written comments from proposed herein have been widely $0.0033 per share provided by the Members or other interested parties. adopted by equities and options proposed Investor Depth Tier, Members III. Date of Effectiveness of the exchanges and are equitable because must also add an ADV of at least Proposed Rule Change and Timing for they are open to all Members on an 500,000 share as Non-displayed orders 14 Commission Action equal basis and provide additional that yield fee code HA. Therefore, the Exchange believes the proposed Investor The foregoing rule change has become benefits or discounts that are reasonably effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) related to: (i) The value to an exchange’s Depth Tier is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) 15 of the Act as the more stringent of the Act 16 and paragraph (f) of Rule market quality; (ii) associated higher 19b–4 thereunder.17 At any time within levels of market activity, such as higher criteria correlates with the tier’s higher rebate. 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule levels of liquidity provision and/or change, the Commission summarily may growth patterns; and (iii) introduction of B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s temporarily suspend such rule change if higher volumes of orders into the price Statement on Burden on Competition it appears to the Commission that such and volume discovery processes. The The Exchange does not believe its action is necessary or appropriate in the Exchange believes that the proposed tier proposed amendment to its Fee public interest, for the protection of is a reasonable, fair and equitable, and Schedule would impose any burden on investors, or otherwise in furtherance of not unfairly discriminatory allocation of competition that is not necessary or the purposes of the Act. fees and rebates because they will appropriate in furtherance of the provide Members with an additional IV. Solicitation of Comments purposes of the Act. The Exchange does incentive to reach certain thresholds on not believe that the proposed change Interested persons are invited to the Exchange. represents a significant departure from submit written data, views, and In particular, the Exchange believes arguments concerning the foregoing, the addition of the Investor Depth Tier previous pricing offered by the Exchange or pricing offered by the including whether the proposed rule is a reasonable means to encourage change is consistent with the Act. Members to increase their liquidity on Exchange’s competitors. Additionally, Members may opt to disfavor the Comments may be submitted by any of the Exchange. The Exchange further the following methods: believes that the proposed Investor Exchange’s pricing if they believe that Depth Tier represents an equitable alternatives offer them better value. Electronic Comments Accordingly, the Exchange does not allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and • Use the Commission’s Internet believe that the proposed change will other charges because the thresholds comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ impair the ability of Members or necessary to achieve the tier encourages rules/sro.shtml); or Members to add displayed liquidity to competing venues to maintain their • Send an email to rule- the EDGX Book 13 each month, as only competitive standing in the financial [email protected]. Please include File the displayed liquidity in this tier is markets. No. SR–EDGX–2015–67 on the subject The Exchange does not believe that awarded the rebate of $0.0033 per share. line. the proposed new tier would burden This tier also recognizes the Paper Comments contribution that non-displayed 14 The Exchange notes that Market Depth Tiers 1 • Send paper comments in triplicate and 2 under footnote 1 also require that Members 11 15 U.S.C. 78f. add an ADV of certain number of shares as Non- to Secretary, Securities and Exchange 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). displayed orders that yield fee code HA, in addition 13 The EDGX Book is the System’s electronic file other added ADV requirements. 16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). of orders. See Exchange Rule 1.5(d). 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 17 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 989

Commission, 100 F Street NE., the Securities and Exchange SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Washington, DC 20549–1090. Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant [Docket No. SSA 2015–0042] All submissions should refer to File No. to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities SR–EDGX–2015–67. This file number Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule Privacy Act of 1974, as Amended; should be included on the subject line 19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule Computer Matching Program (SSA/ if email is used. To help the change to amend BATS Rule 14.11(i) Railroad Retirement Board (RRB))— Commission process and review your and to adopt generic listing standards Match Number 1006 comments more efficiently, please use for Managed Fund Shares. The proposed AGENCY: only one method. The Commission will rule change was published for comment Social Security Administration (SSA) post all comments on the Commission’s in the Federal Register on November 25, Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ 2015.3 The Commission has not ACTION: Notice of a renewal of an rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the received any comments on the proposal. existing computer matching program submission, all subsequent that will expire on March 1, 2016. 4 amendments, all written statements Section 19(b)(2) of the Act provides with respect to the proposed rule that within 45 days of the publication of SUMMARY: In accordance with the change that are filed with the notice of the filing of a proposed rule provisions of the Privacy Act, as Commission, and all written change, or within such longer period up amended, this notice announces a communications relating to the to 90 days as the Commission may renewal of an existing computer proposed rule change between the designate if it finds such longer period matching program that we are currently Commission and any person, other than to be appropriate and publishes its conducting with RRB. those that may be withheld from the reasons for so finding, or as to which the DATES: We will file a report of the public in accordance with the self-regulatory organization consents, subject matching program with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be the Commission shall either approve the Committee on Homeland Security and available for Web site viewing and proposed rule change, disapprove the Governmental Affairs of the Senate; the printing in the Commission’s Public proposed rule change, or institute Committee on Oversight and Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., proceedings to determine whether the Government Reform of the House of Washington, DC 20549, on official proposed rule change should be Representatives; and the Office of business days between the hours of disapproved. The 45th day after Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such publication of the notice for this (OMB). The matching program will be filing will also be available for proposed rule change is January 9, 2016. effective as indicated below. inspection and copying at the principal The Commission is extending this 45- ADDRESSES: office of the Exchange. All comments day time period. Interested parties may received will be posted without change; comment on this notice by either the Commission does not edit personal The Commission finds it appropriate telefaxing to (410) 966–0869 or writing identifying information from to designate a longer period within to the Acting Executive Director, Office submissions. You should submit only which to take action on the proposed of Privacy and Disclosure, Office of the information that you wish to make rule change so that it has sufficient time General Counsel, Social Security available publicly. All submissions to consider this proposed rule change. Administration, 617 Altmeyer Building, should refer to File No. SR–EDGX– Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 2015–67 and should be submitted on or to section 19(b)(2) of the Act,5 21235–6401. All comments received before January 29, 2016. designates February 23, 2016, as the will be available for public inspection at For the Commission, by the Division of date by which the Commission shall this address. Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated either approve or disapprove, or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The authority.18 institute proceedings to determine Acting Executive Director, Office of Robert W. Errett, whether to disapprove, the proposed Privacy and Disclosure, Office of the Deputy Secretary. rule change (File No. SR–BATS–2015– General Counsel, as shown above. [FR Doc. 2016–00102 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] 100) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BILLING CODE 8011–01–P For the Commission, by the Division of A. General Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.6 The Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (Public Law SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Robert W. Errett, COMMISSION (Pub. L.) 100–503), amended the Privacy Deputy Secretary. Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) by describing the [Release No. 34–76820; File No. SR–BATS– [FR Doc. 2016–00105 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] conditions under which computer 2015–100] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P matching involving the Federal Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS government could be performed and Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Designation adding certain protections for persons of a Longer Period for Commission applying for, and receiving, Federal Action on Proposed Rule Change To benefits. Section 7201 of the Omnibus Amend BATS Rule 14.11(i) To Adopt Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (Pub. Generic Listing Standards for Managed L. 101–508) further amended the Fund Shares 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Privacy Act regarding protections for 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. such persons. January 4, 2016. 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76478 The Privacy Act, as amended, On November 18, 2015, BATS (Nov. 19, 2015), 80 FR 73841. regulates the use of computer matching Exchange, Inc. (‘‘Exchange’’) filed with 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). by Federal agencies when records in a 5 Id. system of records are matched with 18 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(31). other Federal, State, or local government

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 990 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

records. It requires Federal agencies (42 U.S.C. 1383(e)(1)(A) and (B) and a Short WebEx session versus a full in involved in computer matching 1383(f)). The legal authority for the place session. programs to: disclosure under this agreement for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (1) Negotiate written agreements with SVB portion is section 806(b) of the Act the other agency or agencies (42 U.S.C. 1006(b)). Karen Hofmann, 202–330–0680, participating in the matching programs; [email protected] or The RTCA (2) Obtain approval of the matching D. Categories of Records and Persons Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW., Suite agreement by the Data Integrity Boards Covered by the Matching Program 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by of the participating Federal agencies; RRB will provide us with an telephone at (202) 833–9339, fax at (202) (3) Publish notice of the computer electronic data file containing annuity 833–9434, or Web site at http:// matching program in the Federal payment data from RRB’s system of www.rtca.org. Register; records, RRB–22 Railroad Retirement, (4) Furnish detailed reports about Survivor, and Pensioner Benefits SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant matching programs to Congress and System, last published on December 1, to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal OMB; 2014 (79 FR 58890). We will match Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– (5) Notify applicants and beneficiaries RRB’s data with data maintained in the 463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is hereby that their records are subject to SSR, Supplemental Security Income given for a meeting of Special matching; and Record and Special Veterans Benefits, Committee 214/EUROCAE WG–78: (6) Verify match findings before SSA/ODSSIS, 60–0103, published on Standards for Air Traffic Data reducing, suspending, terminating, or January 11, 2006 (71 FR 1830) and Communication Services. The meeting denying a person’s benefits or December 10, 2007 (72 FR 69723). SVB objectives are to resolve issue that came payments. data also resides on the SSR. up after last plenary resolution and B. SSA Computer Matches Subject to E. Inclusive Dates of the Matching approval of comments received during the Privacy Act Program FRAC/Open consultation of Revision A to Baseline 2 Standards SPR and We have taken action to ensure that The effective date of this matching INTEROPS and approve the documents all of our computer matching programs program is March 2, 2016, provided that for submission to RTCA PMC and comply with the requirements of the the following notice periods have EUROCAE Council for publication. Privacy Act, as amended. lapsed: 30 days after publication of this The agenda will include the Mary Ann Zimmerman, notice in the Federal Register and 40 days after notice of the matching following: Acting Executive Director, Office of Privacy and Disclosure, Office of the General Counsel. program is sent to Congress and OMB. January 13th The matching program will continue for Notice of Computer Matching Program, 18 months from the effective date and, • Welcome/Introduction/ SSA with the Railroad Retirement if both agencies meet certain conditions, Administrative Remarks Board (RRB) it may extend for an additional 12 • Approval of the Agenda of Plenary months thereafter. A. Participating Agencies 25 [FR Doc. 2016–00183 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] • SSA and RRB BILLING CODE 4191–02–P Approval of the Minutes of Plenary B. Purpose of the Matching Program 24 • Description of new finding and The purpose of this matching program DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION is to set forth the terms, safeguards, and approach to resolve • procedures under which RRB, as the Federal Aviation Administration Approval of resolution and source agency, will disclose RRB submission of documents to RTCA annuity payment data to us, the Twenty Five Meeting: RTCA Special PMC and EUROCAE Council for recipient agency. We will use the Committee 214/EUROCAE WG–78: publication information to verify Supplemental Standards for Air Traffic Data • Adjourn Security Income (SSI) and Special Communication Services Veterans Benefits (SVB) eligibility and Attendance is open to the interested benefit payment amounts. We will also AGENCY: Federal Aviation public but limited to space availability. record the railroad annuity amounts Administration (FAA), U.S. Department With the approval of the chairman, RRB paid to SSI and SVB recipients in of Transportation (DOT). members of the public may present oral the Supplemental Security Income ACTION: RTCA Special Committee 214 statements at the meeting. Persons Record (SSR). held jointly with EUROCAE WG–78: wishing to present statements or obtain Standards for Air Traffic Data information should contact the person C. Authority for Conducting the Communication Services meeting. listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Matching Program CONTACT section. Members of the public SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice The legal authority for this agreement may present a written statement to the to advise the public of twenty five is executed in compliance with the committee at any time. Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, as meeting of RTCA Special Committee amended by the Computer Matching 214 to be held jointly with EUROCAE Issued in Washington, DC, on January 4, and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, the WG–78: Standards for Air Traffic Data 2016. regulations and guidance promulgated Communication Services. Mohannad Dawoud, thereunder. DATES: The meeting will be held January Management Analyst, Procurement Division, Legal authority for the disclosure 13th, 2016 from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. ANG–A1, Federal Aviation Administration. under this agreement for the SSI portion ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held on [FR Doc. 2016–00181 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] are sections 1631(e)(1)(A) and (B) and WebEx Primary at 1150 18th Street NW., BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 1631(f) of the Social Security Act (Act) Suite 910. Note: This is intended to be

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 991

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort preceding years is required to file to reduce paperwork burdens, and as carload waybill sample information Federal Aviation Administration required by the Paperwork Reduction (Waybill Sample) for all line-haul Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3521 (PRA), revenue waybills terminating on its Notice of Extension for the Final the Surface Transportation Board lines. (The Waybill Sample collection is Environmental Impact Statement for (Board) gives notice that it is requesting approved under OMB Control Number the Proposed Airport, Angoon, Alaska from the Office of Management and 2140–0015, which expires on June 30, AGENCY: Federal Aviation Budget (OMB) approval for an extension 2017.) of the Waybill Compliance Survey, Administration (FAA), DOT. In order to determine whether any of which is further described below. The ACTION: Notice of Extension as required the surveyed railroads should be filing Board previously published a notice by ANILCA title XI. a Waybill Sample, the Board needs to about this collection in the Federal collect the information in the Waybill SUMMARY: The Alaska Department of Register. 80 FR 66,968 (Oct. 30, 2015). Compliance Survey—information on the Transportation and Public Facilities That notice allowed for a 60-day public number of carloads of traffic terminated filed a title XI ANILCA application with review and comment period. No the FAA, U.S. Forest Service, and U.S. comments were received. each year by U.S. railroads—from Army Corps of Engineers on January 9, Comments are requested concerning: railroads that are not filing a Waybill 2015. ANILCA section 1104(e), states (1) The accuracy of the Board’s burden Sample. The Board has authority to that ‘‘the final environmental impact estimates; (2) ways to enhance the collect this information under 49 U.S.C. statement shall be completed within one quality, utility, and clarity of the 11144–45, and under 49 CFR 1244.2. year from the date of such filing. Such information collected; (3) ways to DATES: Comments on this information nine-month and one-year periods may minimize the burden of the collection of collection should be submitted by be extended for good cause by the information on the respondents, February 8, 2016. Federal agency head assigned lead including the use of automated responsibility for the preparation of collection techniques or other forms of ADDRESSES: Written comments should such statement if he determines that information technology, when be identified as ‘‘Paperwork Reduction additional time is necessary for such appropriate; and (4) whether the Act Comments, Surface Transportation preparation, notifies the applicant in collection of information is necessary Board, Annual Waybill Compliance writing of such determination and for the proper performance of the Survey.’’ These comments should be publishes notice of such determination, functions of the Board, including directed to the Office of Management together with the reasons therefore, in whether the collection has practical and Budget, Office of Information and the Federal Register’’. Due to utility. Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Chandana complexities of the project, the FAA has L. Achanta, Surface Transportation determined that additional time is Description of Collection Board Desk Officer, by email at necessary to complete the final Title: Waybill Compliance Survey. [email protected]; environmental impact statement. OMB Control Number: 2140–0010. by fax at (202) 395–6974; or by mail to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: STB Form Number: None. Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Leslie Grey, AAL–611, Federal Aviation Type of Review: Extension without Washington, DC 20503. Administration, Alaskan Region, change. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Airports Division, 222 W. 7th Avenue Respondents: Regulated railroads that further information regarding the Box #14, Anchorage, AK 99513. Ms. did not submit carload waybill sample ‘‘Annual Waybill Compliance Survey,’’ Grey may be contacted during business information to the STB in the previous contact Pedro Ramirez at (202) 245– hours at (907) 271–5453 (telephone) and year. Number of Respondents: 523. 0333 or at [email protected]. (907) 271–2851 (fax), or by email at Estimated Time per Response: .5 [Assistance for the hearing impaired is [email protected]. hours. available through the Federal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Frequency: Annually. Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1– Additional details regarding the Total Burden Hours (annually 800–877–8339.] project can be found on the project Web including all respondents): 261.5. site at www.angoonairporteis.com. Total ‘‘Non-hour Burden’’ Cost: None SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA, a federal agency that conducts or Issued in Anchorage, Alaska, on December identified. This information may be 23, 2015. submitted electronically to the Board sponsors a collection of information Byron K. Huffman, (through its contractor). must display a currently valid OMB control number. A collection of Manager, Airports Division, AAL–600. Needs and Uses: Under the Interstate Commerce Act, as amended by the ICC information, which is defined in 44 [FR Doc. 2016–00092 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Termination Act of 1995, Public Law U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c), BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 104–88, 109 Stat. 803 (1995), the Board includes agency requirements that is responsible for the economic persons submit reports, keep records, or DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION regulation of common carrier rail provide information to the agency, third transportation, including the collection parties, or the public. Under § 3507(b) of Surface Transportation Board and administration of the Carload the PRA, federal agencies are required to Waybill Sample. The information in the provide, prior to an agency’s submitting Notice and Request for Comments Waybill Sample is used to monitor a collection to OMB for approval, a 30- day notice and comment period through AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board, traffic flows and rate trends in the DOT. industry. Under 49 CFR 1244, a railroad publication in the Federal Register terminating 4,500 or more carloads, or concerning each proposed collection of ACTION: 30-day notice of intent to seek terminating at least 5% of the total information, including each proposed extension of approval: Waybill revenue carloads that terminate in a extension of an existing collection of Compliance Survey. particular state, in any of the three information.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 992 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Dated: January 5, 2016. Decided: December 30, 2015. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Jeffrey Herzig, By the Board, Joseph H. Dettmar, Acting Title: Short Term Lending Program Clearance Clerk. Director, Office of Proceedings. Application for a Loan Guarantee. [FR Doc. 2016–00174 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Tia Delano, OMB Control No.: 2105–0555. Background: OSDBU’s Short Term BILLING CODE 4915–01–P Clearance Clerk. [FR Doc. 2016–00139 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Lending Program (STLP) offers certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprises BILLING CODE 4915–01–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DBEs) and other certified Small Businesses (8a, women-owned, small Surface Transportation Board DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION disadvantaged, HUBZone, veteran owned, and service disabled veteran [Docket No. FD 35982] Office of the Secretary owned) the opportunity to obtain short term working capital at variable interest Jackson County, Mo.—Acquisition and [Docket No. DOT–OST–2015–0211] Operation Exemption—Union Pacific rates for transportation-related projects. Railroad Company 30-Day Notice of Request for Renewal The STLP provides Participating of a Previously Approved Collection Lenders (PLs) a guarantee, up to 75%, Jackson County, Mo. (Jackson on a revolving line of credit up to a County), a noncarrier, has filed a AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), $750,000 maximum. These loans are verified notice of exemption under 49 Department of Transportation provided through lenders that serve as CFR 1150.31 to acquire from Union (Department) or (DOT). STLP PLs. The term on the line of credit Pacific Railroad Company and to ACTION: Notice and request for is up to one (1) year, which may be operate, approximately 17.7 miles of rail comments. renewed for five (5) years. A potential line between milepost 288.3 and or renewal STLP participant must milepost 270.6, in Jackson County, Mo.1 SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary, submit a guaranteed loan application The transaction may not be Office of Small and Disadvantaged package. The guaranteed loan consummated until January 22, 2016 (30 Business Utilization (OSDBU), invites application includes the STLP days after the notice of exemption was public comments about our intention to application, checklist, and instructions. filed). request the Office of Management and Respondents: Certified Disadvantaged Jackson County certifies that its Budget’s (OMB) approval to renew a Business Enterprises (DBEs) and other projected annual revenues as a result of collection. This collection renewal certified Small Businesses (8a, women- this transaction will not result in its request includes one Short Term owned, small disadvantaged, HUBZone, becoming a Class II or Class I rail carrier Lending Program (STLP) application veteran owned, and service disabled and will not exceed $5 million. used for both new loan guarantee veteran owned) interested in financing Jackson County states that the applicants and renewal loan guarantee their transportation-related contracts. agreement between the parties does not applicants. The information collected in DOT Form 2301–1(REV.1): Short contain any provision that prohibits it the STLP application will determine the Term Lending Program Application for from interchanging traffic with a third applicant’s eligibility and is necessary Loan Guarantee: A potential or renewal party or limits its ability to interchange to approve or deny a loan. We are STLP participant must submit a with a third party. required to publish this notice in the guaranteed loan application package. If the verified notice contains false or Federal Register by the Paperwork The guaranteed loan application misleading information, the exemption Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104– includes the STLP application and is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the 13. supporting documentation to be exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) DATES: Comments must be submitted on collected from the checklist in the may be filed at any time. The filing of or before February 8, 2016. application. The application may be a petition to revoke will not ADDRESSES: You may submit your obtained directly from OSDBU, the automatically stay the effectiveness of comments identified by DOT–OST– Regional Small Business Transportation the exemption. Petitions to stay must be 2015–0211 by any of the following Resource Centers, from a PL, or online filed no later than January 15, 2016 (at methods: from the agency’s Web site, currently at least seven days before the exemption • Office of Management and Budget, http://www.transportation.gov/osdbu/ becomes effective). Attention: Desk Officer for U.S. financial-assistance/short-term-lending- An original and 10 copies of all Department of Transportation, Office of program. pleadings, referring to Docket No. FD Information and Regulatory Affairs, Respondents: Small Businesses, 100. 35982, must be filed with the Surface Office of Management and Budget, Frequency: Once. Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Estimated Average Burden per Washington, DC 20423–0001. In Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. Response: 2 hours. Estimated Total Annual Burden addition, a copy of each pleading must • email: Hours: 200 hours. be served on Kevin M. Sheys, 1666 K St. [email protected]. Supporting documentation: Required NW., Suite 500, Washington, DC 20006. • Fax: (202) 395–5806. Attention: documentation shall include, but is not According to Jackson County, this DOT/OST Desk Officer. action is categorically excluded from limited to, the following items: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John environmental review under 49 CFR a. Business, trade, or job performance Ralston, Manager, Financial Assistance 1105.6(c). reference letters; Board decisions and notices are Division, Office of Small and b. DBE or other eligible certification available on our Web site at Disadvantaged Business Utilization, letters; WWW.STB.DOT.GOV. Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department c. Aging report of receivables and of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey payables; 1 Jackson County, doing business as Rock Island Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, d. Business tax returns; Rail Corridor Authority, will be the operator on the Routing Symbol S–40, 202–366–5577 e. Business financial statements; line. (phone) or [email protected] (email). f. Personal income tax returns;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 993

g. Personal financial statements; Cooperative Agreement; Office of Small monthly loan(s) in process report to h. Schedule of work in progress and Disadvantaged Business Utilization OSDBU. (WIP); U.S. Department of Transportation Short Respondents: 100. i. Signed and dated copy of Term Lending Program Certification Frequency: Monthly. transportation-related contracts; Regarding Debarment, Suspension. The Estimated Average Burden per j. Business debt schedule; STLP is subject to budgeting and Response: 1 hour. k. Cash flow projections; accounting requirements of the Federal Estimated Total Annual Burden l. Owner(s) and key management Credit Reform Act of 1990 (FCRA). The Hours: 100 hours. resumes. PL must carry out processes to activate, DOT Form 2307–1: Drug-Free Respondents: Small Businesses, 100. monitor, service and close out STLP Workplace Act Certification for a Frequency: Once. loans. To fulfill the requirements of Grantee Other than an Individual. The Estimated Average Burden per FCRA, the PL submits reports and the PL certifies it is a drug-free workplace Response: 12 hours. following forms to OSDBU. by executing this certification. Estimated Total Annual Burden Respondents: Participating Lenders Respondents: 100. Hours: 1200 hours. that are in the process or have entered Frequency: Once. SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary, into cooperative agreements with DOT’s Estimated Average Burden per Office of Small and Disadvantaged OSDBU under 49 CFR part 22 DOT– Response: 15 minutes. Business Utilization (OSDBU), invites OST–2008–0236 entitled, ‘‘Short Term Estimated Total Annual Burden public comments on our intention to Lending Program’’. Hours: 25 hours. request the Office of Management and DOT Form 2303–1: Short Term DOT Form 2308–1. Certification Budget’s (OMB) approval to renew a Lending Program Bank Verification Regarding Lobbying for Contracts, collection of the STLP Participating Loan Activation Form. The PL must Grants, Loans, and Cooperative Lender (PL) forms. The collection submit a Loan Activation Form to Agreement. The PL certifies that no involves the use of the ‘‘Short Term OSDBU that indicates the date in which Federal funds will be utilized for Lending Program Bank Verification the loan has been activated. lobbying by executing this form. Respondents: 100. Loan Activation Form’’; ‘‘Short Term Respondents: 100. Frequency: Annually, up to five years. Frequency: Once. Lending Program Bank Estimated Average Burden per Acknowledgement Extension Request 1 Estimated Average Burden per Response: ⁄2 hour. Response: 15 minutes. Form’’; ‘‘Short Term Lending Program Estimated Total Annual Burden Estimated Total Annual Burden Bank Acknowledgement Loan Close-Out Hours: 50 hours. Form’’; ‘‘Guaranty Loan Status Report’’; DOT Form 2310–1: Short Term Hours: 25 hours. ‘‘Pending Loan Status Report’’; ‘‘Drug- Lending Program Bank DOT Form 2309–1. Office of Small Free Workplace Act Certification for a Acknowledgement Extension Request and Disadvantaged Business Utilization Grantee Other than an Individual’’; Form. An extension of the original loan U.S. Department of Transportation Short ‘‘Certification Regarding Lobbying for guarantee for a maximum period of Term Lending Program Certification Contracts, Grants, Loans, and ninety (90) days may be requested, in Regarding Debarment, Suspension. The Cooperative Agreements’’; ‘‘Office of writing, by the PL using the STLP PL must not currently be debarred or Small and Disadvantaged Business Extension Request Form. suspended from participation in a Utilization U.S. Department of Respondents: 100. government contract or delinquent on a Transportation Short Term Lending Frequency: Annually. government debt by submitting this Program Certification Regarding Estimated Average Burden per form. Debarment, Suspension’’; ‘‘Cooperative Response: 1⁄2 hour. Respondents: 100. Agreement between the U.S. Estimated Total Annual Burden Frequency: Once. Department of Transportation and the Hours: 50 hours. Estimated Average Burden per Participating Lender’’; and ‘‘U.S. DOT Form 2304–1: Short Term Response: 15 minutes. Department of Transportation Office of Lending Program Bank Estimated Total Annual Burden Small and Disadvantaged Utilization Acknowledgement Loan Close-Out Hours: 25 hours. Short Term Lending Program Guarantee Form. The PL must submit the Loan Grand Total Annual Estimation of Agreement’’. The information collected Close-Out Form to OSDBU upon full Burden Hours: 1825. administers the loans guaranteed under repayment of the STLP loan or when the Issued in Washington, DC, on December the STLP. The information collected loan guarantee expires. 30, 2015. keeps the Participating Lender’s (PLs) in Respondents: 100. Habib Azarsina, compliance with the terms established Frequency: Annually. Estimated Average Burden per OST Privacy and PRA Officer. in the Cooperative Agreement between 1 [FR Doc. 2015–33272 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] DOT and the PLs. OMB Control No: Response: ⁄2 hour. Estimated Total Annual Burden BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 2105–0555. Hours: 50 hours. Background: STLP loans are provided DOT Form 2305–1: Guaranty Loan through lenders that serve as STLP Status Report. The PL submits a DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION participating Lenders (PL). The STLP monthly status of active guaranteed provides PLs a guarantee, up to 75%, on loans to OSDBU. Office of the Secretary a revolving line of credit up to a Respondents: 100. [Docket No. DOT–OST–2015–0153] $750,000 maximum. As part of the Frequency: Monthly. requirements for approval as a PL, Estimated Average Burden per 30-Day Notice of Application for New lenders must submit the following Response: 1 hour. Information Collection Request certifications: Drug-Free Workplace Act Estimated Total Annual Burden Certification for a Grantee Other Than Hours: 100 hours. AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), An Individual; Certification Regarding DOT Form 2306–1: Pending Loan Department of Transportation Lobbying for Contracts, Grants, Loans, & Status Report. The PL submits a (Department) or (DOT).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 994 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

ACTION: Notice and request for information on the accomplishments of the Mayors’ Challenge, and will be used comments. the Mayors’ Challenge, and will be used to identify best practices and to improve to identify best practices and to improve future DOT outreach to cities. Each city SUMMARY: In compliance with the future DOT outreach to cities. Each city has already identified a point-of-contact Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 has already identified a point-of-contact for the Mayors’ Challenge. This survey U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice for the Mayors’ Challenge. This survey will be distributed electronically to announces that the Information will be distributed electronically to these POCs through an online survey Collection Request (ICR) abstracted these POCs through an online survey tool. below is being forwarded to the Office tool, and the proposed questions are Estimated Total Annual Burden of Management and Budget (OMB) for attached. Hours: 30 minutes/respondent; review and comments. A Federal Affected Public: The 260 cities that Cumulative 130 hours. Register Notice with a 60-day comment voluntarily signed up to Mayor’s Frequency of Collection: Once. period soliciting comments on the Challenge. For Further Information Contact: following information collection was Estimated Number of Respondents: Anthony Burton, Office of Policy, Office published on Aug 5, 2015 (80 FR 260. of the Secretary, W84–230, Department 46646). Estimated Number of Responses: 260. of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Estimated Total Annual Burden DATES: Comments must be submitted on Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, or before February 8, 2016. Hours: 30 minutes/respondent; (202) 366–2278 or Cumulative 130 hours. [email protected] (Email). ADDRESSES: Your comments should be Frequency of Collection: Once. identified by Docket No. DOT–OST– Comments are invited on: whether the 1. Which of the seven goals have you 2015–0153 and may be submitted proposed collection of information is adopted, and what activities have you through one of the following methods: necessary for the proper performance of undertaken to meet those goals? For • Office of Management and Budget, the functions of the Department, reference, the seven goals are: Attention: Desk Officer for U.S. including whether the information will (1) Take a Complete Streets approach; Department of Transportation, Office of have practical utility; the accuracy of (2) Identify and address barriers; Information and Regulatory Affairs, the Department’s estimate of the burden (3) Gather and track data; Office of Management and Budget, of the proposed information collection; (4) Use context-sensitive designs; Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th ways to enhance the quality, utility and (5) Complete bike-ped networks; Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. clarity of the information to be (6) Improve laws and regulations; and • email: collected; and ways to minimize the (7) Educate and enforce proper road [email protected]. burden of the collection of information use. • Fax: (202) 395–5806. Attention: on respondents, including the use of 2. What have been the primary DOT/OST Desk Officer. automated collection techniques or challenges and obstacles to bicycle and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: other forms of information technology. pedestrian safety in your community, Anthony Burton, Office of Policy, Office Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act and what if any actions have you taken of the Secretary, W84–230, Department of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended; to address these challenges and of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey and 49 CFR 1:48. obstacles? Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, Issued in Washington, DC on December 23, 3. What if any changes have resulted (202) 366–2278 or 2015. from the challenge activities? [email protected] (Email). Habib Azarsina, (1) Changes to physical infrastructure, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OST Privacy and PRA Officer. (2) Decision-making processes, Title: Mayors’ Challenge for Safer (3) Policies or procedures, People and Safer Streets Survey. Mayors’ Challenge for Safer People and (4) Enforcement, Type of Request: Application for New Safer Streets Survey (5) Education and awareness of your Information Collection Request. Abstract: Approximately 260 cities community Abstract: Approximately 260 cities are voluntarily participating in the (6) Other: are voluntarily participating in the ‘‘Mayors’ Challenge’’ and through 4. Please use the following table to ‘‘Mayors’ Challenge’’ and through locally-driven efforts they are improving indicate whether you have data on the locally-driven efforts they are improving bike/ped safety policies, infrastructure, impact of the Mayors’ Challenge bike/ped safety policies, infrastructure, and awareness. This survey will collect activities, and what the extent of that and awareness. This survey will collect information on the accomplishments of impact is.

Extent of impact (E.g. number Data available? (E.g. yes/no, of bicyclists, compared to pre- and if yes, type of data) vious years)

event attendance ...... survey results ...... crash data ...... walking and bicycle counts ...... bike lanes, sidewalks, other infrastructure ...... new plans, policies, laws, or campaigns ...... other indications of political and community support ......

5. Which DOT resources, tools, and 6. Which non-DOT resources, tools, 7. What resources, tools, and data do data have been most useful in your and data have been most useful in your you wish were available? challenge? challenge?

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 995

8. What are the most useful formats SUMMARY: The Veteran’s Experience proposed collection of information; (3) for receiving information from USDOT, Office, Department of Veterans Affairs ways to enhance the quality, utility, and and why (e.g. webinars, in-person (VA), is announcing an opportunity for clarity of the information to be meetings, conference calls, etc.)? public comment on the proposed collected; and (4) ways to minimize the 9. What efforts in your city to improve collection of certain information by the burden of the collection of information bicycle and pedestrian safety in your agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction on respondents, including through the community were already underway at Act (PRA) of 1995, Federal agencies are use of automated collection techniques the time of the Mayors’ Challenge? How required to publish notice in the or the use of other forms of information has the Mayors’ Challenge added value Federal Register concerning each technology. and/or helped to fill any gaps in your proposed collection of information, Type of Review: Non-Substantive city’s efforts to improve bicycle and including each proposed non- Change of currently approved pedestrian safety? substantive change request of a collections. 10. In planning and project delivery of currently approved collection, and Abstract: For FY16–17, VA set pedestrian and/or bicycle infrastructure allow 60 days for public comment in Veterans Experience as an agency projects, to what extent has your city response to the notice. This notice priority goal to improve Veterans coordinated with your Metropolitan solicits comments on 11 Information Experience with VA. Because this is a Planning Organization (MPO), Regional collections for the Veteran’s Experience new measure, VA developed one brand Planning Organization (RPO), State Agency Priority Goal, which specifies and three experience measures to Department of Transportation (DOT), that four survey questions will be support the Veterans Experience Agency and Federal Regional/Division office incorporated into existing customer Priority Goal (APG). VA will add four partners? Please note type of outreach experience surveys by Q1 FY2016. The APG questions to each survey identified and coordination, and outcomes it led information collected will be used by below. One question deals with VA to. VA departmental leadership to track brand, and three questions deal with 11. What have been the key benefits enterprise performance improvements Veterans experience. and lessons learned as a result of the as experienced by our Veterans. This ‘‘I got the service I needed.’’ Mayors’ Challenge? notice will serve as notification for any ‘‘It was easy to get what I needed.’’ 12. Do you think the Mayors’ future Non-substantive Change ‘‘I felt like a valued customer.’’ challenge has helped make any Information Collection Request adding ‘‘I trust VA to fulfill our country’s permanent changes in pedestrian and these four customer service questions in commitment to veterans.’’ bike safety and accommodation in your the Information Collection Requests. Strongly agree city/town? DATES: Written comments and Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree [FR Doc. 2016–00159 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] recommendations on the proposed Disagree BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P collection of information should be Strongly disagree received on or before March 8, 2016. Adding these questions is necessary ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to establish an enterprise measure of DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS on the collection of information through VA’s performance as experienced by our AFFAIRS Federal Docket Management System Veterans, as is needed to support VA’s (FDMS) at www.Regulations.gov or to [OMB Control Nos., 2900–0782,, 2900–0770, Veterans Experience FY16–17 APG. 2900–0609, 2900–0701, 2900–0712, 2900– Thomas Pasakarnis, Veteran’s VA’s goal is to incorporate these four 0773, 2900–0838, 2900–0834, 2900–0836, Experience Office (008VE), Department survey questions into VA’s existing 2900–0837, 2900–0835] of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont customer experience by Q1 FY2016. The Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420 or information collected will be used by Proposed Information Collection email to [email protected]. VA departmental leadership to track (Voice of Veteran Surveys, Generic Please refer to ‘‘OMB Control No. 2900– enterprise performance improvements Clearance for the Collection of VE’’ in any correspondence. During the as experienced by our Veterans. Qualitative Feedback on Agency comment period, comments may be VA expects that it will take Service Delivery (National Cemetery viewed online through the FDMS. approximately one minute for each Administration, Veterans Benefits FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: survey respondent to answer these new Affairs, Veterans Health Thomas Pasakarnis at (202) 461–5869 or questions. As set forth below, this Administration), Survey of Veteran FAX (202) 495–5401. change is expected to affect Enrollees’ Health and Reliance Upon SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the approximately 132 instruments VA, Bereaved Family Member PRA of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13; 44 U.S.C. approved under eleven different OMB Satisfaction Survey, Nation-Wide 3501–21), Federal agencies must obtain control numbers. Together, these Customer Satisfaction Surveys approval from the Office of Management instruments are nearly 1.5 million times (Survey of Healthcare Experiences of and Budget (OMB) for each collection of per year. The cumulative annual burden Patients), Veterans Health Benefits information they conduct or sponsor. of this change is more than 24,000 hours Handbook Satisfaction Survey, This request for comment is being made ((1 minute per submission * 1,462,937 Veterans Transportation Service Data pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the submissions)/60 minutes per hour = Collection, Center for Verification and PRA. 24,382.28 hours). There is also some Evaluation Site Inspections, Post With respect to the following annual cost burden associated with this Engagement, Awards & Return on collection of information, Veteran’s request. Specifically, some of these Investment, Center for Verification and Experience invites comments on: (1) instruments are administered by third- Evaluation Verification Survey) Whether the proposed collection of party contractors, who will need to Activity: Comment Request information is necessary for the proper revise the instruments. AGENCY: Veteran’s Experience Office, performance of VBA’s functions, VA has provided a table detailing the Department of Veterans Affairs. including whether the information will full burden information for each have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of information collection located at http:// ACTION: Notice. VA’s estimate of the burden of the www.oprm.va.gov/ers/ers_reports.aspx.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 996 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Please note, additional instruments form 10–0517 Exam Feedback Survey, form 10– approved under these or additional (16) Patient Satisfaction 0559 control numbers may be included in the Questionnaire: Laboratory P&LMS (44) Patient Satisfaction Survey- Veteran’s Experience initiative in the VA New England Healthcare Radiation Oncology WEB survey, future. Therefore, this online table System, form 10–0516 form 10–10063 detailing burden information will be (17) Project ARCH (Access Received (45) Hem-Oncology Telehealth updated periodically. Closer to Home) Patient Satisfaction Satisfaction WEB Survey, form 10– Survey, form 10–0522 10054 Titles of Affected Collections and (18) PVAMC Low Vision Patient (46) Vet Appointment Mobile App Instruments Satisfaction Survey, form 10–0527 Survey, form 10–10057 (1) 2900–0782—Voice of Veteran (19) Vendor Application for Fair, form (47) Telephone Care Services Patient Surveys 10–0528 Satisfaction Survey, form 10–10058 (1) Compensation Access (20) Notice Your Nurse: Notice Your (48) VISN 20 Telephone Customer (2) Compensation Servicing NurseThank you card, form 10– Service Experience Satisfaction (3) Pension Access 0519 Survey, form 10–10059 (4) Pension Servicing (21) The Continuity of Medication (49) Prosthetics Customer Service (5) Education Access Management Patient Survey, form Survey, form 10–10125 (6) Education Servicing 10–0526 (50) Customer Patient Satisfaction (7) VR&E Access (22) Caribbean Healthcare System Monthly Survey, form 10–10126 (8) VR&E Servicing Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, (51) HME Vendor Performance Survey (9) VR&E Non-Participant form 10–0526 2014, form 10–10122 (10) Loan Guarantee Home Loan (23) Tele-Retinal Patient Satisfaction (52) SOU–SORCC Patient Survey, Process Survey, form 10–0540 form 10–10145 (11) Specialty Adapted Housing Grant (24) Purchased Care Patient (53) Audiology Hearing Aid Process, mail Satisfaction Survey, form 10–0538 Questionnaire, form 10–10128 (2) 2900–0770—Generic Clearance for (25) Spinal Cord Home Care Survey, (54) Advanced Education Veteran the Collection of Qualitative form 10–0542 Survey -SORCC-Patient, form 10– Feedback on Agency Service (26) Childcare Services Satisfaction 10128 Delivery (National Cemetery Survey, form 10–0531 (55) VoV OSI Primary Care Survey— Administration, Veterans Benefits (27) Neurology/Rehabilitation Conjoint Analysis, form 10–10147 Affairs, Veterans Health Inpatient Program Satisfaction (56) Women’s Health Research Administration) Survey, form 10–0546 Network, form 10–10142 (1) CFM Supplier Satisfaction Survey, (28) Non-VA Care Coordination (57) Telehealth Master Preceptor, form 10–10163 Veteran Satisfaction Survey, form form 10–10127 (2) VLER Program Survey, Undecided 10–0545 (58) Mental Health Survey, form 10– Vet Interview, form 10–0457 (29) Survey of Veterans’ Satisfaction 10129 (3) Veterans Choice Program Survey, with Income Verification, form 10– (59) Extended Hours Program form 10–0450 0541 Evaluation—Non-Users Survey, (4) Nationwide Dialysis Contracts (30) Spinal Cord Injury Patient form 10–10129 Program Veterans Survey, form 10– Survey, form 10–0515 (60) VISN 1 Extended Hours 0455 (31) National Family Caregiver Evaluation—Users, form 10–10132 (5) VA Courtesy Standards—The Participant Training Feedback Form (61) Maternity Care Coordination Golden Rule Approach Veteran 10–0520 Experiences of Pregnant Veterans Feedback Form, 10–0497 (32) Psychiatric Patient Satisfaction Survey, form 10–10131 (6) Phone Apps Focus Group Survey, form 10–0550 (62) State Veterans Home Admin Demographic Questionnaire, (33) Cardiac Cath Lab Customer Survey, form 10–10136 form10–0496a Satisfaction Survey, form 10–0547 (63) Tobacco and Smoking Cessation (7) PTSD Coach App Survey, form 10– (34) Community Living Center (CLC) Survey, form 10–10136 0496 Satisfaction Survey, form 10–0548 (64) Voice of the Veteran (VOV) (8) Understanding PTSD for Family (35) Survey of Veterans Perceptions of Satisfaction Survey Office of Caregivers: Feedback Survey, form an Enhanced VA Outpatient Strategic Integration (OSI) Conjoint 10–0495 Prescription Label, form 10–0549 Analysis, form 10–10144 (9) Building Better Caregivers (36) Dental Service Customer (65) VISN 1 NCL Patient Satisfaction Satisfaction Survey, form 10–0499 Satisfaction Survey, form 10–0553 Questionnaire, form 10–10133 (10) Building Better Caregiver Phone (37) Dental Satisfaction Survey (66) Interview and Discussion Group Survey, form 10–0499 (Spanish version), form 10–0553s Protocols for the Institute of (11) Clinical Video Telehealth (CVT) (38) Office of Mental Health Veteran Medicine: 09–IOM VA MH Services Patient Satisfaction Survey, form Satisfaction Survey, form 10–0554 Eval Non-VA Service Users 10–0481a (39) Patient Experience of Care Discussion Protocol, form 10–10130 (12) Compensation and Pension Survey, form 10–0552 (67) Battlecreek Urgent Care Survey, Examination Program (CPEP) (40) VCS Patriot Store and VCS Patriot form 10–10135 Veterans Satisfaction Survey, form Cafe Customer Satisfaction Survey, (68) MEC Notification Survey, form 10–0480 form 10–0551 10–10155 (13) Michael E. DeBakey Patient (41) Epilepsy Centers of Excellence (69) Caregiver Feedback form. Self- Satisfaction Survey, form 10–0476 (ECoE) Patient Survey, form10– Care Course, form 10–10119 (14) Food and Nutrition Satisfaction 0558 (70) VISN20 Cancer Care Survey— Survey, form 10–0498 (42) Fraud, Waste and Abuse Veteran Satisfaction, form 10–10164 (15) Veterans Transportation Service Complaint Form, 10–0500 (71) Customer Satisfaction Survey on (VTS) Satisfaction Questionnaire, (43) Sodium Dichromate Exposure VA Research Communication, VA

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices 997

Research Currents, form 10–10167 (98) 2014 Post- (1) Veterans Transportation Service (72) Patient Satisfaction Survey 911CommunicationSurvey- Data Collection Telephonic Script Boston VAMC Ophthalmology, Questionnaire, form 2900–0770 (8) 2900–0834—Center for Verification form 10–211001NR (99) Claims Clinic Satisfaction Survey and Evaluation Site Inspections (73) Anticoagulation (warfarin/ (VBA), form 2900–0770 (1) CVE Site Inspection Survey, Coumadin) Patient Satisfaction (100) Feedback US Survey Historical Survey, form 10–211002 (101) Feedback USA Survey Button— (2) CVE Site Inspection Survey, (74) Patient Survey: Waiting Room KIOSK, form 2900–0770 Regular Television Video Patient Education, (102) Feedback USA Survey Button— (9) 2900–0836—Post Engagement form 10–211005 Internet Web site, form 2900–0770 (1) 2015 National Veterans Small (75) MSCoE Patient Survey, form 10– (103) Business Requirements Sessions Business Engagement Post 211003 (104) Awards and ROI–2013NVSB Engagement Survey (76) PROJECT ARCH (Access (Small Business), form 2900–0770 (10) 2900–0837—Awards & Return on Received Closer to Home) Non- (105) Awards and ROI–2013NVSB Investment Participating Veterans Survey, form (Large Business), form 2900–0770 (1) Awards and Return on Investment 10–211004 (106) 2014 National Veterans Small after 2015 National Veterans Small (77) Outpatient Pharmacy Customer Business Engagement (NVSBE) Business Engagement (Small Satisfaction Survey, form 10– Events Satisfaction, form 2900– Business) 211006NR 0770 (2) Awards and Return on Investment (78) National Patient Centered (107) Business Sessions Satisfaction after 2015 National Veterans Small Community Care Veterans Survey Survey, form? Business Engagement (Large Question, form 10–211009 (108) CVE Booth Satisfaction, form Business) (79) OKC Dental (Ambulatory) Patient 2900–0770 (11) 2900–0835—Center for Verification Satisfaction Survey, form 10– (109) Exhibitor Satisfaction 2900– and Evaluation Verification Survey 211008 0770 (1) CVE Pre-Application Survey (80) HEC Enrollment Survey, form (110) Learning Sessions 2900–0770 (2) CVE Exit Survey 10–211013 (111) NRT Satisfaction 2900–0770 (3) CVE Post-Determination Letter (81) Non-VA-Purchased Care Veteran (112) Senior Leaders Roundtables, By direction of the Secretary. Survey, form 10–211013 2900–0770 Crystal Rennie, (82) Survey of Rehabilitation Care, (113) 2014 NVSBE Post-Engagement Department Clearance Officer, Office of form 10–211010 Attendees Survey, 2900–0770 Privacy and Records Management, (83) Tele-Dermatology Imaging Patient (114) OSDBU Post-Event Evaluation, Department of Veterans Affairs. Satisfaction Survey, form 10– 2900–0770 [FR Doc. 2016–00075 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] 211016 (115) NAC Customer Response BILLING CODE 8320–01–P (84) Home Based Primary Care Survey—WEB Survey, Lawton CBOC, form 10– (3) 2900–0609—Survey of Veteran 211014 Enrollees’ Health and Reliance DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS (85) Dental Insurance Program Upon VA AFFAIRS Survey, form 10–211011 (1) (CATI) Survey of Veteran (86) Survey of Patient Satisfaction at Enrollees’ Health and Reliance Reimbursement for Caskets and Urns Surgical Service, form 10–211015 Upon VA, form 10–21034G for Burial of Unclaimed Remains in a (87) Survey of Patient Satisfaction at (4) 2900–0701—Bereaved Family National Cemetery Surgical Service -Spanish, form 10– Member Satisfaction Survey AGENCY: 211015SP (1) Bereaved Family Member Department of Veterans Affairs. (88) Oklahoma City VAMC Home Satisfaction Survey Administered ACTION: Notice. Based Primary Care (HBPC) Survey, by Facility Staff, form 10–21081 SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans (5) 2900–0712—Nation-wide Customer form 10–211014a Affairs (VA) is updating the monetary (89) Telephone Survey on User Satisfaction Surveys (Survey of reimbursement rates for caskets and Experience with VLER Health Healthcare Experiences of Patients) urns purchased for the interment in a Exchange’ (1) Recently Discharged Patient, form VA national cemetery of Veterans who (90) Provider Interview Guide, form 10–1465–1 die with no known next of kin and 2900–0770 (2) Recently Discharged Inpatient, where there are insufficient resources (91) Veteran (Patient) Interview- form 10–1465–2 for furnishing a burial container. The Guide, form 2900–0770 (3) Ambulatory Care, form 10–1465–3 purpose of this notice is to notify (92) (4) Ambulatory Care, form 10–1465–4 (93) Online Survey—VHA Customer (5) Ambulatory Care, form 10–1465–5 interested parties of the rates that will Value Survey, form 2900–0770 (6) Ambulatory Care, form 10–1465–6 apply to reimbursement claims that (94) State Veterans Home Patient (7) Home Health Care Survey, form occur during calendar year (CY) 2016. Satisfaction, form 2900–0770 10–1465–7 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (95) VISN 1 Call Center Telephone (8) In-Center Hemodialysis Care, form Tamula Jones, Budget Operations and Survey Script (Veteran Women), 10–1465–8 Field Support Division, National form 2900–0770 (6) 2900–0773—Veterans Health Cemetery Administration, Department (96) Gulf War Newsletter Survey— Benefits Handbook Satisfaction of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Office of Public Health, form 2900– Survey Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420. 0770 (1) Veterans Health Benefits Telephone: 202–461–6688 (this is not a (97) My HealtheVet (MHV) Web site Handbook Satisfaction Survey, form toll-free number). Redesign Veteran and Family 10–0507 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title 38, Caregiver Demographic Survey, (7) 2900–0838—Veterans Transportation United States Code, Section 2306(f) form 2900–0770 Service Data Collection authorizes VA National Cemetery

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 998 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Notices

Administration to furnish a casket or Federal Register for publication Experience (explaining the efforts urn for interment in a VA national electronically as an official document of conducted to improve the Veteran’s cemetery of the unclaimed remains of the Department of Veterans Affairs. experience), Employees Experience, Veterans for whom VA cannot identify Robert L. Nabors II, Chief of Staff, Support Services Excellence (such as a next of kin and determines that Department of Veterans Affairs, information technology, human sufficient financial resources for the approved this document on January 5, resources, and finance), Performance furnishing of a casket or urn for burial 2016 for publication. Improvement (projects undertaken to are not available. VA implemented Dated: January 5, 2016. date and those upcoming), and VA regulations to administer this authority Michael Shores, Strategic Partnerships. as a reimbursement benefit in Title 38, Chief Impact Analyst, Office of Regulation On February 2, from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 Code of Federal Regulations, Section Policy & Management, Office of the General p.m., the Committee will meet to 38.628. Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs. discuss and recommend areas for Reimbursement for a claim received [FR Doc. 2016–00143 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] improvement on VA’s work to date, in any CY will not exceed the average BILLING CODE 8320–01–P plans for the future, and integration of cost of a 20-gauge metal casket or a the MyVA efforts. This session is open durable plastic urn during the fiscal to the public. No time will be allocated year (FY) preceding the CY of the claim. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS at this meeting for receiving oral Average costs are determined by market AFFAIRS presentations from the public. However, analysis for 20-gauge metal caskets, the public may submit written designed to contain human remains, MyVA Federal Advisory Committee; statements for the Committee’s review with a gasketed seal, and external rails Notice of Meeting: Amended to Debra Walker, Designated Federal or handles. The same analysis is The Department of Veterans Affairs Officer, MyVA Program Management completed for durable plastic urns, (VA) gives notice under the Federal Office, Department of Veterans Affairs, designed to contain cremated human Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1800 G Street NW., Room 880–40, remains, which include a secure closure App.2., that the MyVA Advisory Washington, DC, 20420, or email at to contain the cremated remains. Committee (MVAC) will meet February [email protected]. Any member of Using this method of computation, in 1–2, 2016, at the Marriott Crystal the public wishing to attend the meeting FY 2015, the average costs for caskets Gateway, 1700 Jefferson Davis Highway, or seeking additional information were determined to be $2,421.00, and Arlington, VA 22202. should contact Ms. Walker. $244.00 for urns. Accordingly, the The purpose of the Committee is to Because the meeting will be held in reimbursement rates payable for advise the Secretary, through the a Government building, anyone qualifying interments occurring during Executive Director, MyVA Task Force attending must be prepared to show a CY 2016 is $2,421.00 for caskets and Office regarding the My VA initiative valid photo government issued ID. $244 for urns. and VA’s ability to rebuild trust with Please allow a minimum of one hour to Request approval to publish in the Veterans and other stakeholders, move through the security process, Federal Register, VA’s notice on the improve service delivery with a focus which includes a metal detector, prior rates of reimbursement for caskets and on Veteran outcomes, and set the course to the start of the meeting. urns for CY2016. for longer-term excellence and reform of VA. Dated: January 5, 2016. Signing Authority On February 1, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 Jelessa Burney, The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or p.m., the Committee will meet to Federal Advisory Committee Management designee, approved this document and discuss the progress on, and the Officer. authorized the undersigned to sign and integration of, the work in the five key [FR Doc. 2016–00178 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] submit the document to the Office of the MyVA work streams—Veteran BILLING CODE P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:39 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES6 Vol. 81 Friday, No. 5 January 8, 2016

Part II

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To Downlist the West Indian Manatee, and Proposed Rule To Reclassify the West Indian Manatee as Threatened; Proposed Rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1000 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls reclassifying the West Indian manatee Church, VA 22041–3803. may be warranted (79 FR 37706). Fish and Wildlife Service We request that you send comments • This proposed rule, in accordance only by the methods described in this with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the 50 CFR Part 17 section. We will post all comments on Endangered Species Act (Act), also http://www.regulations.gov. This constitutes our 12-month finding that [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0178; generally means that we will post any the petitioned action is warranted. FXES11130900000C2–156–FF009E32000] personal information you provide us Summary of the Major Provisions of (see the Public Comments section of RIN 1018–AY84 This Proposed Rule SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for more Endangered and Threatened Wildlife information). • We propose to reclassify the West and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Indian manatee from endangered to Petition To Downlist the West Indian Public Hearing threatened. Manatee, and Proposed Rule To We will hold a public hearing in • This proposed rule also constitutes Reclassify the West Indian Manatee as Orlando, Florida on Saturday, February our 12-month petition finding. Threatened 20, 2016, from 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. at The Basis for Our Action the Buena Vista Palace Conference AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Center, 1900 Buena Vista Drive, • Castelblanco-Martı´nez et al.’s (2012, Interior. Orlando, Florida 32830 in the Center’s pp. 129–143) population viability ACTION: Proposed rule and notice of 12- Great Hall; (see the Public Hearing analysis (PVA) model for the West month petition finding. section of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). Indian manatee describes a Comments will be accepted orally or metapopulation with positive growth, SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and in writing at the public hearings. See the and Runge et al.’s Core Biological Model Wildlife Service (Service), propose to Public Hearing section of (2015, p. 13) predicts that it is unlikely reclassify the West Indian manatee from SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Comments (<2.5 percent chance) that the endangered to threatened under the will be accepted orally or in writing at southeastern U.S. population will fall Endangered Species Act of 1973, as the public hearings. below 4,000 total individuals over the amended (Act) due to substantial FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jay next 100 years, assuming current threats improvements in the species’ overall remain constant indefinitely. Herrington, Field Supervisor, North • status since the original listing in 1967 Florida Ecological Services Office, by Current population estimates are as endangered under the Endangered telephone at 904–731–3191, or by 6,350 manatees in the southeastern Species Conservation Act of 1966. This facsimile at 904–731–3045; or at the continental United States and 532 proposed action is based on a thorough following address: 7915 Baymeadows manatees in Puerto Rico. These numbers review of the best scientific and Way, Suite 200, Jacksonville, FL 32256; reflect a very low percentage chance of commercial data available, which Edwin Mun˜ iz, Field Supervisor, this animal going extinct in the next 100 indicate that the West Indian manatee years. Caribbean Ecological Services Office, by • no longer meets the definition of telephone at 787–851–7297, or by Outside the United States, habitat endangered under the Act. If this facsimile at 787–851–7441; or at the fragmentation and loss is the main proposal is finalized, the West Indian following address: Road 301, Km. 5.1, threat. Within the United States, manatee including its subspecies would P.O. Box 491, Boquero´n, PR 00622. If watercraft collisions and the loss of remain protected as a threatened species you use a telecommunications device winter warm-water habitat are the main under the Act. This document also for the deaf (TDD), please call the threats. Our review of the best scientific constitutes our 12-month finding on the Federal Information Relay Service and commercial information available petition received to reclassify this (FIRS) at 800–877–8339, 24 hours a day, and analyses of threats and species. 7 days a week. demographics conclude that threats are being addressed and reduced DATES: Comment submission: To allow SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: throughout the species’ range. us adequate time to consider your • comments on this proposed rule, we Executive Summary Based on our review, we conclude must receive your comments on or that the West Indian manatee no longer Why We Need To Publish This Proposed meets the Act’s definition of endangered before April 8, 2015. Rule Public Hearing: An informational and should be reclassified as threatened. • In April 2007, we completed a 5- open house and public hearing are Public Comments year status review, which included a scheduled for Saturday, February 20, recommendation to reclassify the West We intend that any final action 2016 (see the ADDRESSES section and the Indian manatee from endangered to resulting from this proposed rule will be Public Hearing section of threatened. as accurate and as effective as possible. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for more • In December 2012, we received a Therefore, we request data, comments, information). petition submitted by the Pacific Legal and new information from concerned ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Foundation, on behalf of Save Crystal governmental agencies (including but on this proposed rule by one of the River, Inc., requesting that the West not limited to State and Federal following methods: Indian manatee and subspecies thereof agencies and foreign governments), • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// be reclassified from its current status as Native American Tribes, the scientific www.regulations.gov. Follow the endangered to threatened, based community, industry, or any other instructions for submitting comments primarily on the analysis and interested party concerning this on Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0178. recommendation contained in our April proposed rule. The comments that will • U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public 2007 5-year review. be most useful and likely to influence Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. • On July 2, 2014, we published a 90- our decision are those that are FWS–R4–ES–2015–0178; U.S. Fish and day finding that the petition presented supported by data or peer-reviewed Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: substantial information indicating that studies and those that include citations

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1001

to, and analyses of, applicable laws and should be aware that your entire listed in DATES. The Public hearing will regulations. Please make your comments comment—including your personal last from 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. We will as specific as possible and explain the identifying information—may be made hold a public informational open house basis for them. In addition, please publicly available at any time. prior to the hearing from 1:30 p.m. to include sufficient information with your If you submit a comment via http:// 2:30 p.m. to provide an additional comments to allow us to authenticate www.regulations.gov, your entire opportunity for the public to gain any scientific or commercial data you comment, including any personal information and ask questions about the reference or provide. We particularly identifying information, will be posted proposed rule. This open house session seek comments concerning the on the Web site. While you can ask us should assist interested parties in following: in your comment to withhold your preparing substantive comments on the (1) The historical and current status personal identifying information from proposed rule. and distribution of the West Indian public review, we cannot guarantee that Persons needing reasonable manatee within and outside the United we will be able to do so. Please note that accommodations in order to attend and States (including both of its subspecies, comments posted to this Web site are participate in the public hearings the Florida manatee and Antillean not immediately viewable. When you should contact Chuck Underwood of the manatee), data regarding its biology and submit a comment, the system receives North Florida Ecological Services Office ecology, and ongoing conservation it immediately. However, the comment at 904–731–3332 or via email to measures for the species and its habitat. will not be publically viewable until we [email protected] as soon as (2) Relevant data concerning threats post it, which might not occur until possible. In order to allow sufficient (or lack thereof) to West Indian several days after submission. time to process requests, please contact manatees including any new data or Similarly, if you mail or hand-deliver us for assistance no later than 1 week models related to climate change, as hardcopy comments that include before the hearing. well as the extent of regulatory personal identifying information, you Written comments submitted during protections and management that would may request at the top of your the comment period receive equal continue to be provided to this species, documents that we withhold this consideration with oral comments if this rule were finalized and the West information from public review. presented at a public hearing. All Indian manatee became a threatened However, we cannot guarantee that we comments we receive at the public species. will be able to do so. To ensure that the hearing, both oral and written, will be (3) Additional information concerning electronic docket for this rulemaking is considered in making our final decision. the range, distribution, population size, complete and all comments we receive and trends for the West Indian manatee, are publicly available, we will post all Previous Federal Actions including both of its subspecies. hardcopy comments on http:// The Florida manatee (Trichechus (4) Current or planned activities www.regulations.gov. within the geographic range of the West manatus latirostris), a subspecies of the Indian manatee that may impact or Peer Review West Indian manatee (Trichechus benefit the species, including activities In accordance with our policy manatus), was listed as endangered in that affect aquatic plant communities, published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 1967 (32 FR 4001, March 11, 1967) freshwater and warm-water sources, 34270), we will seek the expert opinions under the Endangered Species sheltered waterbodies, boat access of at least three specialists in the field Preservation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89– projects, port expansion projects, and who were not involved in developing 669; 80 Stat. 926). After adoption of the others. this proposed rule. The purpose of such Endangered Species Conservation Act of Please note that submissions merely review is to ensure that our 1969 (Pub. L. 91–135; 83 Stat. 275), the stating support for or opposition to the determination is based on scientifically listing was amended in 1970 to expand action under consideration without sound data, assumptions, and analysis. the Florida manatee listing to include providing supporting information, We will send peer reviewers copies of the West Indian manatee throughout its although noted, will not be considered this proposed rule immediately range, including in the Caribbean Sea in making a determination, as section following publication in the Federal and northern South America. This 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that a Register. We will invite these peer amendment added the Antillean determination as to whether any species reviewers to comment during the public manatee (Trichechus manatus manatus) is a threatened or endangered species comment period. We will consider all to the listing (35 FR 18319, December 2, must be made ‘‘solely on the basis of the comments and information received 1970). Species listed under the best scientific and commercial data from peer reviewers during the 90-day Endangered Species Conservation Act, available.’’ comment period on this proposed rule, including the West Indian manatee, Prior to issuing a final rule on this as we prepare a final rule. were subsequently grandfathered into proposed action, we will take into the List of Endangered and Threatened consideration all additional information Public Hearing Wildlife under the Endangered Species and comments that we receive. Such Section 4(b)(5) of the Act (16 U.S.C. Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and information may lead to a final rule that 1531 et seq.) provides for one or more the West Indian manatee remains listed differs from this proposal. All comments public hearings on this proposal, if as an endangered species under the Act. and recommendations, including names requested. Given the level of interest in We originally issued a recovery plan for and addresses, will become part of the this review, we have scheduled a formal the West Indian manatee in 1980, which administrative record for the final rule. public hearing to afford the public and included both Florida and Antillean You may submit your comments and all interested parties with an manatees. We completed a recovery materials concerning this proposed rule opportunity to make formal oral plan for the Florida subspecies in 1989, by one of the methods listed in comments on the proposed revised it in 1996, and completed ADDRESSES. Before including your reclassification of the West Indian another in 2001 (USFWS 2001). In 1986, address, phone number, email address, manatee. we completed a recovery plan for the or other personal identifying We will hold the public hearing at the Puerto Rico population of the Antillean information in your comment, you location listed in ADDRESSES on the date manatee (USFWS 1986).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1002 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

We published notices in the Federal the action sought by the December 2012 Cuba (Melillo-Sweeting et al. 2011, p. Register on July 22, 1985, and on petition is warranted. To ensure that our 505; Alvarez-Alema´n et al. 2010, p. 148; November 6, 1991 (50 FR 29901 and 56 review is complete and based on the Odell et al. 1978, p. 289). FR 56882, respectively), stating that we best available scientific and commercial Outside of the southeastern United were conducting 5-year reviews for all information, in our July 2, 2014, Federal States, the West Indian manatee has an endangered and threatened species Register notice of the 90-day finding we extensive but fragmented distribution listed before January 1, 1991, including solicited information from the public on (Marsh et al. 2011, p. 384) and occurs the West Indian manatee. In 2005 and the status of the West Indian manatee, in 20 countries (Table 1). Manatees are threats to the species, conservation 2006, we published notices in the found in the Greater Antilles (i.e., Cuba, measures for the species, and other Federal Register (70 FR 19780, April 14, Jamaica, Hispaniola, and Puerto Rico) relevant information. 2005; 71 FR 14940, March 24, 2006) that and discontinuously along the Gulf we were initiating another 5-year status We received 49,571 comments from the public in response to our notice of coast of Mexico, the Caribbean coast of review for the West Indian manatee. In Central and South America, and along this 5-year review, which was status review. Most were in relation to the Florida manatee (Trichechus the Atlantic coast of South America as completed on April 6, 2007, we far south as Bahia, Brazil (Self-Sullivan recommended downlisting the species manatus latirostris), and most of those were emails or letters expressing either and Mignucci-Giannoni 2012, p. 36). to threatened (USFWS 2007, p. 35). A Except for rare sightings, manatees are copy of the 2007 5-year status review is support for or opposition to the action being considered, with no supporting no longer found in the Lesser Antilles available on our Web site (http:// (i.e., those Caribbean islands extending ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_year_review/ information. These comments were noted but are not being considered in from the Virgin Islands to Grenada) doc3771.pdf). (Lefebvre et al. 2001, p. 425). The few On December 14, 2012, we received a preparation of this proposed rule. individuals that have been reported for petition from the Pacific Legal Several submittals, however, shared the U.S. and British Virgin Islands, Foundation on behalf of Save Crystal peer-reviewed literature, observations Turks and Caicos, Cayman Islands, St. River, Inc., requesting that the West from State and Federal partners, and Maarten, Curacao, and Bonaire are Indian manatee and its subspecies be survey data, and these data were considered vagrant from nearby reclassified from endangered to considered and are addressed as populations (Self-Sullivan and threatened under the Act, based appropriate. Similarly, the few species- Mignucci-Giannoni 2012, p. 40; USFWS primarily on the analysis and specific reports we received on the 2007, p. 27). recommendation presented in our 2007 Antillean manatee (Trichechus manatus 5-year review for the species. We manatus) were also evaluated and In Puerto Rico, recent island-wide reviewed the petition and found that it incorporated as appropriate. aerial surveys flown to characterize presented substantial information Species Information manatee distribution patterns (USFWS indicating that reclassifying the West Manatee Aerial Surveys 2015, unpubl. Indian manatee to threatened may be Distribution data) confirm the observations of Powell warranted. We published a notice The range of the West Indian manatee et al. (1981, p. 644) and Rathbun et al. announcing our 90-day finding and includes the southeastern United States (1985, p. 9) that manatees are most initiation of the species’ status review in (primarily Florida), the east coast of frequently observed along the south- the Federal Register on July 2, 2014 (79 Mexico and Central America, central and eastern coasts and not on FR 37706). northeastern South America, the Greater the northwestern coast. The former Antilles (Cuba, Hispaniola, Puerto Rico, Roosevelt Roads Naval Station (RRNS) Current Federal Action and Jamaica), and parts of the Lesser area, the northwest coast of Vieques, Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires Antilles, including Trinidad and Bahı´a de Jobos, and Guayanilla that, for any petition to revise the Lists Tobago. Manatees in the southeastern consistently presented a high number of of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife United States are found in Florida year- observations (USFWS Manatee Aerial and Plants (Lists) that presents round and occasionally in Georgia and Surveys, 2015 unpubl. data). In substantial information, we make a Alabama during the warmer months, localized aerial surveys on the finding within 12 months of the date of and vagrants can be found as far north southwestern coast, between Cabo Rojo the receipt of the petition on whether as Massachusetts and as far west as and Ponce, sightings were common the requested action is either (a) not Texas (Beck 2015, unpubl. data; Fertl et throughout the region, but concentrated warranted, (b) warranted, or (c) al. 2005, p. 74; Domning and Hayek at Cabo Rojo, Bahı´a Bioluminiscente warranted but precluded from 1986, p. 136; Lowery 1974, p. 481; and Montalva in Lajas, and Bahı´as de immediate proposal. This proposed rule Gunter 1941, p. 64). Florida vagrants are Guayanilla and Tallaboa in Guayanilla constitutes our 12-month finding that also known to occur in the Bahamas and (Mignucci-Giannoni 2006, p. 13).

TABLE 1—WEST INDIAN MANATEES, RANGE COUNTRIES WHERE FOUND: TRENDS, POPULATION ESTIMATES, NATIONAL LISTING STATUS [Abbreviations: U–Unknown; D–Declining; S–Stable; I–Increasing; En–Endangered; CrEn–Critically Endangered (adapted from UNEP 2010, p. 11 and Castelblanco-Martı´nez et al. 2012, p. 132, Martin et al. 2015, p. 44, unless otherwise cited).]

Population Country Trend 1 National listing status estimate 1

Greater Antilles (1,382)

1A 2 ...... United States (Puerto Rico) ...... S 3 532 (mean) En (PRDNER 2004). 2 ...... Cuba ...... U/D 500 En (A´ lvarez-Alema´n 2012). 3 ...... Haiti ...... U 100 No information. 4 ...... Dominican Republic ...... D 200 CrEn (MMARNRD 2011).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1003

TABLE 1—WEST INDIAN MANATEES, RANGE COUNTRIES WHERE FOUND: TRENDS, POPULATION ESTIMATES, NATIONAL LISTING STATUS—Continued [Abbreviations: U–Unknown; D–Declining; S–Stable; I–Increasing; En–Endangered; CrEn–Critically Endangered (adapted from UNEP 2010, p. 11 and Castelblanco-Martı´nez et al. 2012, p. 132, Martin et al. 2015, p. 44, unless otherwise cited).]

Population Country Trend 1 National listing status estimate 1

5 ...... Jamaica ...... U/D 50 No information.

Mexico, Central America (3,600)

6 ...... Mexico ...... U 1,500 En. 7 ...... Belize ...... U/D 1,000 En. 8 ...... Guatemala ...... U 150 CrEn (CONAP 2009). 9 ...... Honduras ...... S 100 No information. 10 ...... Costa Rica ...... D 200 En. 11 ...... Panama ...... U 150 No information. 12 ...... Nicaragua ...... D 500 No information.

South America (1,800)

13 ...... Colombia ...... U/D 500 CrEn (Rodrı´guez-Mahecha et al. 2006). 14 ...... Venezuela ...... D 200 CrEn (Ojasti and Lacabana 2008). 15 ...... Suriname ...... D 100 No information. 16 ...... French Guiana ...... S 100 No information. 17 ...... Guyana ...... D 100 No information. 18 ...... Trinidad and Tobago ...... D 100 En (MCT 2002). 19 ...... Brazil ...... U/D 700 CrEn (Barbosa et al. 2008).

North America (6,360)

20 ...... The Bahamas ...... I 10 No information. 21B 2 ...... United States (Southeast) ...... S/I 6,350 En (FAC 68A–27.0031).

Total Estimated Population 13,142 1 Trends and estimates described in Table 1 for manatee populations outside the United States are, in large part, based on the personal opin- ions of local experts and are not based on quantified analyses of trends in country population counts or demographics. Such data from these countries are limited or absent, making most of these assessments conjectural (UNEP 2010, p. xiv). 2 Note that Locations 1A and 21B refer to manatee populations in the United States (in Puerto Rico and the southeastern United States, re- spectively). 3 Based on adjusted aerial survey counts (Pollock et al. 2013, p. 8).

West Indian manatees are at the Johns River unit that occurs in the river Taxonomy and Species Description northern limit of their range in the south of Palatka; a Northwest unit that The West Indian manatee, Trichechus southeastern United States. This occupies the Florida Panhandle south to manatus, is one of three living species limitation is based on the species’ Hernando County; and a Southwest unit of the genus Trichechus (Rice 1998, p. intolerance for cold. Prolonged exposure that occurs from Pasco County south to 129). The West Indian manatee includes to cold water temperatures results in Whitewater Bay in Monroe County two recognized subspecies, the debilitation and/or death due to cold (USFWS 2001, p. 3 and 2007c, pp. 12– Antillean manatee, Trichechus manatus stress syndrome (Bossart et al. 2004, p. 13; Figure 1). Each of these management manatus, and the Florida manatee, 435; Rommel et al. 2002, p. 4). At this units includes individual manatees that Trichechus manatus latirostris (Rice northern reach of their range, manatees tend to return to the same warm-water 1998, p. 129). Each subspecies has historically relied upon warm, site(s) each winter and have similar distinctive morphological features and temperate coastal and inshore waters in non-winter distribution patterns. The occurs in discrete areas with rare south Florida and on natural warm- exchange of individuals between these overlap between ranges (Hatt 1934, p. water springs scattered throughout the units is limited during the winter 538; Domning and Hayek 1986, p. 136; area for warmth. Industrial outfalls, months, based on data from telemetry and Alvarez-Alema´n et al. 2010, p. 148). including power plant effluents, have studies (Rathbun et al. 1990, entire; Reid Recent genetic studies substantiate the expanded the manatees’ range in Florida et al. 1991, pp. 180–181; Deutsch et al. uniqueness of the Florida subspecies, as since their appearance in the 1940s. A 1998, entire; Weigle et al. 2001, entire; its genetic characteristics have been majority of manatees now winter at compared with other populations from these sites. Deutsch et al. 2003, entire) and photo- identification studies (Rathbun et al. the Antillean subspecies found in In Florida, manatees have been 1990, entire; USGS Sirenia Project Puerto Rico and Belize (Hunter et al. identified as occurring in four, relatively Manatee Individual Photo-identification 2010, p. 599; Hunter et al. 2012, p. 1631). distinct, regional management units System (MIPS), 2015, unpubl. data; (formerly referred to as subpopulations): West Indian manatees are large, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation An Atlantic Coast unit that occupies the fusiform-shaped animals (wide in the Commission (FWC Fish and Wildlife east coast of Florida, including the middle and tapered at both ends) with Florida Keys and the lower St. Johns Research Institute (FWRI) MIPS, 2015, skin that is uniformly dark grey, River north of Palatka; an Upper St. unpubl. data). wrinkled, sparsely haired, and rubber-

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1004 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

like. Manatees possess paddle-like marine habitats for their life-history The loss of manatees from certain forelimbs, no hind limbs, and a round, needs (i.e., feeding and drinking, areas has been attributed to, among beaver-like tail. Their bones are massive traveling, resting, thermoregulation, other factors, dam construction along and heavy with no marrow cavities in mating, and nursing) and survival. rivers (Colmenero-Rolo´n and Hoz- the ribs or long bones of the forearms Manatees feed on freshwater and marine Zavala 1986, in UNEP 2010, p. 59; (Odell 1982, p. 829). Adults average plants, including submergent, emergent, Montoya-Ospina et al. 2001, in UNEP about 3.0 meters (m) (9.8 feet [ft]) in and shoreline vegetation. Significantly, 2010, p. 29). Historically, anthropogenic length and 400 kilograms (kg) (900 manatees seek out sources of fresh influences (i.e., dams, drainage of pounds [lb]) in weight, but may reach drinking water, especially when in wetlands, mangrove destruction, etc.) lengths of up to 4.5 m (15 ft) (Husar marine and estuarine habitats. Manatees have altered manatee habitat 1978, p. 1) and weigh as much as 1,620 tend to travel along the waterward edges significantly and thus affected the kg (3,570 lb) (Rathbun et al. 1990, p. 23). of plant beds and in and near channels. number of animals along the coast and Newborns average 1.2 to 1.4 m (4 to 4.5 Sheltered embayments and other such their movements between fresh and ft) in length and weigh about 30 kg (66 areas are used for resting and, for saltwater areas (Amour 1993, in lb) (Odell 1981, p. 134). The nostrils, mothers with calves, as areas to nurse Lefebvre et al. 2001, p. 447; Boyle and located on the upper snout, open and and nurture offspring. Mating activity Khan 1993, in Lefebvre et al. 2001, p. close by means of muscular valves as takes place in all types of habitat; estrus 447; Correa-Viana 1995, in Lefebvre et the animals surface and dive (Husar females prefer shallow areas where they al. 2001, p. 446; Montoya-Ospina et al. 1977, p. 2; Hartman 1979, p. 73). A can rest from mating activity. In the 2001, in UNEP 2010, p. 30; MCT 2002, muscular, flexible, upper lip is used inland and coastal waters of peninsular p. 15; Serrano et al. 2007, p. 109). As with the forelimbs to manipulate food Florida, manatees use warm-water discussed below, in Florida, warm- into the mouth (Hartman 1979, p. 85). springs, warm industrial outfalls, and water natural spring areas essential for Bristles are located on the upper and other warm-water sites as shelter during the manatee’s survival are threatened by lower lip pads (Marshall et al. 2000, p. the winter months (Hartman, 1974, pp. numerous factors, including 649). Molars designed to crush 8–30, Lefebvre et al. 2001, pp. 451–453, diminishing spring flows, deteriorating vegetation form continuously at the Stith et al. 2006, pp. 4–5), several of water quality, and increasing human back of the jaw and move forward as which are designated manatee activities in and around spring areas older ones wear down (Domning and protection areas. In warmer months, (Taylor 2006, pp. 5–6). Hayek 1984, p. 105). The eyes are very manatees leave these sites and can Population Size small, close with sphincter action, and disperse great distances. are equipped with inner membranes Manatees in Central and South Within the southeastern United that can be drawn across the eyeball for America are found in coastal rivers and States, Martin et al. (2015 entire) protection. Externally, the ears are estuaries, while those in the Antilles are provide an abundance estimate for the minute with no pinnae (Husar 1977, p. found more often in coastal marine Florida subspecies of 6,350 manatees 2). habitats (Lefebvre et al. 2001, p. 463). In (with a 95 percent CI (confidence Puerto Rico, Antillean manatees are interval) between 5,310 and 7,390). Lifespan, Mating, and Reproduction mostly found in protected bays and Outside the southeastern United States, The lifespan of the manatee is not shallow coves with seagrass beds for available population estimates are based known with certainty. There is a record feeding and resting and utilize river on data of highly variable quality and in Florida of a captive 67-year old mouths and estuaries when seeking should be considered only as crude manatee (South Florida Museum 2015), freshwater for drinking. Seagrass, approximations (UNEP 2010, p. xiv). and there are documented longevity freshwater, and shelter are described as Available population estimates suggest records of over 55 years in the wild. The the three primary ecological attributes that there may be as many as 1,382 average age of Florida manatees dying in needed to ensure long-term manatee manatees in the Greater Antilles, 3,600 Florida is 7.7 years (Pitchford 2009 p. survival in Puerto Rico (Drew et al. manatees in Mexico and Central 22). Manatee mortality records from 2012, p. 19). Outside the United States, America, and 1,800 manatees in South Puerto Rico found adults aged from 22 manatees occur within estuaries, America (Table 1). This information to 28 years old (Mignucci-Giannoni et lagoons, and interconnected rivers, such reflects the broad distribution of the al. 2000, p. 194). as those found in Chetumal Bay species and suggests a relatively Manatees generally become sexually between Mexico and Belize. Chetumal medium to large range-wide population mature between 3 to 5 years of age Bay is a specially designated manatee estimate. A sum of all estimates totals (Boyd et al. 1999 and Glaser and protection area and wildlife sanctuary 13,142 manatees for the species Reynolds 1997, in UNEP 2010, p. 4), (UNEP 2010, p. 60). throughout its range (See Table 1; UNEP and female manatees continue Several factors can affect the viability 2010, p. 11; Castelblanco-Martı´nez et al. reproducing in the wild into their of manatee habitats. Human activities 2012, p. 132; Marsh et al. 2011, p. 385; thirties (Marmontel 1995, in UNEP such as dredge and fill, soil runoff, Self-Sullivan and Mignucci 2012, p. 40; 2010, p. 4). After a gestation period of propeller dredging, anchoring, etc., are Martin et al. 2015, entire). Total between 11 and 14 months (Rathbun et known to result in the loss of seagrass estimates for manatees outside the al. 1995, Reynolds and Odell 1991, in and foraging habitat (Duarte 2002, p. southeastern United States and Puerto UNEP 2010, p. 4), female manatees 194; Orth et al. 2006, p. 991). For Rico alone range between approximately usually give birth to a single calf, example, dredging will directly remove 3,000 and 6,700 individuals, including although there are a few documented seagrass, and sediment, suspended in adults, subadults, and calves, of which cases of twins (Marmontel 1995, the water column during dredge and fill fewer than 2,500 are estimated to be Rathbun et al. 1995, SEMARNAT 2001, activities, may cover neighboring reproductively mature animals (Self- Wells et al. 1999, in UNEP 2010, p. 4). seagrass beds (Auil 1998, p. 9). A Sullivan and Mignucci-Giannoni 2012, significant decrease of this resource p. 40). Castelblanco-Martı´nez et al. Habitat could cause stress to the population by (2012, p. 132) adapted the UNEP (2010, West Indian manatees use a wide limiting manatee grazing habitats and p. 11) numbers and used an estimated variety of freshwater, estuarine, and range. initial size of 6,700 individuals in their

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1005

population viability analysis (PVA) other anthropogenic factors (Deutsch et authors divided the metapopulation into model for the Antillean manatee al. 2008, online). However, each of the six subpopulations identified by population. subspecies (Antillean and Florida) by geographic features, local genetic The Martin et al. (2015) study themselves was considered to be structure, ranging behavior, and habitat referenced above is the first quantified endangered and declining due to a use. Using an initial metapopulation estimate of abundance for the Florida variety of threats identified in the IUCN size of 6,700 Antillean manatees, with manatee in the southeastern United classification criteria (Deutsch et al. low human pressure and a relatively States. This estimate relied upon 2008, online). As we have noted above, low frequency of stochastic events, their innovative survey techniques and our estimate of the total West Indian baseline PVA model describes a multiple sources of information to manatee population currently is 13,142 metapopulation with positive growth. estimate a Florida manatee population (Table 1). The authors explain that the model is of 6,350 animals (Martin et al. 2015, p. To the extent that it can be measured limited due to a lack of certainty with 44). In Puerto Rico, the Service recently with the best available data, the West regard to the estimated size of the updated aerial survey methods to Indian manatee population trend and population, it does not take into account account for detection probability, which status varies regionally (Table 1). In the trends in local populations, and it provides an improved population southeastern United States, the manatee assumes that all threats have an equal estimate. A total of six island-wide population has grown, based on effect on the different subpopulations. aerial surveys have been completed updated adult survival rate estimates Castelblanco-Martı´nez et al. (2012, pp. with this new method. These have and estimated growth rates (Runge et al. 141–142) state that no quantitative resulted in the most robust counts 2015, p. 19). Historical and anecdotal information exists for manatees outside available for the population, with an accounts outside the southeastern the southeastern United States and that average direct minimum population United States suggest that manatees ‘‘experts and local people throughout count of 149 individuals (standard were once more common, leading the region agree that the number of deviation (SD) 31). Calf numbers have scientists to hypothesize that significant manatees sighted per year has decreased also been documented with an average declines have occurred (Lefebvre et al. over time.’’ However, manatee minimum direct calf count of 14 (SD 5) 2001, p. 425; UNEP 2010, p. 11; Self- populations in Puerto Rico, Honduras, or approximately 10 percent of the Sullivan and Mignucci-Giannoni 2012, and French Guiana, where an estimated direct minimum population count. A p. 37). Based on expert and local 732 manatees are found, are thought to record high of 23 calves were counted opinion, population trends are declining be stable (Table 1). in the December 2013 survey. The or unknown in 84 percent of the In the southeastern United States, October 2010 survey count analysis countries where manatees are found new population growth rates for resulted in an adjusted mean estimated (UNEP 2010, p. 11; Marsh et al. 2011, Florida’s Atlantic Coast, Upper St. Johns population size of 532 individuals, with p. 385; Self-Sullivan and Mignucci- River, Northwest, and Southwest a 95 percent equal area confidence Giannoni 2012, p. 40; Table 1). The Regions describe growth in each region interval (CI) of 342–802 manatees magnitude of decline is difficult to through the 2008–2009 winter season (Pollock et al. 2013, p. 8). assess, given the qualitative nature of (Runge et al. 2015, p. 7). More recent these accounts (see footnote Table 1). data are unavailable at the present time. Population Trends For example, Bertram and Bertram Regional adult survival rate estimates In 2008, the International Union for (1973, p. 318) noted that there were were also updated through the same the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) several thousand manatees in Guyana in period and are higher and more precise identified the West Indian manatee as a 1963, but recent estimates suggest that for all regions since the last estimates ‘‘Vulnerable’’ species throughout its there may be as few as 100 manatees were provided (Runge et al. 2015, p. 7; range based on an estimate of less than remaining (UNEP 2010, p. 11). It is not USFWS 2007, p. 65). Because the 10,000 mature individuals (Deutsch et known if this represents an actual updates are through the 2008–2009 al. 2008, http://www.iucnredlist.org/ decline or differences in expert opinion winter, they do not capture recent details/22103/0). The population was over time. severe cold events of 2009–2010 and expected to decline at a rate of 10 In the Castelblanco-Martı´nez et al. 2010–2011, the 2012–present Indian percent over the course of three (2012, pp. 129–143) PVA model for the River Lagoon (IRL) die-off event; or the generations (i.e., 60 years; 1 generation manatee metapopulation found outside 2013 red tide event (Runge et al. 2015, = circa 20 years) due to habitat loss and the United States, discussed above, the p. 20; Table 2).

TABLE 2—MANATEE DEATHS 2009–2014 [FWC FWRI Manatee Carcass Salvage Database 2015, unpubl. data]

Number of Number of red Number of all Number of Year cold-related Number of IRL tide-related die-off related deaths due to Deaths from event deaths 1 all other all causes deaths deaths deaths causes

2014 ...... 26 2 2 30 341 371 2013 ...... 36 118 276 430 400 830 2012 ...... 28 15 33 76 316 392 2011 ...... 113 0 23 136 327 463 2010 ...... 2 288 0 0 2 288 478 766

Total ...... 491 135 334 960 1,862 2,822 1 Indian River Lagoon event, 2012 to present (ongoing). 2 Confirmed cold-related deaths; an additional 197 cold-related deaths are suspected.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1006 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

In Florida, FWC conducts a series of Site-specific management actions that opportunities may be used instead of statewide aerial and ground surveys of may be necessary to achieve the plan’s methods identified in the recovery plan. warm-water sites known to be visited by goals for conservation and survival of Likewise, information on the species manatees during cold-weather extremes the species; (2) objective, measurable may be learned that was not known at to count numbers of manatees. These criteria, which when met would result the time the recovery plan was surveys are conducted from one to three in a determination, in accordance with finalized. The new information may times each winter, depending on the provisions of section 4 of the Act, change the extent that criteria need to be weather conditions (FWC FWRI that the species be removed from the met for recognizing recovery of the Manatee aerial surveys, 2015, unpubl. list; and (3) estimates of the time species. Overall, recovery of species is data). While the number of manatees required and cost to carry out the plan. a dynamic process requiring adaptive has increased over the years, in and of Revisions to the List (adding, management, planning, implementing, themselves they are not considered to be removing, or reclassifying a species) and evaluating the degree of recovery of reliable indicators of population trends, must reflect determinations made in a species that may, or may not, fully given concerns about detection accordance with section 4(a)(1) and 4(b). follow the guidance provided in a probabilities. However, it is likely that Section 4(a)(1) requires that the recovery plan. a significant amount of the increase Secretary determine whether a species The following discussion provides a does reflect an actual increase in is threatened or endangered (or not) review of recovery planning and population size when this count is because of one or more of five threat implementation for the West Indian considered in the context of other factors. Therefore, recovery criteria must manatee, as well as an analysis of the positive demographic indicators, indicate when a species is no longer recovery criteria and goals as they relate including the recently updated growth threatened or endangered by any of to evaluating the status of the species. and survival rates (Runge et al. 2015, p. these five factors. In other words, Recovery Actions 19). objective, measurable criteria contained In January 2010, FWC counted 5,077 in recovery plans (recovery criteria) Recovery and conservation actions for manatees during a statewide survey must indicate when an analysis of the the West Indian manatee are described prior to the start of the 2010 die-off. five factors under section 4(a)(1) would in the ‘‘UNEP Caribbean From 2010 through 2014, at least 2,822 result in a determination that a species Environment[al] Program’s Regional manatees died (Table 2). In February is no longer threatened or endangered. Management Plan for the West Indian 2015, researchers counted 6,063 Section 4(b) requires that the Manatee’’ (UNEP 2010, entire) and in manatees during a statewide survey determination made under section national conservation plans for (FWC FWRI Manatee aerial surveys 4(a)(1) be based on the best available countries outside the United States. 2015, unpubl. data). These counts made science. Within the United States, the Service’s before and after the die-offs, when Thus, while recovery plans are Recovery Plan for the Puerto Rico considered in the context of positive intended to provide guidance to the Population of the West Indian demographic indicators (i.e., growth Service, States, and other partners on (Antillean) Manatee (USFWS 1986, rates and adult survival rate estimates), methods of minimizing threats to listed entire), the South Florida Multi-Species suggest a certain resiliency in the species and on criteria that may be used Recovery Plan (USFWS 1999, entire), Florida population (FWC FWRI Manatee to determine when recovery is achieved, and the Florida Manatee Recovery Plan aerial surveys 2015, unpubl. data); they are not regulatory documents and (USFWS 2001, entire) identify recovery Runge et al. 2015, p. 19). cannot substitute for the determinations and conservation actions for the species. and promulgation of regulations Actions common to all plans include Recovery required under section 4(a)(1). minimizing manatee mortality and Section 4(f) of the Act directs us to Determinations to remove or reclassify a injury, protecting manatee habitats, and develop and implement recovery plans species from the list made under section monitoring manatee populations and for the conservation and survival of 4(a)(1) must be based on the best habitat. listed species, unless we find that such scientific and commercial data available UNEP Caribbean Environment[al] a plan will not promote conservation of at the time of the determination, Program’s Regional Management Plan the species. Although the West Indian regardless of whether that information for the West Indian Manatee, National manatee is listed throughout its range, differs from the recovery plan. Conservation Plans (outside the United Service recovery planning efforts for the In the course of implementing States) West Indian manatee focused mostly on conservation actions for a species, new The UNEP plan, published in 2010, those portions of the species’ range information is often gained that requires identifies short- and long-term within U.S. jurisdiction. We published recovery efforts to be modified conservation and research measures that an initial recovery plan for the West accordingly. There are many paths to should be implemented to conserve the Indian manatee in 1980 (USFWS 1980) accomplishing recovery of a species, West Indian manatee. This plan also and subsequently published recovery and recovery may be achieved without includes an overview of West Indian plans at the subspecies level for all criteria being fully met. For example, manatees within their range countries, manatees found within the United one or more criteria may have been including descriptions of regional and States. At present, approved plans exceeded while other criteria may not national conservation measures and include the Recovery Plan for the Puerto have been accomplished, yet the Service research programs that have been Rican Population of the Antillean may judge that, overall, the threats have implemented. Given the general lack of manatee (USFWS 1986); the Florida been minimized sufficiently, and the information about manatees in most Manatee Recovery Plan, Third Revision species is robust enough, to reclassify range countries, the plan recommends (USFWS 2001); and the South Florida the species from endangered to that needed research and the Multi-Species Recovery Plan (USFWS threatened or perhaps even delist the development of common methodologies 1999). species. In other cases, recovery be prioritized in concert with Section 4(f) of the Act directs that, to opportunities may have been recognized coordinated manatee and manatee the maximum extent practicable, we that were not known at the time the habitat protection efforts (UNEP 2010, incorporate into each recovery plan: (1) recovery plan was finalized. These entire).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1007

Within the species’ range, foundations identified tasks. The 1986 plan included (the former Caribbean Stranding for coordinated conservation and three major objectives: (1) To identify, Network or CSN) and the Puerto Rico research activities are developing and a assess, and reduce human-related Zoo. There has not been a record of number of governments have designated mortalities, especially those related to poaching since 1995 as a result of manatee protection areas and have gill-net entanglement; (2) to identify and increased public awareness of the developed or are developing minimize alteration, degradation, and protected status of the manatee. The conservation plans (UNEP 2010, p. xiv). destruction of important manatee successful rehabilitation and release of National legislation exists for manatees habitats; and (3) to develop criteria and the captive manatee ‘‘Moises’’ in 1994, in all range countries, and many biological information necessary to a manatee calf stranded after the mother countries have ratified their determine whether and when to had been killed by poachers, served to participation in international reclassify (either delist or downlist) the incite a change of cultural values and conventions and protocols that protect Puerto Rico population (USFWS 1986, increase awareness about threats to manatees and their habitat (UNEP 2010, p. 12). The Recovery Plan also includes manatees (Marsh and Lefebvre 1994, p. p. xv). See Supplemental Documents 1 a step-down outline that identifies two 157). and 3 in Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015– primary recovery actions for: (1) Documented entanglement in fishing 0178. Belize, Colombia, Costa Rica, Population management and (2) habitat nets rarely occurs. However, in 2014, Guatemala, Mexico, the United States, protection. Since the release of the 1986 three adult manatees were entangled in Puerto Rico, and Trinidad have Recovery Plan for the Puerto Rico large fishing nets; one of them was an developed country-specific manatee population of the West Indian adult female that died (PRDNER 2015, recovery plans (UNEP 2010, p. 92). (Antillean) manatee, initiated recovery unpubl. data). Significant exposure was Efforts to conserve manatees outside actions have provided substantial new given to this case through the local and the United States vary significantly from knowledge about the species’ ecology social media. Current PRDNER fishing country to country. Some countries, and threats. Some of these efforts apply regulations still allow the use of beach including but not limited to Mexico, to multiple tasks and are helping to seine nets with certain prohibitions that Belize, Brazil, and Cuba, are engaged in update conservation information and need to be carefully monitored. efforts to assess current status and tools that are applied towards adaptive Fisheries-related entanglements and distribution of manatees. Many management and education. Here we debris ingestion are rarely documented countries, including Belize and Brazil, report on the current status of these but may occur and cause take of provide protections for manatees and actions. manatees. A recent instance was noticed their habitat. For example, the manatee Recovery Task (1): Population in August 2014, where an adult female in Belize is listed as endangered under management. Recovery actions under was confirmed to have both flippers Belize’s Wildlife Protection Act of 1981. this task include: (11) Reduce human- severely entangled in monofilament Belize protects manatees from caused mortality, (12) determine line. Attempts to capture the female overexploitation, and its recovery plan manatee movement patterns and trends manatee from the shore were implements recovery actions similar to in abundance and distribution, (13) unsuccessful. This manatee has not those identified in the Florida and assess contaminant concentrations in been observed since that time. Agencies, Puerto Rico recovery plans. Efforts to manatees, (15) determine quantitative community groups, and protect manatees include education and recovery criteria, and (16) develop nongovernmental organizations in outreach efforts, and countries are manatee protection plans for areas of Puerto Rico consistently educate the promoting cooperation and information specific importance. public about proper waste disposal that exchanges through venues such as the Recovery Task (2): Habitat protection. can affect manatees. recent Cartagena Convention meetings Recovery actions under this task In 2012, the Service completed a (UNEP 2014, entire). A successful include: (11) Radio-tag manatees to cooperative agreement with researchers cooperative initiative identified at the determine habitat utilization, (12) from North Carolina State University meetings includes the implementation determine and map distribution of (NCSU) to identify potential Manatee of manatee bycatch surveys in the seagrass beds and sources of fresh water, Protection Areas (MPAs) and address Dominican Republic, Belize, Colombia, and (13) monitor important habitat some of the core recommendations and Mexico (Kiszka 2014, entire). We components and ensure protection. made by the most recent West Indian are encouraged by the progress that is A carcass salvage program was first manatee 5-year review, such as the being made in several portions of the implemented in the late 1970s and establishment of MPAs (USFWS 2007, Antillean manatee’s range in protecting continues today. Mignucci-Giannoni et p. 37). This collaboration led to the this mammal and the growing al. (2000, p. 189) provided an analysis identification of several potential MPAs enthusiasm behind implementing of stranding data and identified sources and serves to update the body of recovery to better protect this important of human-caused mortality. This knowledge pertaining to key ecological species. In the future, we would like to summarization of data points indicates resources used by manatees (i.e., support and reach out to these countries a shift in the nature of threats since the seagrass, shelter, freshwater) and the to assist them with their efforts to release of the 1986 Recovery Plan, current status of threats to the Antillean further conserve manatees. which listed poaching, direct capture, manatee (Drew et al. 2012, pp. 1, 33– and entanglement as the most 34). MPAs serve to prevent the take of Recovery Plan for the Puerto Rico significant threats to manatees. one or more manatees (USFWS 1979). Population of the West Indian Watercraft collision is now considered The MPA selection criteria considered (Antillean) Manatee the greatest threat to manatees in Puerto key manatee resources (i.e., seagrass, We approved the Recovery Plan for Rican waters (Mignucci et al. 2000, p. shelter, freshwater), manatee aerial the Puerto Rico population of the West 189; Drew et al. 2012, p. 26). Currently, surveys, and areas where take can be Indian (Antillean) manatee on December carcass salvage efforts are led by the minimized. After expert elicitation and 24, 1986 (USFWS 1986, entire). Puerto Rico Department of Natural and a thorough literature review, available Although this plan is considered out of Environmental Resources (PRDNER) data were spatially analyzed and date (USFWS 2007, p. 26), we present with support from the Puerto Rico described to reflect manatee use and the progress we have made under the Manatee Conservation Center (PRMCC) habitat preference.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1008 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

Federal MPAs have not been only a direct count and did not allow for Florida ecosystems, this plan included designated in Puerto Rico, and the a more reliable estimate of population species information and recovery tasks PRDNER does not have a specific size with detection probabilities from the then-current Florida manatee manatee area regulation like the State of (Pollock et al. 2013, p. 2). Hence, recovery plan, the Service’s 1996 Florida’s Manatee Sanctuary Act of 1978 estimates of population size are likely Florida Manatee Recovery Plan (USFWS (FMSA), which allows for management biased low, and inferences from trend 1996, entire). Because the 1996 Florida and enforcement of boat speed analyses are unreliable. The Service Manatee Recovery Plan was revised in restrictions and operations in areas again partnered with researchers from 2001, the South Florida Multi-Species where manatees are concentrated. Still, the NCSU to conduct a review of aerial Recovery Plan, West Indian Manatee the PRDNER has the authority to survey protocols and implement a element became obsolete. However, the establish boat speed regulatory areas sampling protocol that allows the 2001 Florida Manatee Recovery Plan marked with buoys wherever deemed estimation of a detection probability includes tasks that address manatee necessary. For example, in 2014, the (Pollock et al. 2013, pp. 2–4). In 2010, conservation throughout this USFWS, PRDNER, and Reefscaping, Inc. the Service partnered with Atkins subspecies’ range, including in South finalized the installation of 100 manatee (private consultant) to implement the Florida. speed regulatory buoys throughout new sampling protocol in order to Manatee recovery activities addressed known important manatee use areas, provide for more reliable population in the south Florida region include a and the PRDNER has a plan to install estimates. A total of six aerial surveys Comprehensive Everglades Restoration more buoys. In addition, the Navigation were completed from 2010 to 2014 in Plan (CERP) Task Force that addresses and Aquatic Safety Law for the order to test the new protocol and CERP tasks related to manatee Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (Law population estimate calculations. Data conservation, an Interagency Task Force 430) was implemented in 2000. This are still being reviewed, but results from for Water Control Structures that law restricts boat speeds to 5 miles per the October 2010 survey derived an minimizes manatee deaths associated hour within 150 feet (45 meters) from estimated average population size of 532 with water control structures, and the coastline unless otherwise posted. manatees in Puerto Rico, with a 95 efforts to protect the manatees’ south However, the effectiveness of this law percent equal area confidence interval Florida winter habitat (FWC 2007, pp. and State manatee speed regulatory of 342–802 manatees (Pollock et al. 63, 196). buoys have not been appropriately 2013, p. 8). The CERP Task Force developed Recovery actions are also assessed, and enforcement is limited guidelines for manatee protection implemented during technical (see Factor D). during CERP-related construction In Puerto Rico, island-wide manatee assistance and project review. Any activities. The guidelines address aerial surveys have been conducted action or project with a Federal nexus culvert and water control structure since the late 1970s. These aerial (e.g., Federal funds, permits, or actions) installation, potential thermal effects of surveys provide the basis for island- will require a consultation with the Aquifer Storage and Recovery wells, wide distribution patterns and to Service under section 7 of the Act. determine minimum population direct During the consultation process, the potential manatee entrapment in canal counts in some areas or throughout the Service identifies conservation networks, and in-water construction island. Not all surveys were equal in measures to avoid and minimize effects. The Task Force evaluated terms of the area covered and time of possible effects of proposed actions or proposed changes to existing canal year in which they were done. These projects. We review numerous projects systems and the construction of new direct counts identify a number of each year pertaining to the manatee, for structures planned for CERP animals observed at the time of the example, dredging, dock and marina implementation and recommended survey and suggest that there are at least construction, coastal development, measures to minimize effects on a specified number of manatees in the marine events (i.e., high-speed boat manatees. The measures have been population. The Service recognizes that races), and underwater and beach implemented and are in effect (FWC these counts do not accurately represent unexploded ordnance, among others. 2007, p. 196). the total number of manatees in the The Service has developed Antillean Water control structures are mostly population. Weather, other manatee conservation measures found in south Florida and are a environmental factors (e.g., water guidelines specific to Puerto Rico. For predominant means for controlling clarity), observer bias, and aerial survey example, we have worked with the U.S. flooding in the region. Water control space restrictions influence count Coast Guard to develop and implement structures primarily include flood gates conditions and affect detection standard permit conditions for boat and navigation locks that allow vessel probability and final count, thus likely races, such as observer protocols. passage through dams and the true number of individuals is impoundments, such as those associated South Florida Multi-Species Recovery underestimated. Furthermore, as in the with Lake Okeechobee. Manatees travel Plan, West Indian Manatee Florida manatee aerial surveys, survey through these structures and are methods preclude any analysis of The South Florida Multi-Species occasionally killed in crushings and precision and variability in the counts, Recovery Plan, West Indian Manatee impingements. Manatee protection and do not allow for the estimation of element, was adopted on August 18, devices have been installed on most the apparent detection probability. In 1999, by the Service (USFWS 1999, structures known to have killed spite of the high variability between and entire). This ecosystem-based recovery manatees, and the number of deaths has within surveys, the data can be used to plan is intended to recover listed been reduced (FWC 2007, p. 63). For the specify a minimum population direct species and to restore and maintain the period 1998–2008, the average annual count within a time period (one island- biodiversity of native plants and number of structure-related deaths was wide survey). animals in South Florida and is not 6.5 deaths. This number was reduced to The most consistent surveys were intended to replace existing recovery 4.2 deaths per year from 2009–2014 conducted from 1984 to 2002 (USFWS plans but to enhance recovery efforts (FWC 2007, pp. 194–195; FWC FWRI Manatee Aerial Surveys 2015, unpubl. (USFWS 1999, p. 3). Inasmuch as Manatee Carcass Salvage Database 2015, data). However, methods used provided manatees are a component of South unpubl. data).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1009

Important warm-water wintering sites Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) continue to operate in a way that does for manatees in south Florida include permits to insure that existing, not adversely affect manatees and seek power plant discharges, springs, and significant discharges do not adversely to modify or eliminate those discharges passive warm-water sites (sites affect manatees and insure that no new that adversely affect manatees. In characterized by warm-water inversions attractant discharges are created. particular, these reviews prevent the and other features). State and Federal The State of Florida requires counties creation of new sources of warm water rules have been adopted for all power to develop manatee protection plans and drinking water, known manatee plant discharges in south Florida that (MPPs). These are county-wide plans for attractants. limit public access during the winter the development of boat facilities Task 2. Minimize collisions between (FWC 2007, pp. 235–238; USFWS 2007, (docks, piers, dry-storage areas, marinas, manatees and watercraft. See pp. 71–79). Coincidentally, a majority of and boat ramps) that specify preferred discussion of watercraft collisions under the significant power plants used by locations for boat facility development Factor E, below. wintering manatees have been based on an evaluation of natural Ongoing efforts to minimize collisions repowered and have projected lifespans resources, manatee protection needs, between manatees and watercraft of about 40 years (Laist et al. 2013, p. and recreation and economic demands. include the adoption of manatee 10). The loss of a passive warm-water MPPs are reviewed by FWC and the protection areas that require boat site due to restoration activities, the Port Service and, when deemed adequate, operators to slow down or avoid of the Islands warm-water basin, is are used to evaluate boat access projects. sensitive manatee use areas. By being addressed through the When proposed projects are consistent requiring boats to slow down, manatees construction of an alternate warm-water with MPPs, permitting agencies are better able to evade oncoming boats site downstream of the original site authorize the construction of facilities and boat operators are better able to see (Dryden 2015, pers. comm.). in waters used by manatees. Currently, manatees and prevent collisions. all of the original 13 counties required Protected areas minimize the take of Florida Manatee Recovery Plan to have MPPs have plans, as well as manatees in manatee wintering areas, We published the current Florida Clay and Levy Counties. Flagler and resting areas, feeding areas, travel Manatee Recovery Plan on October 30, Charlotte Counties are also preparing corridors, and other important manatee 2001 (USFWS 2001). This recovery plan plans. use sites. Manatee protection areas have includes four principal objectives: (1) The Service developed programmatic been adopted in 26 Florida counties by Minimize causes of manatee consultation procedures and permit the State of Florida, local communities, disturbance, harassment, injury, and conditions for new and expanding and the Service. Manatee protection mortality; (2) determine and monitor the watercraft facilities (e.g., docks, boat areas were first adopted in the late status of manatee populations; (3) ramps, and marinas) as well as for 1970s, and additional areas continue to protect, identify, evaluate, and monitor dredging and other in-water activities be adopted, as needed. For example, manatee habitats; and (4) facilitate through an effect determination key FWC recently adopted new protection manatee recovery through public with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers areas in western Pinellas County (68C– awareness and education. To help and State of Florida (the ‘‘Manatee 22.016). achieve these objectives, the plan Key’’) (recently revised in 2013). The Task 3. Enforce manatee protection identifies 118 recovery implementation Manatee Key ensures that watercraft regulations. Service and State efforts to tasks. Important tasks include those that facility locations are consistent with reduce the number of watercraft address the reduction of watercraft MPP boat facility siting criteria and are collisions with manatees rely on collisions and the loss of warm-water built consistent with MPP construction enforced, well-defined, and designated habitat. conditions. The Service concluded that MPAs. Integral to these efforts are an Recovery Objective 1. Minimize these procedures constitute appropriate adequate number of law enforcement causes of manatee disturbance, and responsible steps to avoid and officers to patrol and enforce these harassment, injury, and mortality. Tasks minimize adverse effects to the species areas. Federal, State, and local law identified under this objective include and contribute to recovery of the enforcement officers enforce these (1) Conducting reviews of permitted species. measures; Federal officers can enforce activities; (2) minimizing collisions The Service has worked with the U.S. State regulations, and State officers can between manatees and watercraft; (3) Coast Guard and State agencies to enforce Federal regulations. Officers can enforcing manatee protection develop and implement standard permit only enforce areas that are properly regulations; (4) assessing and conditions for high-speed marine event marked by well-maintained signs and minimizing mortality caused by large permits. These conditions require that buoys. Maintenance of these markers vessels; (5) eliminating water control events take place at locations and times requires significant, continuing funding structure deaths; (6) minimizing when few manatees can be found at to ensure the presence of enforceable fisheries and marine debris event locations and require event protection areas. entanglements; (7) rescuing and observer programs. Observer programs It is difficult to ascertain the adequacy rehabilitating distressed manatees; and place observers in locations in and of enforcement efforts. Data concerning (8) implementing strategies to minimize around event sites; these observers dedicated officer hours on the water and manatee harassment. watch for manatees and shut events numbers of citations written are Task 1. Conduct reviews of permitted down when manatees enter event sites. confounding. For example, many activities. The Service conducts reviews The Florida Department of dedicated officer hours on the water of coastal construction permit Environmental Protection (FDEP) issues address diverse missions, and it is not applications to minimize impacts to and renews NPDES permits for power possible to identify how many of these manatees and their habitat, reviews plants, desalination plants, wastewater hours are devoted to manatee high-speed marine event permit treatment plants, and other dischargers enforcement and how many hours are applications to minimize the effect of that affect manatees. The FWC, the dedicated to other missions. Boater concentrated, high-speed watercraft Service, and others review these actions. compliance assessments provide events on manatees, and reviews These reviews insure that discharges another measure to assess adequacy. National Pollution Elimination identified as beneficial to manatees Boater compliance varies by waterway,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1010 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

with some waterways experiencing 85 manatees are rescued throughout the objective include: (1) Conducting status percent compliance rates and others as southeastern United States. Rescuers reviews; (2) determining life-history little as 14 percent (Gorzelany 2013, p. include the State of Florida, other range parameters, population structure, 63). Average boater compliance States, and numerous private distribution patterns, and population throughout Florida is 54 percent organizations. Each year these rescuers trends; (3) evaluating and monitoring (Shapiro 2001, p. iii). An enforcement assist dozens of manatees that present causes of mortality and injury; and (4) presence generally ensures a higher with a variety of stresses. Significant defining factors that affect health, well- compliance rate (Gorzelany 2013, p. 34). causes of distress include watercraft being, physiology, and ecology. Task 4. Eliminate water control collisions, fishing gear entanglements, Research projects that support this structure deaths. As discussed below, calf abandonment, and exposure to cold objective include aerial surveys, a entrapment and crushing in water and brevetoxin. Many animals are carcass salvage program, a photo- control structures was first recognized treated and released in the field, and identification program, telemetry as a threat to manatees in the 1970s others with significant needs are taken studies and others. (Odell and Reynolds 1979, entire), and to one of three critical care facilities for A USGS-led status and threats measures were immediately medical treatment. A majority of analysis for the Florida manatee was implemented to address manatee manatees rescued through this program updated in 2015 (Runge et al. 2015, mortality. While initial measures were are successfully released back into the entire). This effort updates adult mostly ineffective, recent advances in wild (USFWS Captive Manatee survival rates, considers the protection/detection technology have Database, 2015, unpubl. data). demographic effects of the major threats nearly eliminated this threat to Florida Task 7. Implement strategies to to Florida manatees, and evaluates how manatees. In 2014, the 5-year average for minimize manatee harassment. See those demographic effects influence the manatee deaths at structures and locks discussion of harassment under Factor risk of extinction using the manatee was 4.2 manatee deaths per year as B, below. Core Biological Model. Adult survival opposed to 6.5 manatee deaths per year Federal and State regulations rates were updated through winter during the preceding 20 years (FWC prohibiting harm and harassment 2008–2009 (See Table 3); observations FWRI Manatee Carcass Salvage (including provisioning) are in effect during the winter of 2008–2009 were Database, 2015, unpubl. data). and enforced (see Supplemental included in the data analysis, but 1–2 Task 5. Minimize fisheries and marine Document 2 in Docket No. FWS–R4– annual estimates at the end of the time debris entanglements. Fishing gear, ES–2015–0178). Extensive outreach series were dropped because of including both gear in use and efforts encourage proper viewing concerns about end of time series bias discarded gear (i.e., crab traps and practices and include the efforts of the (Runge et al. 2015, p. 8). Although the monofilament fishing line), are a Service, tour guides, and others and adult survival rate is less than one, in continuing problem for manatees. To include various outreach materials. In the Atlantic, Northwest, and Upper St. reduce this threat, a manatee rescue areas with large aggregations of Johns regions, growth rates have been program disentangles manatees, manatees, the Service and FWC have demonstrably greater than 1 (positive derelict-crab-trap removal programs and designated manatee sanctuaries and no- growth) over the recent past (1983– monofilament recycling programs entry areas where waterborne activities 2007). In the Southwest, the growth rate remove gear from the water, and known to take manatees are prohibited. has been greater than 1, but if the severe extensive education and outreach efforts When commercial manatee viewing red-tide frequency increases, the growth increase awareness and promote sound activities occur on National Wildlife rate could stabilize or begin to decline gear disposal activities. See Factor E for Refuges, businesses are required to (Runge et al. 2015, p. 7). Although the additional information. Because of obtain permits that restrict their new rates are higher, there is no continued and ongoing fishing into the activities to prevent harassment from evidence of a positive trend between the foreseeable future, it is unlikely that this occurring. current analysis and the previous rates threat will be eliminated. Recovery Objective 2. Determine and identified in the 2007 5-year review Task 6. Rescue and rehabilitate monitor the status of manatee (Runge et al. 2015, 19; USFWS 2007, p. distressed manatees. Distressed populations. Tasks identified under this 65).

TABLE 3—UPDATED FLORIDA MANATEE ADULT SURVIVAL RATES [Runge et al. 2015, p. 7]

Region Mean Standard error Period

Atlantic ...... 0.967 0.004 1983–2007 Upper St. John’s ...... 0.975 0.004 1986–2006 Northwest ...... 0.977 0.004 1983–2007 Southwest ...... 0.971 0.004 1996–2007

The analysis forecast the manatee threats: watercraft, water control continued presence of all of the threats, population under different threat structures, marine debris, cold, red tide, including the threat of the potential loss scenarios using the Manatee Core and others (Runge et al. 2015, p. 4). of warm water in the future due to Biological Model. Data from the The model expressed the contribution power plant closures and the loss of Manatee Carcass Salvage Program, of each threat as it affects manatee springs and/or reduction in spring 2001–2009 (FWC FWRI Manatee Carcass persistence, by removing them, one at a flows. Salvage Program 2015, unpub. data) time, and comparing the results to the The threats due to watercraft, water- were used to estimate fractions of ‘‘status quo’’ scenario. The ‘‘status quo’’ control structures, and entanglement mortality due to each of six known represents the population status in the were each ‘‘removed’’ by reducing the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1011

regional mortality of adults and calves refuges and investigate alternatives; (2) facilities in Kings Bay, Florida, and by the estimated fractions of mortality. establishing, acquiring, managing, and adjoining waters. The kiosk panels The threat due to loss of warm water monitoring regional protected-area provide the public with information was removed by assuming that the networks and manatee habitat; (3) about manatees and guidance winter warm-water capacity for ensuring that minimum flows and levels addressing manatee viewing activities. manatees will remain at current levels are established for surface waters to The kiosks are supported by Refuge- for the indefinite future. The threat of protect resources of importance to linked web media that provide red tide was removed by setting the manatees; and (4) assessing the need to additional information about manatee probability of occurrence of a major red revise critical habitat. Important habitats harassment and user activities (Vicente tide event to zero; low background for the Florida manatee include winter 2015, pers. comm.). SeaWorld Orlando, levels of red tide mortality that occurs sources of warm water, forage, drinking through its permitted display of each year were already incorporated water, travel (or migratory) corridors, rehabilitating manatees, reaches out to into the baseline. The various scenarios and sheltered areas for resting and unprecedented numbers of visitors. The were considered as ‘‘all or nothing;’’ calving. The most significant of these display addresses the park’s rescue and either a particular threat was present at include winter warm water and winter rehabilitation program and informs the its current level (and remained at that foraging areas. Florida manatees are at public about threats to manatees and level indefinitely), or it was removed the northern limit of the species’ range what they can do to reduce the number completely. Thus, this comparison and require stable, long-term sources of of manatees affected by human activities provides a measure of the relative effect warm water during cold weather and (SeaWorld Parks and Entertainment, of each threat on the status of the adjacent forage to persist through winter 2015. See: http://seaworld.org/en/ Florida manatee population. periods. Historically, manatees relied on animal-info/animal-infobooks/ Under the status quo scenario, the the warm, temperate waters of south manatee/.) statewide manatee population is Florida and on natural warm-water Recovery Plan for the Puerto Rican expected to increase slowly, nearly springs scattered throughout their range Population of the West Indian doubling over 50 years, and then as buffers to the lethal effects of cold (Antillean manatee) (USFWS 1986, stabilize as the population reaches winter temperatures. Absent warm entire) statewide carrying capacity. Under this water, prolonged exposure to cold water scenario, the model predicts that it is temperatures results in debilitation and/ The 1986 Recovery Plan does not unlikely (<2.5 percent chance) that the or death due to ‘‘cold stress syndrome’’ establish quantitative recovery criteria statewide population will fall below (Bossart et al. 2004, p. 435; Rommel et to describe a sustainable population of 4,000 total individuals over the next 100 al. 2002, p. 4). Several spots in this manatees in Puerto Rico. It does, years, assuming current threats remain recovery effort summary (like in however, direct the Service to determine constant indefinitely (Runge et al. 2015, Objective 1 above) show efforts that we and satisfy the recovery criteria that are p. 13). are taking to protect these sites and based on mortality and abundance Results for each threat scenario (status continue to implement recovery for the trends and a minimum population size quo, plus removal of each of the five West Indian manatee. and ensure that adequate habitat threats, one at a time) were evaluated Recovery Objective 4. Facilitate protection and anti-poaching measures over different timeframes and for manatee recovery through public are implemented (USFWS 1986, different levels of effective population awareness and education. Tasks Executive Summary). The Recovery size (or its surrogate, adult population include: (1) Developing, evaluating, and Plan also specifies that delisting should size) (Runge et al. 2015, p. 5). This updating public education and outreach occur when the population is large analysis was conducted for two programs and materials; (2) coordinating enough to maintain sufficient genetic ‘‘coastal’’ regions of Florida—an East the development of manatee awareness variation to enable it to evolve and Coast (Upper St. Johns River and programs and materials to support respond to natural changes and Atlantic Coast) Region and a Gulf Coast recovery; and (3) developing consistent stochastic or catastrophic events. As (Northwest and Southwest) Region. On manatee viewing and approach previously explained, the Service has the Gulf Coast there is a very low guidelines, utilizing the rescue, made substantial progress implementing probability (0.24 percent) that the rehabilitation, and release program to a number of recovery actions, and some effective population size could fall educate the public. other actions are in progress. below 500 animals under the status quo Manatee conservation relies on In the absence of historic data scenario (Runge et al. 2015, p. 14). The significant education and outreach (previous to the late 1970s) that major threats here are watercraft-related efforts. While the Service and State of identifies a clear goal for population mortality, loss of warm water, and red Florida engage in these efforts, many size, and population parameters such as tide. On the East Coast, the probability diverse stakeholders also participate in adult survival rates, which have the that the effective population size would these activities. Counties, highest potential effect on growth rate fall below 500 animals is 0.68 percent municipalities, boating organizations, (Marsh et al. 2011, p. 255), it is not (Runge et al. 2015, p. 16). Watercraft- manatee advocacy groups, possible to stipulate with precision the related mortality is the major threat to environmental organizations, and others population size and vital rates that this population. The probability that the produce and distribute outreach should characterize a recovered, self- effective population size will fall below materials through a variety of media. An sustaining population of manatees in 500 animals on either coast within 150 active manatee rescue and rehabilitation Puerto Rico. Hunter et al. (2012, p. years under the status quo scenario is program displays rehabilitating 1631) describes low genetic diversity for 0.92 percent (Runge et al. 2015, p. 16). manatees and promotes conservation the Puerto Rico population of Antillean Recovery Objective 3. Protect, identify, through display and educational manatees, and cites other authors that evaluate, and monitor manatee habitats. programs. suggest at least 50 genetically effective Tasks identified under this objective Significant education and outreach breeders (∼500 individuals) are needed include: (1) Protecting, identifying, efforts include Crystal River National to prevent inbreeding depression for evaluating, and monitoring existing Wildlife Refuge’s (NWR) manatee short-term population survival, while natural and industrial warm-water kiosks, located at all water access other researchers suggest population

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1012 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

levels in the upper hundreds to identified important manatee habitat models that are intended for their thousands to maintain evolutionary and will continue to use and pursue evaluation. See previous review of potential. The average estimate of 532 new strategies towards manatee habitat demographic data in Florida Manatee for the manatee population in Puerto protection together with the PRDNER. Recovery Plan Objective 3. Rico, ranging from a minimum of 342 to Planned research in the near future will Downlisting Criteria, Listing/Recovery a maximum of 802 individuals (Pollock focus on manatee health assessment to Criterion A et al. 2013, p. 8), is just within the gain baseline information into potential numbers of a viable population contaminant problems and disease. 1. Identify Minimum Flow Levels for mentioned by Hunter et al. (2012, p. Florida Manatee Recovery Plan Important Springs Used by Wintering 1631). The Service still considers the Manatees Puerto Rico Antillean manatee The Florida Manatee Recovery Plan population as stable, as it did in the (USFWS 2001, entire) identifies criteria Minimum spring discharge rates that previous status assessment (USFWS for downlisting the Florida subspecies consider estimated flow rates necessary 2007, p. 33). Past and current aerial from endangered to threatened and to protect water supply and support surveys have also served to demonstrate criteria for removing the subspecies overwintering manatees have been the island-wide distribution of the from the List of Endangered and identified for some springs used by Puerto Rico population, which also does Threatened Wildlife. Both downlisting manatees. Minimum flows were not seem to have changed. In the 45 and delisting criteria include Listing/ established at Blue Spring, Fanning years that have passed since the species Recovery Factor criteria and Spring, Manatee Spring, the Weeki was listed, it can be said that, according demographic criteria. Criteria can be Wachee River system and Weeki to the population numbers and found in Supplemental Document 1 in Wachee Springs, Homosassa Springs, maintenance of the population’s island- Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0178. and Chassahowitzka Spring. Florida wide distribution, the Puerto Rico A 2004 review of the demographic water management districts have manatee population is well represented criteria noted that these criteria are scheduled, or are in the process of and has shown resilient attributes for largely redundant and that (1) no scheduling, minimum flow long-term persistence in spite of past population can grow at a fixed rate requirements for the remaining springs. and present natural and anthropogenic indefinitely as limiting resources will See Table 4. These regulations will threats. eventually prevent the population from ensure that adequate flows are met to Major tasks for recovery include continuing to grow at that rate and the support manatees. To date, minimum reduction of human-caused mortality, population will ultimately reach flows have been adopted for six springs, habitat protection, identification and stability; (2) the reproductive criterion is and efforts are under way to develop control of any contaminant problems, difficult to estimate and the modeling flows for two additional springs, and research into manatee behavior and results are difficult to interpret; and (3) including the Crystal River springs requirements to direct future demographic recovery criteria should be complex. The status of efforts to management (USFWS 1986, Executive linked to statistically rigorous field data, establish minimum flows for eight Summary). The Service has already as well as to the specific population remaining springs are unknown.

TABLE 4—PROJECTED TIMEFRAMES FOR ESTABLISHING SPRING MINIMUM FLOWS [From water management districts]

Adopted/year proposed Spring for adoption Notes

EAST COAST, FLORIDA Upper St. Johns River Region

Blue Spring (Volusia County) ...... ADOPTED. Silver Glen Springs (Marion County) ...... UNKNOWN ...... To be initiated in 2016. DeLeon Springs (Volusia County) ...... UNKNOWN ...... Initiated in 2014. Salt Springs (Marion County) ...... UNKNOWN. Silver Springs (Marion County) * ...... UNKNOWN.

Atlantic Region

No springs...... N/A.

WEST COAST, FLORIDA Northwest Region

Crystal River System and Kings Bay Springs (Citrus County) ...... 2017. Homosassa River Springs (Citrus County) ...... ADOPTED ...... Revision due 2019. Weeki Wachee/Mud/Jenkins Creek Springs (Hernando County) ...... ADOPTED. Manatee/Fanning Springs (Dixie County) ...... ADOPTED. Wakulla/St. Mark’s Complex (Wakulla County) ...... 2021. Ichetucknee Springs Group (Columbia County) ...... UNKNOWN ...... Initiated in 2013. Chassahowitzka River Springs (Citrus County) ...... ADOPTED ...... Revision due 2019. Rainbow Spring (Marion County) * ...... UNKNOWN.

Southwest Region

Warm Mineral Springs (Sarasota County) ...... UNKNOWN. Spring Bayou/Tarpon Springs (Pasco County) ...... UNKNOWN.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1013

TABLE 4—PROJECTED TIMEFRAMES FOR ESTABLISHING SPRING MINIMUM FLOWS—Continued [From water management districts]

Adopted/year proposed Spring for adoption Notes

Sulphur Springs (Hillsborough County) ...... ADOPTED. * At present, largely inaccessible to manatees.

2. Protect a Network of Warm-Water Downlisting Criteria, Listing/Recovery Downlisting Criteria, Listing/Recovery Refuges as Manatee Sanctuaries, Criterion B Criterion D Refuges, or Safe Havens 1. Address Harassment at Wintering and Specific actions are needed to ensure A network of warm-water sanctuaries/ Other Sites to Achieve Compliance With the adequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. no-entry areas and refuges exists the Marine Mammal Protection Act throughout much of the Florida (MMPA) and the Act and as a 1. Establish Minimum Flows Consistent manatee’s range. Along the Atlantic Conservation Benefit to the Species With Listing/Recovery Criterion A Coast, all four of the primary power To address harassment at wintering See discussion under Listing/ plant discharges have been designated and other sites, the Service and State Recovery Criterion A, above. as manatee protection areas and many have designated manatee sanctuaries lesser warm-water sites, such as the 2. Protect Important Manatee Habitats and no-entry areas to keep people out of Coral Gables Waterway, are protected as Important manatee habitats have been sensitive wintering sites. Federal, State, well. In the St. Johns River region, Blue identified and protected through a and local law enforcement officers Springs is in public ownership, and the variety of means. Manatee habitat is enforce these restrictions and address spring and run are protected. The four protected through land acquisition and any violations that occur outside of the primary west Florida power plants are various Federal and State laws. protected areas. designated as sanctuaries/no-entry Important acquisitions include Blue areas, and significant warm-water Kings Bay, located in Crystal River, Spring in Volusia County and the Main springs in Citrus County are designated Florida, is a world-renowned Spring, Three Sisters Springs, and as sanctuaries. Efforts are ongoing to destination for manatee viewing Homosassa Springs in Citrus County. improve conditions and management of activities. Commercial viewing activities Land managers for these sites manage habitat to benefit manatees. To insure southwest Florida’s Warm Mineral began in the early 1970s, and today’s that these habitats and habitat in public Springs. See Supplemental Document 2 activities generate millions in income to waterways are protected, regulatory in Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0178. the region. Harassment associated with this activity has been addressed through agencies such as the Army Corps of 3. Identify Foraging Sites Associated the purchase of properties of sensitive Engineers, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), State With the Network of Warm-Water Sites manatee habitat, the designation of water management districts, and others for Protection (Addressed Below) manatee sanctuaries and protected review permit applications for activities areas, the creation and operation of the 4. Identify for Protection a Network of that could adversely modify or destroy Migratory Corridors, Feeding Areas, and Crystal River NWR in 1983, extensive habitat and require permittees to avoid Calving and Nursing Areas outreach activities, and enforcement of or minimize impacts. Discharges and regulations prohibiting manatee runoff that could affect habitat are Extensive research, including aerial harassment. The Service adopted the addressed through the Clean Water surveys and field studies of tagged Kings Bay Manatee Refuge rule in 2012 Act’s NPDES permitting program, manatees, has identified many of the to expand existing sanctuary administered by FDEP with oversight foraging sites associated with the boundaries, better address manatee from the EPA. Florida manatee’s warm-water network, harassment occurring off refuge as well as migratory corridors, resting property, and minimize watercraft- 3. Reduce or Remove Unauthorized areas, and calving and nursery areas. In related deaths in Kings Bay. The rule Take many of these areas, manatee protection identifies specific prohibitions that can To address harassment at wintering area measures are in place to protect be enforced through the issuance of and other sites, the Service and State manatees from watercraft collisions. citations (USFWS 2012). Crystal River have designated manatee sanctuaries State and Federal laws afford some NWR recently adopted measures to help and no-entry areas to keep people out of protection against habitat loss in these prevent any harassment in Three Sisters sensitive wintering sites. Federal, State, areas (see Factor D discussion below). Springs and is considering further and local law enforcement officers For example, the Clean Water Act measures as the situation requires. enforce these restrictions and address insures that discharges into waterways any violations that occur outside of the used by manatees are not detrimental to Downlisting Criteria, Listing/Recovery protected areas. Criterion C grass beds and other habitat features Downlisting Criteria, Listing/Recovery used by manatees. At the time the recovery plan was Criterion E developed, there was no data indicating 1. Create and Enforce Manatee Safe that this was a limiting factor, thus no Havens and/or Federal Manatee Refuges reclassification (downlisting) criteria To date, the Service and State have was deemed necessary, therefore, no created more than 50 manatee delisting criteria were established. protection areas, and protection area

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1014 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

measures are enforced by the Service, • Support the adoption of minimum other natural or manmade factors U.S. Coast Guard, FWC, and local law flow regulations for remaining affecting its continued existence. We enforcement officers. important springs used by manatees. must consider these same five factors in • Protect and maintain important reclassifying or delisting a species. 2. Retrofit One Half of All Water Control manatee habitat. The following analysis examines all Structures With Devices To Prevent • Continue to maintain, adopt, and five factors currently affecting or that Manatee Mortality enforce manatee protection areas as are likely to affect the West Indian Water control structures are flood appropriate (continue to fund law manatee. enforcement activities and manatee gates that control water movement and A. The Present or Threatened protection area marker maintenance). navigation locks that allow vessel Destruction, Modification, or • Continue to address instances of passages through dams and Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range impoundments, such as those associated manatee harassment. • with Lake Okeechobee. Manatees travel Continue to review and address West Indian manatees are found in through these structures and are warm- and freshwater discharges and coastal and riverine systems from the occasionally killed when structures are boat facility projects that affect southeastern United States to manatees. northeastern Brazil, including closed or opened. Manatee protection • devices installed on these structures Maintain and install manatee freshwater, brackish, and marine prevent manatee deaths. See discussion protection devices on existing and new habitats. Submerged, emergent, and water-control structures. floating vegetation is their preferred in ‘‘South Florida Multi-Species • Recovery Plan, West Indian Manatee.’’ Continue manatee rescue and food. Important habitat components rehabilitation efforts, including efforts include foraging areas, freshwater To date, all but one water control to minimize the effect of manatee sources, travel corridors, sheltered structure has been retrofitted with entanglements and entrapments. areas, and, in the southeastern United manatee protection devices. Efforts are • Continue to monitor manatee States, sources of warm water for ongoing to complete installation at the population status and trends. wintering. Degradation and loss of remaining site. This action has • Continue manatee education and manatee habitat occurs throughout significantly reduced the impacts of outreach efforts. (UNEP 2010, p. 12). Although the control structure related manatee injury The Florida manatee population, immediacy and the magnitude of this and death; such injuries or deaths are estimated at about 6,350 manatees, is factor varies throughout the species’ now relatively rare. characterized by good adult survival range, available manatee foraging 3. Draft Guidelines To Reduce or rate estimates and positive breeding habitat does not seem to be a limiting Remove Threats of Injury or Mortality rates. The recently updated threats factor in most of the range countries, From Fishery Entanglements and analysis continues to identify losses due including Florida and Puerto Rico (Orth Entrapment in Storm Water Pipes and to watercraft and projected losses of et al. 2006, p. 994; Drew et al. 2012, p. Structures winter warm-water habitat as the 13; Lefebvre et al. 2001, entire; UNEP greatest threats to this subspecies. The 2010, entire). Still, manatee habitat Some measures have been developed designation, marking, and enforcement degradation and loss remains a threat in to reduce or remove threats of injury or of manatee protection areas in areas most countries, and ongoing efforts to mortality from fishery entanglements, where manatees are at risk of watercraft address these threats remains a recovery and steps are being taken to minimize collision, in addition to outreach efforts priority (Castelblanco et al. 2012, p. entrapments in storm water pipes and focused on minimizing this threat, 142). structures. Measures to address fishery addresses this concern. Numerous Some countries have been able to entanglements include monofilament efforts have been made and are ongoing document manatee habitat loss effects, recycling programs and derelict crab to protect and enhance natural warm- while other countries do not have site- trap removals; these two programs water sites used by wintering manatees. specific information available to address primary sources of manatee Addressing the pending loss of warm quantify the severity and/or frequency entanglement. Storm water pipes and water habitat from power plant of this threat on manatees. For example, structures large enough for manatees to discharges remains a priority activity in Mexico, loss of manatees from certain enter are designed to include features needed to achieve recovery. areas has been attributed to, among that prohibit manatee access. Existing other factors, the construction of a dam structures are re-fitted with bars or Summary of Factors Affecting the along a river (Colmenero-Rolo´n and grates to keep manatees out. In the event Species Hoz-Zavala 1986, in UNEP 2010, p. 59), of entanglements or entrapments, the Section 4 of the Act and its while significant manatee habitat manatee rescue program intervenes. implementing regulations (50 CFR part modification has affected the number of There are very few serious injuries or 424) set forth the procedures for listing, animals along the coast of Veracruz deaths each year due to these causes. reclassifying, or removing a species (Serrano et al. 2007, p. 109). Other Guidelines to minimize gear-related from the Federal Lists of Endangered important manatee habitat in Belize entanglements associated with netting and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. such as Turneffe atoll is also affected by activities have been developed. A species may be determined to be an unsustainable fishing, mangrove Similarly, guidance has been developed endangered or threatened species due to clearing, overdevelopment, and to reduce entrapment in storm water one or more of the five factors described dredging (Edwards 2012, p. 72). pipes and structures. See Factor E for in section 4(a)(1) of the Act: (A) The In Honduras, manatee abundance additional information. present or threatened destruction, declined, in part, because of habitat Remaining tasks needed to recover modification, or curtailment of its degradation (Cerrato 1993, in Lefebvre Florida manatees include: habitat or range; (B) overutilization for et al. 2001, p. 440), while in Costa Rica, • Continue to address pending commercial, recreational, scientific, or habitat modification activities such as changes in the manatees’ warm-water educational purposes; (C) disease or logging and agriculture have increased network (develop and implement predation; (D) the inadequacy of sedimentation in rivers and lagoons, strategies). existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) making it difficult for manatees to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1015

access suitable habitat in the Tortuguero exercising to ensure an effective National Oceanic and Atmospheric River system (Smethurst and response to releases of hazardous Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Coast Nietschmann 1999, in Lefebvre et al. substances and oil spills. The Service Guard, and others working to avoid, 2001, p. 442). In Panama, manatee developed a manatee specific response minimize, and mitigate project impacts distribution is apparently fragmented by plan as part of the Puerto Rico and USVI on manatee habitat. The development discontinuous and likely depleted Area Contingency Plan (http:// and implementation of no-wake areas, habitat (Lefebvre et al. 2001, p. 442). ocean.floridamarine.org/ACP/SJACP/ marked navigation channels, boat Although threats continue, there are Documents.html), including a manatee exclusion areas, and standardized positive recovery efforts being made for specific response plan. construction conditions for marinas and the West Indian manatee to protect Since the 2007 5-year review, habitat boat ramps are a few of the efforts against threats posed by habitat loss or effects including threats to seagrass making a positive impact on modification in many range countries habitat have been quantitatively maintaining and protecting important and in the areas of U.S. jurisdiction. In assessed. The PRDNER has been manatee habitat (see Recovery sections). Belize, three protected areas were gathering new relevant information Manatees require sources of fresh created specifically to protect critical documented in its two reports entitled water for daily drinking and do not manatee habitat, and more than 43 Evaluation of Recreational Boating appear to exhibit a preference for percent of the country’s protected areas Anchor Damage on Coral Reefs and natural over anthropogenic freshwater are within the coastal zone (UNEP 2010, Seagrass Beds (PRDNER 2008, entire; resources (Slone et al. 2006, p. 3). p. 24). Mexico has designated PRDNER 2012, entire). The report Sources of freshwater are currently not significant special manatee protection identified the east, south, and west considered limiting in Puerto Rico and areas (UNEP 2010, p. 60), and Trinidad coasts of the island as the areas with include the mouths of streams and protected the Nariva Swamp, the most major impacts on seagrass beds caused rivers, coastal groundwater springs, and important manatee habitat in that by vessel propellers, indiscriminate even industrial wastewater outflows country (UNEP 2010, p. 77). Although anchorage, and poor navigation skills. (e.g., wastewater treatment plants, most countries within the species’ range According to the reports, the areas with hydroelectric power plants). At this outside the United States continue to major impacts of severe magnitude were time, the lack and/or degradation of provide suitable manatee habitat, those on the south-central coast, fresh water is considered a low-level habitat degradation and loss remains a including high manatee use areas in the threat in Puerto Rico. There is no threat requiring ongoing recovery municipalities of Guayama, Salinas and indication that manatees are being efforts. Guayanilla, among others. The PRDNER affected by a lack of freshwater sources, In Puerto Rico and the southeastern (2008, 2012, p. 6) also describes that even during the 2015 severe drought United States, threats to manatee habitat seagrasses are being severely impacted and especially since it is possible for are well documented. The Service’s by both the scarring actions of motor manatees to drink from several sources. 2007 5-year review identified specific boat propellers and the scouring action On the other hand, the potential impact threats including: Loss of seagrass due of jet ski traffic in shallow waters. In of poor water quality on the manatee to marine construction activities (extent addition, small to mid-size boat owners population is unknown. In the same unknown), propeller scarring and prefer to visit near-shore areas, which way as for other habitat threats, the anchoring (magnitude unknown), and have contributed to the decrease in Service will continue to assess and work oil spills; loss of freshwater due to seagrass density and an increment in the with others towards maintenance and damming and competing uses; and fragmentation of this habitat (PRDNER potential enhancement of manatee increasing coastal commercial and 2008, 2012, p. 7). freshwater drinking sources. recreational activities (USFWS 2007, pp. Although anthropogenic activities Within the southeastern United 30–31). Human activities that result in that result in the loss of seagrass such States, the potential loss of warm water the loss of seagrass include dredging, as dredging, anchoring, effects from at power plants and natural, warm- fishing, anchoring, eutrophication, coastal development, propeller scarring, water springs used by wintering siltation, and coastal development boat groundings, and inappropriate manatees is identified as a significant (Duarte 2002, p. 194; Orth et al. 2006, recreational activities occur in Puerto threat (USFWS 2007, entire; Laist and p. 991; PRDNER 2008, entire; PRDNER Rico, seagrass abundance is not Reynolds 2005 a, b, entire, and (USFWS 2012, entire). considered a limiting factor for the 2001, entire). Natural springs are In the Service’s 2007 5-year review, current Antillean manatee population of threatened by potential reductions in overall impacts to manatee habitat had the Island (Drew et al. 2012, p. 13). It flow and water quality (due to not been quantitatively assessed in would be expected that a significant unsustainable water withdrawals Puerto Rico. At that time, the Service decrease of this resource could cause combined with severe droughts) and by did not believe there were significant stress to the manatee population. factors such as siltation, disturbance threats to seagrass habitat and noted that However, no data is available to support caused by recreational activities, and the potential loss of fresh water sources estimates of how much seagrass is others that affect manatee access and may be the most limiting of the manatee needed to sustain a larger manatee use of the springs (Florida Springs Task habitat variables in the future. However, population (Bonde et al. 2004, p. 258). Force 2000, p. 13). Power plants, which the 5-year review identified other Based on the present availability of provide winter refuges for a majority of habitat threats as identified in the seagrass habitat in Puerto Rico, the the Florida manatee population, are not previous paragraph. All of these threats Service believes the severity of the permanent reliable sources of warm still remain, in varying degrees and threat of degraded and or decreased water. In the past, some industrial immediacy. For example, oil spills may seagrass habitat is low. sources of warm water have been always be considered a non-imminent To offset these threats in Puerto Rico, eliminated due to plant obsolescence, threat to the manatee and its habitat. a wide range of conservation efforts are environmental permitting requirements, The Service forms part of the Caribbean ongoing (see Recovery discussion economic pressures, and other factors Regional Response Team, who are above). These include the collective (USFWS 2000, entire). Experience with responsible for preparedness activities efforts of the Service, the U.S. Army disruptions at some sites has shown that including planning, training, and Corps of Engineers, PRDNER, the some manatees can adapt to minor

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1016 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

changes at these sites; during temporary Nature Conservancy 2015). See: http:// make recommendations to avoid and power plant shutdowns, manatees have www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/regions/ minimize impacts to manatee habitat. been observed to use less preferred northamerica/unitedstates/florida/ For West Indian manatees in the nearby sites. In other cases, manatees howwework/saving-manatees-through- continental United States, ensuring the have died when thermal discharges springs-restoration.xml. Also, Marella continued availability of warm-water have been eliminated due to behavioral (2014, p. 1) noted declining demands on refugia sites is a critical need related to persistence or site fidelity (USFWS central Florida aquifers due to increased this factor. 2000, entire). rainfall, declining agricultural demands, We describe above (and in The current network of power plant use of re-use water, and other water supplemental documents) progress with sites will likely endure for another 40 conservation measures, suggesting that local, county, city, and State partners to years or so (Laist et al. 2013, p. 9). We spring flows used by manatees can be maintain minimum flows and restore do not know for sure if the plants will maintained. Chapter 62–42, Florida habitat at sites where we believe it will be replaced or eliminated at the end of Administrative Code, requires that help address this habitat need for the this time, but the likelihood is that the minimum flow levels be set for Florida species. For areas outside U.S. power plants will close (Laist and waterbodies. Set flow levels require that jurisdiction, we have documented Reynolds 2005b, p. 281). We also do not measures be taken should flows drop examples of habitat destruction, know exactly how manatees would below statutorily adopted levels, thus modification, and fragmentation that respond if some sites are lost, since past insuring adequate flows. Minimum have impacted West Indian manatees, modifications or changes to power plant flows have been set for six springs that by damming rivers and destroying sites have resulted in variable response are important to wintering manatees. estuaries. There are also a number of from manatees. If power plant outflows Flow levels must be identified for the positive examples of manatee protection are lost, manatees would rely on Crystal River springs complex and other areas that will continue to provide long- remaining springs in the upper St. Johns important springs. term suitable manatee habitat. The River and northwest Florida regions and In the southeastern United States, a Service, in coordination with its on Warm Mineral Springs in southwest wide range of conservation efforts International Affairs Program, will Florida, passive thermal basins, and identified in the 2007 5-year Review are continue to enhance international warm ambient waters in southernmost continuing (USFWS 2007, pp. 17–18; relations in order to promote, and work Florida. The loss of certain warm-water see also Recovery discussion above). together with other countries towards, sites potentially could cause a change in Service efforts in cooperation and manatee habitat conservation. Atlantic coast abundance and coordination with State and industry B. Overutilization for Commercial, distribution because there are no natural partners are ongoing to minimize any Recreational, Scientific, or Educational springs on the Atlantic coast north of future manatee losses from industrial Purposes the St. John’s River (Laist and Reynolds site reductions or closures by seeking 2005b, p. 287). short-term alternatives and long-term Throughout the range of the species, Florida’s springs have seen drastic sustainable options for supporting manatees are used for a variety of declines in flows and water quality and manatees without the reliance on purposes. Outside the United States, many springs have been altered industrial warm-water sources. Spring manatees have been hunted and are (dammed, silted in, and otherwise studies and on-the-ground restorations poached to supply meat and other obstructed) to the point that they are no seek to restore flows and access to commodities. Recreationally, people longer accessible to manatees (Taylor existing natural springs. Habitat seek out opportunities to view manatees 2006, pp. 5–6; Laist and Reynolds degradation and loss from natural and through commercial ecotour operators 2005b, p. 287; Florida Springs Task human-related causes are being or on their own. There are numerous Force 2001, p. 4). Flow declines are addressed through collective efforts to scientific studies being conducted of largely attributable to demands on improve overall water quality, minimize captive and wild manatees, including aquifers (spring recharge areas) for construction-related impacts, and studies of specimens salvaged from potable water used for drinking, minimize loss of seagrass due to prop carcasses. The public is educated about irrigation, and other uses (Marella 2014, scarring. Efforts to replant areas devoid manatees through a variety of media, pp. 1–2). Declining flows provide less of seagrass are showing success in such as videos and photographs, usable water for wintering manatees. restoring lost manatee foraging habitat. including rehabilitating manatees in Declines in water quality (e.g., increased Summary: Based on the wide extent captivity. nitrates) can promote the growth of and combined threats discussed above, Poaching remains a major threat to the undesirable alga, such as Lyngbya sp., the Service considers activities manatee population outside of the which can cover and smother food identified under Factor A to be a southeastern United States (Marsh et al. plants used by wintering manatees moderate threat to the species. While 2011, p. 265) and has been responsible (Florida Springs Task Force 2001, pp. there have been substantial for past declining numbers throughout 12, 26). Notable springs largely improvements towards addressing much of the Antillean subspecies’ range inaccessible to manatees due to habitat threats since listing, these (Thornback and Jenkins 1982, in damming include springs in the activities still threaten the West Indian Lefebvre et al. 2001, p. 426) (in 17 of 20 Ocklawaha and Withlacoochee river manatee but not to the magnitude that range countries). For example, in systems. Springs that have silted in places the species in danger of Guadeloupe (French Antilles), the local include Manatee and Fanning springs, extinction, especially given the manatee population was hunted to Warm Mineral Spring, Weeki Wachee availability of suitable habitat extinction by the early 1900s (Marsh et Spring, and others (Taylor 2006, pp. throughout the species’ range. If this al. 2011, p. 429). In Honduras, manatees 5, 8). downlisting rule is finalized, we will are still actively poached on an In the case of Manatee, Fanning, and continue to evaluate projects with a opportunistic basis in La Mosquita Weeki Wachee springs, restoration Federal nexus in areas of U.S. (Gonza´lez-Socoloske et al. 2011, p. 129). efforts have removed sand bars and jurisdiction (Puerto Rico and areas of Manatee meat is a highly prized source other obstructions, making these sites the continental United States) to benefit of protein in some local markets in once again accessible to manatees (The habitat for the West Indian manatee and Central America, bringing up to $100

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1017

per pound (Jime´nez 2002, Quintana- the presence of manatees. For example, (including Puerto Rico) and has been Rizzo 1993: in UNEP 2010, p. 12). in 1992, manatees stopped visiting reduced in other countries. However, it Depending on certain social and suitable manatee habitat (Swallow Caye, continues to occur in some range economic factors, current poaching rates Belize) after swim-with-the-manatee countries. We do not believe in northern Nicaragua vary from year to programs were allowed without proper overutilization for research or education year (Self-Sullivan and Mignucci- control (Auil 1998, p. 12). Community purposes is a threat at this time. Giannoni 2012, p. 44). Other manatee groups and a local conservation C. Disease or Predation products include oil, bones, and hide organization helped to declare the area (Lefebvre et al. 2001, p. 426; Marsh et a wildlife sanctuary in 2002. The area is While numerous infectious disease al. 2011, p. 264; Self-Sullivan and currently co-managed between the agents and parasites have been reported Mignucci-Giannoni 2012, pp. 42–45). Belize Forest Department and a local in sirenians, there have been no reports Manatees are particularly susceptible conservation organization (UNEP 2010, of major West Indian manatee mortality to overexploitation because of their low p. 23), and manatees have returned to events caused by disease or parasites reproductive rates (Lefebvre et al. 2001, the area. (Marsh et al. 2011, p. 294). p. 12). Accordingly, poaching poses a In Puerto Rico, harassment of Disease-related deaths are known to serious threat to some manatee manatees by kayak users and swimmers occur in West Indian manatees. Recent populations, especially in those areas has been reported in several popular cases of toxoplasmosis are a concern in where few manatees remain. Currently, beach and coastal recreational areas. In Puerto Rico (Bossart et al. 2012, p. 139). poaching is hypothesized no longer to addition, harassment related to However, until additional studies are occur in a few regions, has been reduced speedboat races in manatee areas has concluded, the severity of this threat is in others, and is still common in others increased. In 2014 alone, the Service unknown. (UNEP 2010, entire; Marsh et al. 2011, reviewed 12 permit applications for Marsh et al. (2011, p. 294) stated that p. 386). For example, although manatee speed boat races in Puerto Rico, several the importance of disease as a threat to poaching in Colombia still occurs in of them in areas with high the manatee is unknown. In spite of specific areas and seasons concentrations of manatees. However, to concerns about the manatee’s ability to (Castelblanco-Martı´nez 2009, p. 239), it date there have been no reported rebound from a population crash should is much less common today than in the injuries or deaths of manatees caused by an epizootic event occur, the impact of past (UNEP 2010, p. 30). It is also no speedboat races. Consultation with the disease on population viability remains longer believed to be a threat in Belize. Service under Section 7 of the Act has unknown (Sulzner et al. 2012, p. 1). Marsh (2011, p. 269) identifies poaching served to implement specific Marsh et al. 2011 (p. 294) speculated as a major threat to manatees in Brazil, conservation measures during marine that the Florida subspecies appears to Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican events such as boat races (see Recovery have a robust immune system that Republic, French Guiana, Guatemala, and Available Conservation Measures safeguards them from significant disease Honduras, Mexico, Suriname, Trinidad sections). The U.S. Coast Guard outbreaks. We suspect this to be also and Tobago, and Venezuela. It is no consistently consults with the Service true for the Antillean subspecies longer a threat in the mainland United on marine event applications and because we have no documented States and Puerto Rico (Marsh 2011, p. readily includes manatee conservation disease outbreaks. 269). Poaching has not been observed in measures when applicable. In addition, Mou Sue et al. (1990) described rare Puerto Rico since 1995. We continue to government agencies and local attacks by sharks on manatees in pursue initiatives with other countries nongovernmental organizations have Panama (p. 239). Reported instances of that encourage a ban on poaching and implemented education and outreach sharks and alligators feeding on hunting of manatees. Foreign strategies to insure that manatee manatees are extremely rare (Marsh et governments have instituted regulations harassment is avoided and minimized. al. 2011, p. 239). to address this threat (see Factor D). Education and research programs Summary: Based on the above Manatee viewing by commercial tour involving manatees are designed to information, disease and predation are operators and private citizens occurs in insure that manatees are neither not considered to be a threat to the West the southeastern United States, Belize, adversely affected nor overutilized. Indian manatee at this time. Mexico, and, based on anecdotal Examples include outreach efforts used D. The Inadequacy of Existing accounts, possibly in Puerto Rico. to minimize manatee harassment in Regulatory Mechanisms People view manatees from the water; Crystal River, Florida, and the Service’s from boats, kayaks, and canoes; and ESA/MMPA marine mammal scientific Regulatory mechanisms are in place from shoreline areas. These actions may research permitting program, which throughout the West Indian manatee’s disrupt manatee behaviors and cause limits the effects that research activities range. These include, but are not limited them to leave important habitats. Large have on manatees. to, specific laws and regulations that numbers of people may crowd manatees Summary: Based on the information prohibit specific and general human and also cause them to leave resting, discussed above, overutilization is activities that impact manatees and their calving or feeding sites. considered a moderate threat to the habitat, and the establishment of long- In the southeastern United States and West Indian manatee, with varying term conservation protection measures other areas where people view frequencies of occurrence from absent to at key locations throughout the range. In manatees, numerous measures are in common throughout the species’ range. the United States, Florida county MPPs place to prevent the take of manatees This threat is not severe enough to ensure consistent and effective due to disturbance of viewing-related indicate the West Indian manatee is in protection throughout the State. harassment. Well-enforced sanctuaries danger of extinction because measures Although regulatory mechanisms keep people out of sensitive manatee and efforts are in place to address should be effective and consistent in all habitats (i.e., warm-water sites), concerns and are proving effective in a countries where manatees are found, the educated tour guides insure that their good portion of the West Indian extent and overall effectiveness of these customers do not harass manatees, and manatee’s range. The situation has regulatory mechanisms varies widely many educational programs prescribe improved, as poaching is not a threat in from country to country. Despite this appropriate measures to take when in the southeastern United States variability, our assessment of the best

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1018 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

available information leads us to believe Protocol Concerning Specially Protected section, and Supplemental Document 2 these efforts are having an overall Areas and Wildlife for the protection in Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0178), positive impact on manatee recovery and development of the marine as well as the Clean Water Act and the and conservation. However, environment of the Wider Caribbean Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. The enforcement and compliance with these Region (SPAW Protocol). The SPAW MMPA was enacted in 1972 in response measures, as well as the need for Protocol, approved in 1990, prohibits to growing concerns among scientists additional efforts in some countries, the possession, taking, killing, and and the public that certain species and continues to be a concern and will commercial trade of any sirenian populations of marine mammals, require additional cooperative efforts species (UNEP 2010, p. 14). It stresses including the West Indian manatee, into the foreseeable future. the importance of establishing regional were in danger of extinction or Outside the United States, West cooperation to protect and, as depletion as a result of human activities. Indian manatees are protected in most appropriate, to restore and improve the The goal of the MMPA is to protect countries by a combination of national state of ecosystems, as well as and conserve marine mammals so that and international treaties and threatened and endangered species and they continue to be significant agreements as listed in Table 4 in UNEP their habitats in the Wider Caribbean functioning elements of the ecosystem (2010, p. 14), in Lefebvre et al. (2001, Region. The manatee is listed in Annex of which they are a part. The MMPA entire), and Table 4.2 in Self-Sullivan II of the SPAW Protocol. Annex II includes a general moratorium on the and Mignucci-Giannoni (2012, p. 41). includes threatened or endangered taking and importation of marine See Supplemental Document 3 in animal species for which, again, any mammals and their products, with some Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0178. form of destructions or disruption exemptions (e.g., Alaska Native Countries within the range of the (capture, possession, killing, trade, etc.) subsistence purposes) and exceptions to Antillean manatee protect the manatee must be banned for their protection and the prohibitions (e.g., for scientific by national legislation (UNEP 2010, recovery. research, enhancement of the species, Table 4). For example, in The Bahamas, Although manatees outside of the and unintentional incidental take manatees are protected under the Wild southeastern United States are legally coincident with conducting lawful Animals Protection Act (Chapter 248, 21 protected by these and other activities). of 1968 E.L.A.O. 1974), which prohibits mechanisms, full implementation of ‘‘Take’’ is defined under the MMPA as the taking or capture of any wild animal these international and local laws is ‘‘harass, hunt, capture, or kill, or (Government of The Bahamas 2004). In lacking, especially given limited attempt to harass, hunt, capture or kill.’’ 2005, the Bahamian Government also funding and understaffed law The term ‘‘harassment’’ means ‘‘any act created the Marine Mammal Protection enforcement agencies (UNEP 2010, p. of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which Act (No. 12), which monitors and 89). has the potential to injure a marine regulates human interactions with Marsh et al. (2011, p. 387) indicated mammal or marine mammal stock in the marine mammals. The Act prohibits that enforcement remains a critical issue wild’’ (Level A harassment), or ‘‘has the taking, selling, or harassing any marine for West Indian manatees. Outside the potential to disturb a marine mammal or mammal (The Government of The United States, mechanisms are needed marine mammal stock in the wild by Bahamas 2006). As another example, the to allow existing West Indian manatee causing disruption of behavioral Manatee Protection Ordinance (1933– protection laws to work as intended. patterns, including but not limited to, 1936) provided the first protective Despite all of the existing regulations for migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, legislation for the species in Belize. In manatees, illegal poaching and feeding, or sheltering’’ (Level B 1981, manatees in Belize were included destruction of habitat continue (Self- harassment). as an endangered species in the Wildlife Sullivan and Mignucci-Giannoni 2012, By definition under the MMPA, any Protection Act No. 4 of the Forest p. 41). Enforcement of conservation marine mammal species or population Department. The Act prohibits the policies varies in different coastal stock that is listed as an endangered or killing, taking, or molesting of manatees, regions; in some regions, poaching is a threatened species under the Act is as well as possession and sale of any common and in areas with a considered ‘‘depleted’’ and managed as part of any manatee (Auil 1998, pp. 29– government presence, enforcement such under the MMPA. Furthermore, a 30). efforts are thought to be significant marine mammal stock that is listed The West Indian manatee is listed in (Self-Sullivan and Mignucci-Giannoni under the Act is considered a ‘‘strategic Appendix I of the Convention on 2012, p. 45). Poaching occurs in areas stock’’ for purposes of commercial International Trade in Endangered where the presence of enforcement fishery considerations. Neither of these Species of Wild Fauna and Flora personnel is rare (UNEP 2010, p. 64). categorizations would change with the (CITES). CITES (see www.cites.org) is an However, in other areas, like Costa Rica, potential downlisting of the West Indian international agreement through which it does not appear to be significant manatee from endangered to threatened. member countries work together to (UNEP 2010, p. 34). Although we cannot Both the Florida and Puerto Rico stocks protect against over-exploitation of enforce Federal regulations in areas will remain depleted and strategic animal and plant species found in outside of U.S. jurisdiction, we continue under the MMPA. international trade. Commercial trade in to cooperate with other countries’ Several additional prohibitions are wild-caught specimens of these governments under section 8 of the Act, provided in section 102 of the MMPA, Appendix 1 species is illegal (permitted as well as CITES and other international including take of any marine mammal only in exceptional licensed agreements. on the high seas; possession of a marine circumstances). The Service reviewed In the southeastern United States, in mammal or any product of that marine the CITES trade database for the West addition to being listed as an mammal taken in violation of the Indian manatee, which currently has endangered species, the West Indian MMPA; transport, purchase, sell, export, information from 1977 to 2013, and manatee is further considered a or offer to purchase, sell, or export any found that trade does not pose a threat depleted stock under the Marine marine mammal or marine mammal to the West Indian manatee at this time. Mammal Protection Act (see greater product that is taken in violation of the The manatee and its habitat are also detail just below; MMPA, 16 U.S.C. MMPA or for any purpose other than protected by the Cartagena Convention 1361 et seq.; Previous Federal Actions public display, scientific research, or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1019

enhancing the survival of a species or agencies related to implementation of Puerto Rico (Law 430) was implemented stock; and import of illegally taken the MMPA. The Commission’s primary in year 2000 and allows for the marine mammals and marine mammal focus and duties are the protection and designation and enforcement of products. Section 102 further prohibits conservation of marine mammals. The watercraft speed zones for the the import of any marine mammal if the Service coordinates and works with the protection of wildlife and coastal mammal was taken from a depleted Commission in order to provide the best resources. However, in Puerto Rico and species or population stock except management practices for marine Florida, despite protections, watercraft under a permit for scientific research or mammals. collisions continue to be a threat to for enhancing the survival or recovery of Within the southeastern United States manatees (see Factor E). The PRDNER a species or stock. (including Puerto Rico), the West Indian has indicated that current speed U.S. citizens who engage in a manatee also receives protection by regulatory buoys are ineffective, in part specified activity other than commercial most State and Territorial agencies, and because regulations do not identify the fishing (which is specifically and will continue to receive protection if perimeter or area that each buoy separately addressed under the MMPA) this downlisting rule is finalized. In regulates (PRDNER 2015, pers. comm.). within a specified geographical region Florida, the manatee is protected by the Thus, emphasis has been given to public may petition the Secretary of the Florida Manatee Sanctuary Act (FMSA), education and signage in coastal areas to Interior to authorize the incidental, but which established Florida as a sanctuary further reduce manatee mortality. not intentional, taking of small numbers for manatees. This designation protects In addition, there are numerous other of marine mammals within that region manatees from injury, disturbance, manatee protection laws and regulations for a period of not more than 5 harassment, and harm in the waters of in place in other States within the consecutive years or, if the potential Florida, and provides for the United States. These are detailed in a take is limited to harassment, an designation and enforcement of manatee table entitled ‘‘Existing International, authorization may be issued under an protection zones. However, Florida Federal, and State Regulatory expedited process for up to 1 year. Prior statutes state that, ‘‘[w]hen the federal Mechanisms,’’ see ‘‘Supplemental to issuance of either authorization, the and state governments remove the Document 2’’ in Docket No. FWS–R4– Secretary must find that the total of manatee from status as an endangered or ES–2015–0178 or http://www.fws.gov/ such taking during the period will have threatened species, the annual northflorida and http://www.fws.gov/ a negligible impact on such species or allocation may be reduced’’ (FMSA caribbean/es. This table shows an stock and will not have an unmitigable Chap. 379.2431(2)(u)(4)(c)), suggesting extensive list of existing regulatory adverse impact on the availability of that adequate funding could be mechanisms in place for the West such species or stock for taking for problematic if downlisting occurs. Indian manatee; many have been subsistence uses, which only applies to Florida laws also provide a regulatory instituted, revised, or improved to better Alaskan Natives as provided under the basis to protect habitat and spring flows protect the manatee. MMPA. (Florida Water Resources Act). Based on population growth and Section 104 provides for the issuance In Georgia, West Indian manatees are stability described earlier in this rule of permits to authorize the taking or listed as endangered under the Georgia (Florida subspecies–6,350 manatees; importation of marine mammals for the Wildlife Act of 1973 (O.C.G.A. §§ 22–3– Puerto Rico–532 manatees), the above- purpose of scientific research, public 130) which prohibits the capture, described mechanisms are adequate to display (unless the species or stock is killing, or selling of protected species continue to allow growth in the West considered depleted), or enhancement and protects the habitat of these species Indian manatee population in the of the species. In addition, photography on public lands. In 1999, the United States and expand protection for permits may be issued for educational Commonwealth of Puerto Rico approved their habitat as needed. If this or commercial purposes as long as the the Law No. 241, known as the New downlisting rule is finalized, the West subject marine mammals are limited to Wildlife Law of Puerto Rico (Nueva Ley Indian manatee in the United States will harassment that only has the potential de Vida Silvestre de Puerto Rico). The remain protected as a threatened species to disturb them. purpose of this law is to protect, under the ESA, and as a depleted Section 118 of the MMPA addresses conserve, and enhance both native and species under the MMPA, and these the taking of marine mammals migratory wildlife species, declare to be existing regulatory mechanisms will incidental to commercial fishing the property of Puerto Rico all wildlife remain in effect. As long as funding operations. This section, which was species within its jurisdiction, and remains available, recovery actions added to the MMPA in 1994, establishes regulate permits, hunting activities, and would continue to be implemented, a framework that authorizes the exotic species, among other actions. In regulations enforced, and additional incidental take of marine mammals 2004, the PRDNER approved Regulation measures adopted as needs arise. State during commercial fishing activities. In 6766 to regulate the management of and Federal agencies would continue to addition, this section outlines threatened and endangered species in coordinate on the implementation of mechanisms to monitor and reduce the Puerto Rico (Reglamento 6766— manatee conservation measures. level of incidental take. Information Reglamento para Regir el Manejo de las Summary: Based on the above, the from the carcass salvage programs Especies Vulnerables y en Peligro de inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms is indicate that interactions between Extincio´ n en el Estado Libre Asociado considered to be a moderate threat to manatees and commercial fisheries may de Puerto Rico). In particular, the New the West Indian manatee. Although occur within waters of the United States Wildlife Law of Puerto Rico of 1999 and numerous regulatory mechanisms to but is not a concern at this time. its regulations provide for severe fines protect manatees exist, challenges in the Title II of the MMPA established the for any activities that affect Puerto enforcement of these regulatory Marine Mammal Commission Rico’s endangered species, including mechanisms have been identified. This (Commission), an independent agency the Antillean manatee. These laws threat is not severe enough to indicate of the U.S. Government, to review and similarly prohibit the capture, killing, the West Indian manatee is in danger of make recommendations on the marine take, or selling of protected species. extinction. If this downlisting rule is mammal policies, programs, and actions Also, the Navigation and Aquatic finalized, all regulatory mechanisms being carried out by Federal regulatory Safety Law for the Commonwealth of will remain in place and will continue

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1020 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

to provide legal protections to the of death may be somewhat watercraft-related mortality makes the species throughout its range. underestimated for three reasons. First, largest contribution to the risk of for the majority of the manatee mortality extinction; full removal of this single E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors cases in Puerto Rico, the cause of death threat would reduce the risk of Affecting Its Continued Existence is deemed undetermined (38 percent, 92 extinction to near negligible levels. Other factors affecting West Indian out of 242), mostly because carcasses are Mortality data from FWCs Manatee manatees include human-related too decomposed when found and a Carcass Salvage Program and other interactions, such as watercraft cause of death cannot be determined, so sources describe numbers of watercraft- collisions, harassment, fishing gear it may be that many of these deaths are related deaths, general areas where entanglement, exposure to also watercraft-related. Second, deaths occur, trauma, and other contaminants, and naturally occurring watercraft-related effects that may cause parameters (O’Shea et al. 1985, entire; phenomena, such as harmful algal a mother and calf separation will go Ackerman et al. 1995, entire; Wright et blooms, exposure to the cold, loss of undetected, as it would be challenging al. 1995, entire; Deutsch et al. 2002, genetic diversity, climate change, and to find evidence of such an event. The entire; Lightsey et al. 2006, entire; tropical storms and hurricanes. In 2007, number of dependent calf deaths in Rommel et al. 2007, entire). the Service considered this factor the Puerto Rico for the past 34 years is 55 Over the past 5 years, more than 80 most significant due to watercraft calves (22.6 percent, 55 out of 242) or manatees have died from watercraft- collisions (USFWS 2007, pp. 32–33). an average of 1.6 manatee calves per related incidents each year. The highest Watercraft year. The majority of the manatees year on record was 2009, when 97 rescued for rehabilitation in Puerto Rico manatees were killed in collisions with Watercraft collisions that kill or injure are calves. Lastly, it is assumed that not boats. The Manatee Individual Photo- manatees are a threat in some range all carcasses are recovered, so that there identification System (1978 to present) countries outside the United States. may be additional undocumented identifies more than 3,000 Florida However, current information on the deaths caused by watercraft. manatees by scar patterns mostly caused effects of boat traffic on manatees does On the other hand, carcass salvage by boats, and most catalogued manatees not exist for most range countries numbers for Puerto Rico indicate that have more than one scar pattern, outside the United States. In some the number of watercraft-related deaths indicative of multiple boat strikes. A countries such as Belize, watercraft is low, and the population is believed to cursory review of boat strike frequency collisions were the predominant cause remain stable (see Population Size and suggested that some manatees are struck of death from 1996 to 2003 with an Trend sections) in spite of these and injured by boats twice a year or increasing trend (Auil and Valentine numbers. As boat use in Puerto Rico has more (O’Shea et al. 2001, pp. 33–35). 2004, in UNEP 2010, p. 22). As the increased in number and distribution The primary conservation action in number of registered boats has increased (PRDNER 2012, p. 3), and with no State place to reduce the risk of manatee significantly since the mid-1990s, or Federal MPAs yet established, one injury and death from watercraft manatees are most vulnerable to may expect an increase in watercraft- collisions is a limitation on watercraft collisions in the waters near Belize City related conflicts. Still, manatee carcass speed. The rationale is that a slower (Auil 1998, in UNEP 2010, p. 22). totals for Puerto Rico have exceeded 10 speed allows both manatees and boaters Motorboats are becoming more or more only six times over 34 years and additional response time to avoid a abundant and popular in Guatemala, average approximately 7 per year collision. Furthermore, if an impact and watercraft traffic and speed are not (Mignucci et al. 2000, p. 192; Mignucci- occurs, the degree of trauma will regulated even within protected areas Giannoni 2006, p. 2; PRDNER Manatee generally be less if the colliding boat is (UNEP 2010, pp. 45–46). An aquatic Stranding Reports 2015, unpubl. data). operating at slower speed (Laist and transportation system with high- In addition, calf numbers documented Shaw 2006, p. 478; Calleson and powered engines has increased boat in the most recent aerial surveys Frohlich 2007, p. 295). Despite transit in one of the most important indicate the population is reproducing continued losses due to watercraft manatee habitats areas in Panama well, with a record high of 23 calves collisions, the southeastern U.S. (UNEP 2010, p. 66). Increased boating counted in December 2013 (see manatee population is expected to activities in Brazil have resulted in both Population size section). As the species increase slowly under current lethal collisions with manatees and continues to move towards recovery, the conditions (Runge et al. 2015, p. 11). disruption of manatee behavior (Self- Service will continue to address and Federal, State, and local speed zones Sullivan and Mignucci-Giannoni 2012, make improvements towards avoiding are established in 26 Florida counties. p. 43). and further reducing this threat. In Brevard and Lee Counties, where Within the United States, watercraft- A manatee carcass salvage program, watercraft-related mortality is among related deaths have been identified as started in 1974, collected and examined the highest reported, speed zone the most significant anthropogenic manatee carcasses to determine cause of regulations were substantially revised threat to manatees in both Florida and death. This program identified and areas posted to improve manatee Puerto Rico. In Puerto Rico, 34 years of watercraft collisions with manatees as a protection in the early 2000s. Since manatee mortality data from 1980 to primary cause of human-related 2004, the FWC has approved new 2014 indicate that a total of 37 manatees manatee mortality. The recent status manatee protection rules for three have died due to watercraft (Mignucci et review and threats analysis shows that counties in Tampa Bay and reviewed al. 2000, p. 192; Mignucci-Giannoni watercraft-related mortality remains the and updated speed zones in Sarasota, 2006, p. 2; PRDNER 2015, unpubl. data). single largest threat in Florida to the Broward, Charlotte, Lee, and Duval This number represents approximately West Indian manatee (O’Shea et al. Counties. In October 2005, the 15 percent of the total known mortality 1985, entire; Ackerman et al. 1995, Hillsborough County Commission cases during that time (37 out of 242) or entire; Wright et al. 1995, entire; adopted mandatory manatee protection an average of 1.1 manatees per year. Deutsch et al. 2002, entire; Lightsey et slow-speed zones in the Cockroach Bay Although 37 deaths may be considered al. 2006, entire; Rommel et al. 2007, Aquatic Preserve that previously had a low number, it can be argued that the entire, Runge et al. 2015, p. 16;). Runge been voluntary. In 2012, speed zones percentage of watercraft-related causes et al. (2015, p. 20) observed that were established in the Intracoastal

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1021

Waterway in Flagler County. In 2005, in UNEP 2010, p. 34). entanglements in and ingestion of addition, of the 13 counties identified in Castelblanco-Martı´nez et al. (2009, in fishing gear) presented a weak threat to 1989 as in need of State-approved Marsh et al. 2011, p. 278) suggest that the West Indian manatee in Florida. In MPPs, all have approved plans. Two incidental drowning in fishing nets the future, we would like to seek additional counties, Clay and Levy, causes almost half of the mortality and opportunities to share information with proactively developed their own MPPs. wounding of manatees in the Orinoco countries like Cuba, Belize, and Mexico Implementation of these protective River in Colombia. A variety of fishing and continue to make entanglement measures stabilizes and may even gear was reported to cause manatee from discarded or current gear a low reduce the mortality rate from watercraft entanglements, and at least 43 calves threat rangewide. collisions. were entangled in gear in northeast The Service developed programmatic Brazil between 1981 and 2002 (UNEP Water Control Structures consultation procedures and permit 2010, p. 26). Currently, on the northeast Advances in water control structure conditions for new and expanding coast of Brazil, the main cause of devices that prevent manatees from watercraft facilities (e.g., docks, boat manatee deaths is due to the constant being crushed or impinged have been ramps, and marinas) as well as for presence of gill and drag nets (Lima et largely successful. In Florida, most dredging and other in-water activities al. 2011, p. 107). Similar to the lack of structures have been fitted with devices. through an effect determination key knowledge regarding the effects of boat These devices include acoustic arrays, with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers traffic on manatees, most range piezoelectric strips, grates, and bars that and State of Florida (the ‘‘Manatee countries outside of the United States reverse closing structures and/or Key’’) (recently revised in 2013). The do not have current information on the prevent manatees from accessing gates Manatee Key ensures that watercraft effects of fishing gear and entanglements and recesses. Runge et al. (2015, p. 16) facility locations are consistent with on manatees. determined that water control structures MPP boat facility siting criteria and are In Puerto Rico, fisheries-related presented a weak threat to the West built consistent with MPP construction entanglements and debris ingestion may Indian manatee in Florida and noted conditions. The Service concluded that cause take and reduce fitness of that death or injury due to water control these procedures constitute appropriate manatees. In July 2009, there was a structures had become a rare event and responsible steps to avoid and documented case of entanglement (2015, p. 19). minimize adverse effects to the species (beach seine net) and successful release and contribute to recovery of the of an adult manatee and in 2014, three Contaminants species. adult manatees were entangled in large Direct and indirect exposure to fishing nets; one of them was an adult Fishing Gear contaminants and/or chemical female that died (PRDNER 2015, pollutants in benthic habitats is another Fishing gear (nets, crab traps, etc.) is unpubl. data). A few manatees have also factor that may have adverse effects on known to entangle and injure and kill been found that were severely entangled manatees (Bonde et al. 2004, p. 258). manatees; ingestion of fishing gear and in monofilament line. These events are other debris (monofilament and considered a low threat because Contaminants are known to have associated tackle, plastic banana bags, stranding records indicate they rarely affected one manatee in Puerto Rico etc.) also kills manatees. In countries cause manatee deaths in Puerto Rico; a (diesel spill), and residues from sugar outside the United States, the incidental total of four (4) in 34 years. processing in Cuba are thought to have capture of animals in fishing gear is still Fishing gear, including both gear in killed manatees there. Manatees may a threat, and the captured manatees are use and discarded gear (i.e., crab traps have abandoned Cuba’s largest bay area occasionally butchered and used for and monofilament fishing line), is a because of contamination (UNEP 1995 food and various products. In Cuba, continuing and increasing problem for in UNEP 2010, p. 37). There are many researchers have recently documented a manatees in the southeastern United activities that introduce contaminants decrease in the number of manatee States. It is unknown if the increasing and pollutants into the manatees’ deaths within a marine protected area, number of rescues is a reflection of environment—gold mining, agriculture, hypothesized to be due to a ban on the increasing awareness and reporting of oil and gas production, and others. use of trawl net fishing in that area (Sea entangled manatees, increases in fishing Despite the presence of contaminants in to Shore Alliance 2014, entire). One of effort, increases in the number of manatee tissues, the effect that these the principal causes of perceived manatees, or other factors. Between have on manatees is poorly understood increases in manatee decline along the 2010 and 2014, researchers attribute (Marsh et al. 2011, pp. 302–305) northern and western coasts of the 18.2 percent of all rescues to Algal Blooms Yucatan peninsula includes increased entanglement. use of fishing nets that entangle Rescue activities that disentangle In Florida, algal blooms pose a manatees (Morales-Vela et al. 2003, in manatees have almost eliminated localized threat to West Indian UNEP 2010, p. 59; Serrano et al. 2007, mortalities and injuries associated with manatees. Specifically, in southwest p. 111). In Honduras, the major cause of fishing gear (USFWS Captive Manatee Florida, extensive red tide blooms killed known manatee mortality in the period Database, 2015, unpubl. data). Derelict 276 manatees in 2013 (see Table 2). 1970–2007 was due to entanglement in crab trap removal and monofilament Runge et al. (2015, p. 20) noted that on fishnets (Gonza´lez-Socoloske et al. recycling programs aid in efforts to Florida’s Gulf coast, red tide effects are 2011, p. 123), while Nicaragua reports reduce the number of entanglements by stronger than the effect of watercraft- between 41 and 49 manatees being removing gear from the water. Extensive related mortality due, in part, to ‘‘the killed by accidental entanglements in education and outreach efforts increase increased estimate of adult survival in fishing nets from 1999 to 2000 (Jime´nez awareness and promote sound gear the Southwest and the anticipated 2002, in UNEP 2010, p. 63). Although disposal activities. As a result, deaths continued increase in the frequency of gillnets are illegal in Costa Rica, gillnet and serious injuries associated with severe red-tide mortality.’’ Runge et al.’s entanglements still occur there. fishing gear are now extremely rare. (2015, p. 1) analysis did not address the However, they are uncommon in certain Runge et al. (2015, p. 16) determined effect of the 2013 red tide event in its protected manatee use areas (Jime´nez that marine debris (including assessment.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1022 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

In 2011, algal blooms in Florida’s (Hunter et al. 2012, p. 1631). Manatee ranges, seasonal activities, and Indian River Lagoon clouded the water populations in other portions of the migration patterns (IPCC 2014, p. 4). column and killed over 50 percent of range may also be affected by isolation, Although SLR is due in part to natural the seagrass beds in the region (St. Johns small population size, and low genetic variability in the climate system, River Water Management District, 2015). diversity. Low genetic diversity in the scientists attribute the majority of the The loss of seagrass beds likely caused southeastern United States has been observed increase in recent decades to a dietary change that may have played identified as a potential concern (Bonde human activities that contribute to a role in the loss of more than a hundred et al. 2012, p. 15). However, there is ocean thermal expansion related to manatees in the area. While algal limited detailed genetic information to ocean warming, and melting of ice blooms occur in other parts of the confirm the significance of this as a (Marcos and Amores 2014, pp. 2504– species’ range, there have not been any threat to the West Indian manatee as a 2505). significant die-offs attributable to this whole. Trend data show increases in sea level cause in this portion of the species’ have been occurring throughout the Tropical Storms range. southeastern Atlantic and Gulf coasts, Tropical storms and hurricanes may and, according to Mitchum (2011, p. 9), Cold Weather also pose a threat to manatees. Live the overall magnitude in the region has The Florida manatee subspecies is at manatee strandings and reduced adult been slightly higher than the global the northern limit of the species’ range. manatee survival rates can be attributed, average. Measurements summarized for As a subtropical species, manatees have in part, to hurricanes and storms stations at various locations in Florida little tolerance for cold and must move (Langtimm and Beck 2003, entire, indicate SLR there has totaled to warm water during the winter as a Langtimm et al. 2006, entire). Langtimm approximately 200 millimeters (mm) (8 refuge from the cold. During extremely and Beck (2003) suggest that both direct inches (in.)) over the past 100 years, cold weather, hundreds of animals died and indirect mortality (from strandings, with an average of about 3.0 mm per in 2010 and 2011 due to cold stress. debris-related injuries, animals being year (0.12 in. per year) since the early Notably, animals that relied on Florida’s swept offshore, etc.) and/or emigration 1990s (Ruppert 2014, p. 2). The natural warm-water springs fared the associated with hurricanes and storms relatively few tidal gauges in Florida, best, while animals in east-central and may cause a decrease in adult survival Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and south Florida, where springs are absent, rates. This result has been observed in southern North Carolina also show fared the worst (Barlas et al. 2011, p. Florida and in Mexico: Hurricanes and increases, the largest being in South 31). Manatees using seagrass beds along storms are thought to affect the Carolina, Alabama, and parts of Florida east-central Florida’s Atlantic coast presence/absence of manatees in storm- (NOAA Web site http:// cannot easily access warm-water springs struck areas. In Puerto Rico, tropical tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/ of the St. Johns River during periods of storms and hurricanes intensify heavy sltrends.shtml, accessed August 28, cold temperatures, and, in the absence surf, and at least one manatee calf death 2015). of access to warm water associated with was attributed to Hurricane Hortense in Continued global SLR is considered power plants, these manatees are at risk. 1996 (USFWS 2007, p. 33). Other factors virtually certain to occur throughout Since these events, the number of can either exacerbate or ameliorate risk this century and beyond (Stocker, 2013, deaths due to cold has returned to an to the manatee population, such as p. 100; Levermann et al. 2013, entire). average of roughly 30 per year (FWC density of manatees within the strike Depending on the methods and FWRI 2015, unpubl. data). While cold area, the number of storms within a assumptions used, however, the range of stress remains a threat to Florida season, protective features of the possible scenarios of global average SLR manatees, Antillean manatees, found coastline such as barrier islands, or for the end of this century is relatively outside of the southeastern United occurrence of other mortality factors large, from a low of 0.2 meters (m) States, do not suffer from cold stress (Langtimm et al. 2006, p. 1026). (approximately 8 in.) to a high of 2 m because they inhabit warm subtropical However, there is limited information to (approximately 78 in., i.e., 6.6 feet (ft)) waters. Progress is being made in confirm the significance of tropical (Parris et al. 2012, pp. 2, 10–11). protecting warm-water sites; we storms as a threat. Although this relatively wide range continue to work with our partners to reflects considerable uncertainty about Climate Change/Sea-Level Rise protect these sources to minimize cold- the exact magnitude of change, it is related manatee deaths. The Intergovernmental Panel on notable that increases are expected in all Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that cases, and at rates that will exceed the Genetics warming of the climate system is SLR observed since the 1970s (IPCC Isolated locations, small population unequivocal (IPCC 2014, p. 3). The more 2013, pp. 25–26). Given the large sizes, and low genetic diversity increase extreme impacts from recent climate number and variety of climate change the susceptibility of West Indian change include heat waves, droughts, and SLR models, forecasts of the rate manatee to rapid decline and local accelerated snow and ice melt including and extent of SLR vary significantly. extinction (Hunter et al. 2012, p. 1631). permafrost warming and thawing, Because of the variation in projections Low genetic diversity has been floods, cyclones, wildfires, and and uncertainties associated with identified as a threat to manatee widespread changes in precipitation manatee response to SLR, it will be populations in Puerto Rico and Belize amounts (IPCC 2014, pp. 4, 6). Due to important to continue monitoring (Hunter et al. 2010, entire; Hunter et al. projected sea level rise (SLR) associated manatee habitat use throughout the 2012, entire). In addition, the manatee with climate change, coastal systems species’ range. population in Puerto Rico is essentially and low-lying areas will increasingly Other possible effects of climate closed to immigration from outside experience adverse impacts such as change include increases in the sources. Natural geographical features submergence, coastal flooding, and frequency of harmful algal blooms, and manatee behavior limits gene flow coastal erosion (IPCC 2014, p. 17). In increases in the frequency and intensity from other neighboring manatee response to ongoing climate change, of storms, losses of warm-water refugia populations (i.e., Dominican Republic), many terrestrial, freshwater, and marine and possible decreases in the number of and genetic mixing is not expected species have shifted their geographic watercraft collisions. Warmer seas may

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1023

increase the frequency, duration, and habitat in the future (Hoegh-Guldberg manatee population demographics. In magnitude of harmful algal blooms and and Bruno 2010 in Marsh et al. 2011, p. the southeastern United States, where cause blooms to start earlier and last 313). the largest population of manatees longer. Increases in salinity could create Summary: Threats (watercraft, fishing exists, the manatee population has more favorable conditions for other gear, water control structures, likely grown, based on updated adult species; conversely, increases in storm contaminants; harmful algal blooms, survival rate estimates and estimated frequency and extreme rainfall could cold weather, loss of genetic diversity, growth rates (Runge et al. 2015, p. 19). offset the effects of salinity on algal tropical storms, and climate change) Accordingly, we believe that the West growth (Edwards et al. 2012, p. 3). will continue to have an effect on West Indian manatee should be reclassified as Climate change models predict that Indian manatees. The threats associated threatened. Each of these successes is the intensity of hurricanes will increase with increasing numbers of watercraft discussed in more detail below. with increasing global mean will require continued maintenance and Human causes of mortality and injury temperature (Edwards et al. 2012, p. 4). enforcement of manatee protection are being addressed throughout the Langtimm et al. (2006, entire) found that areas, and the adoption of additional species’ range. Predominant causes mean adult survival dropped areas both inside and outside the United include poaching, entanglement in significantly in years after intense States will continue as needs become fishing gear, and collisions with hurricanes and winter storms. These apparent. Increasing fishing efforts and watercraft. Poaching has been decreases were thought to be due to the consequent increase of fishing gear eliminated in the southeastern United tidal stranding, animals being swept out in water will require continued efforts States and in Puerto Rico. Efforts to to sea, loss of forage, or emigration of to maintain gear in a manatee-safe address poaching outside the United animals out of affected areas (Langtimm fashion, additional and continued gear States vary in effectiveness, with et al. 2006, p. 1026). clean-ups, and maintenance of the successful efforts noted in areas with a For manatees in the southeastern manatee rescue program to rescue significant enforcement presence. United States, SLR could mean the loss entangled manatees. While most water Entanglement in fishing gear continues of most of the major industrial warm- control structures in the United States throughout the species’ range. In the water sites and result in changes to have been fitted to prevent southeastern United States, entangled natural warm-water sites. In the event of impingements and crushings, new manatees are rescued and very few a projected SLR of 1 to 2 meters (3.3 to structures in the United States must be deaths and serious injuries occur. In 6.6 feet) in 88 years (Rahmstorf 2010 fitted to minimize impacts to manatees. Puerto Rico, there have been few and Parris et al. 2012 in Edwards et al. Existing and new structures outside the entanglements since 1986, when 2012, p. 5), SLR will inundate these United States should be fitted, as well. entanglements were first reported as a sites and warm-water capacity could be For manatees in Florida, harmful algal serious threat. Entanglements outside lost. While power plants may not be in blooms and cold weather will continue the United States are known to occur; operation when SLR inundates their to be major threats to this subspecies. however, the magnitude and severity of sites, the increased intensity and Tropical storms and hurricanes will this threat is unknown. frequency of storms could interrupt continue to have an effect on the West Watercraft collisions are the plant operations and warm-water Indian manatee in most parts of its predominant anthropogenic cause of production. If storms result in the loss range. Projections of climate change and death for manatees in the United States. of a power plant, manatees that winter sea level rise impacts on West Indian The Service, other Federal agencies, and at that site could die in the event that manatees and their habitat are State and Commonwealth wildlife they did not move to an alternate uncertain. management agencies continue to be location (Edwards et al. 2012, p. 5). Both Castelblanco et al. (2012, entire) engaged in significant efforts to address Increased intrusion of saltwater from and Runge et al. (2015, entire) project and further reduce this threat. In SLR or storm surge coupled with increasing populations under these Florida, a network of marked, enforced, reduced spring flows could reduce or threats as they currently exist. manatee protection areas ensure that eliminate the viability of natural springs Accordingly, we consider threats boat operators slow down to help avoid used by wintering manatees (Edwards et identified in Factor E to be current manatees. In Puerto Rico, manatee al. 2012, p. 5). threats to the species. There is a high protection areas have not been Climate-change-induced loss of level of uncertainty regarding the designated, but a number of regulated fishing habitat and boating overall effects of climate change on the manatee speed buoys are in place to infrastructure (docks, etc.), increases in species and its habitat. Thus, we better protect manatees. Watercraft storm frequency, and pollutants and consider the threats identified under collisions are known to kill manatees changes in economics and human this factor to be moderate. outside the United States; however, demographics could decrease the per available information on the magnitude capita number of boats operating in Conclusion of this threat in other counties is manatee habitat. If these changes were By definition, an endangered species limited. to occur, decreases in the numbers of is a ‘‘species which is in danger of Habitat fragmentation and loss are boats operating in manatee habitat could extinction throughout all or a significant thought to be the greatest single threat reduce numbers of manatee–watercraft portion of its range’’ and a threatened to manatees outside the United States. collisions (Edwards et al. 2012, p. 7). species is a ‘‘species which is likely to Development activities in coastal and Many complex factors with become an endangered species within riverine areas destroy aquatic vegetation potentially negative consequences are the foreseeable future throughout all or and block access to upriver reaches and likely to operate on the world’s marine a significant portion of its range.’’ We freshwater. Within the United States, ecosystems as global climate change believe that the West Indian manatee is Federal, State, and Commonwealth progresses. Conversely, climate change no longer in danger of extinction agencies limit habitat losses and those could potentially have a beneficial throughout all of its range due to activities that block access through effect, as well. Therefore, there is significant recovery efforts made regulatory processes. For example, the uncertainty regarding how climate throughout its range to address threats State of Florida and the Service rely on change may affect the manatee and its as well as a better understanding of county MPPs to address impacts to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1024 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

manatee habitat from installation of, for definition of endangered and should be existence of the West Indian manatee. example, a boat dock or marina. In reclassified as threatened. Federal action agencies that may be Florida, the other potential significant required to consult with us include but Significant Portion of the Range threat facing manatees is the loss of are not limited to the U.S. Army Corps winter warm-water habitat. Federal and Because we have concluded that the of Engineers, the U.S. Coast Guard, the State agencies are working with the West Indian manatee is a threatened Environmental Protection Agency, and power industry and others to ensure a species throughout all of its range, no others, due to involvement in actions or future warm-water network to sustain portion of its range can be ‘‘significant’’ projects such as permitting boat access manatees into the future. While many for purposes of the definitions of facilities (marinas, boat ramps, etc.), strides have been made in this area, ‘‘endangered species’’ and ‘‘threatened dredge and fill projects, high-speed work continues to be done to fully species.’’ See the Service’s Significant marine events, warm-water discharges, address and reduce this threat, as Portion of its Range (SPR) Policy (79 FR and many other activities. described above in our review of the 37578, July 1, 2014). Section 8(a) of the Act authorizes the Florida manatee recovery plans. In Available Conservation Measures provision of limited financial assistance addition, we must continue to address for the development and management of pending changes in the manatees’ Conservation measures provided to programs that the Secretary of the warm-water network (develop and species listed as endangered or Interior determines to be necessary or implement strategies) and support the threatened under the Act include useful for the conservation of adoption of minimum flow regulations recognition, recovery actions, endangered or threatened species in for remaining important springs used by requirements for Federal protection, and foreign countries. Sections 8(b) and 8(c) manatees. prohibitions against certain practices. of the Act authorize the Secretary to Available population estimates Recognition through listing increases encourage conservation programs for suggest that there may be as many as public awareness of threats to the West foreign listed species, and to provide 13,142 manatees throughout the species’ Indian manatee, and promotes assistance for such programs, in the range (see Table 1). Estimates from conservation actions by Federal, State, form of personnel and the training of countries outside the United States and local governments in the United personnel. (6,250) are largely conjectural and are States, foreign governments, private The Secretary has the discretion to based on the opinions of local experts. organizations and groups, and prohibit by regulation with respect to Within the United States, Martin et al. individuals. The Act provides for any threatened species any act (2015, p. 44) and Pollock et al. (2013, p. possible land acquisition and prohibited under section 9(a)(1) of the 8) describe population estimates of cooperation with the State, and for Act. Exercising this discretion, the 6,350 manatees and 532 manatees in the recovery planning and implementation. Service developed general prohibitions southeastern United States and Puerto The protection required of Federal (50 CFR 17.31) and exceptions to those Rico, respectively. agencies and the prohibitions against prohibitions (50 CFR 17.32) under the Recent demographic analyses taking and harm are discussed, in part, Act that apply to most threatened (through 2009) suggest a stable or below. species. Our regulations at 50 CFR 17.31 increasing population of Florida A number of manatees occur in near- provide that all the prohibitions for manatees (Runge et al. 2015, entire) and shore waters off Federal conservation endangered wildlife under 50 CFR demonstrate that Florida manatees are lands and are consequently afforded 17.21, with the exception of 50 CFR not likely to become extinct in the some protection from development and 17.21(c)(5), will generally also be foreseeable future. Castelblanco- large-scale habitat disturbance. West applied to threatened wildlife. These Martı´nez et al.’s (2012, pp. 129–143) Indian manatees also occur in or prohibitions make it illegal for any PVA model for the West Indian manatee offshore of a variety of State-owned person subject to the jurisdiction of the describes a metapopulation with properties, and existing State and United States to ‘‘take’’ (including to positive growth. Runge et al. (2015, p. Federal regulations provide protection harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, 13) predict that it is unlikely (<2.5 on these sites. A significant number of wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or to percent chance) that the Florida manatees occur along shores or rivers of attempt any of these) within the United population of manatees will fall below private lands. Through conservation States or upon the high seas, import or 4,000 total individuals over the next 100 partnerships, many of these use areas export, deliver, receive, carry, transport, years, assuming current threats remain are protected through the owners’ or ship in interstate or foreign constant indefinitely. stewardship. In many cases, these commerce in the course of a commercial There are numerous ongoing efforts to partnerships have been developed activity, or to sell or offer for sale in protect, conserve, and better understand through conservation easements, interstate or foreign commerce, any West Indian manatees and their habitat wetland restoration projects, and other endangered (and hence, threatened) throughout their range, as described in conservation means. wildlife species. It also is illegal to this proposed rule. The contribution of Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or these recovery efforts to the current and as implemented by regulations in ship any such wildlife that has been status of the species is significant. Some title 50 of the Code of Federal taken in violation of the Act. Certain threats remain and will likely continue Regulations (CFR) at part 402, requires exceptions apply to agents of the into the foreseeable future and need to Federal agencies to evaluate their Service and State conservation agencies. be addressed as appropriate. However, actions with respect to the West Indian These prohibitions would be applicable they are not severe enough to indicate manatee within the United States or to the West Indian manatee if this rule that the West Indian manatee is under U.S. jurisdiction. If a Federal is made final. The general provisions for currently in danger of extinction. Given action may adversely affect the manatee issuing a permit for any activity our review of the best scientific and or its habitat, the responsible Federal otherwise prohibited with regard to commercial information available and agency must consult with the Service to threatened species are found at 50 CFR analyses of threats and demographics, ensure that any action authorized, 17.32. we conclude that the West Indian funded, or carried out by such agency is The Service may develop regulations manatee no longer meets the Act’s not likely to jeopardize the continued tailored to the particular conservation

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 1025

needs of a threatened species under Anyone taking, attempting to take, or Service. If future activities resulting section 4(d) of the Act if there are otherwise possessing this species, or from this proposed rule may affect specific prohibitions and exceptions parts thereof, in violation of section 9 of Tribal resources, a Plan of Cooperation that would be necessary and advisable the Act or its implementing regulations, will be developed with the affected for the conservation of that particular is subject to a penalty under section 11 Tribe or Tribes. species. In such cases, some of the of the Act. Pursuant to section 7 of the Clarity of This Regulation (E.O. 12866) prohibitions and exceptions under 50 Act, Federal agencies must ensure that CFR 17.31 and 17.32 may be appropriate any actions they authorize, fund, or We are required by Executive Orders for the species and incorporated into the carry out are not likely to jeopardize the 12866 and 12988 and by the regulations, but they may also be more continued existence of the West Indian Presidential Memorandum of June 1, or less restrictive than those general manatee. 1998, to write all rules in plain provisions. The Service believes the If the West Indian manatee is listed as language. This means that each rule we prohibitions and exceptions set out in threatened and this proposed rule is publish must: 50 CFR 17.31 and 17.32 are most made final, recovery actions directed at (a) Be logically organized; appropriate to address the particular the West Indian manatee would (b) Use the active voice to address conservation needs of the West Indian continue to be implemented as outlined readers directly; manatee at this time. in the recovery plans (USFWS 1986 and (c) Use clear language rather than In Florida, questions regarding 2001, entire). Highest priority recovery jargon; whether specific activities will actions include: (1) Reducing watercraft (d) Be divided into short sections and constitute a violation of section 9 of the collisions with manatees; (2) protecting sentences; and Act should be directed to the U.S. Fish habitat, including foraging and drinking (e) Use lists and tables wherever and Wildlife Service, North Florida water sites and, for the Florida possible. Ecological Services Office (see FOR subspecies, warm-water sites; and (3) If you feel that we have not met these FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). In reducing entanglements in fishing gear. requirements, send us comments by one Puerto Rico, questions regarding Other recovery initiatives also include of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES. whether specific activities will addressing harassment and illegal To better help us revise the rule, your constitute a violation of section 9 of the hunting in sites where these occur. comments should be as specific as Act should be directed to the Caribbean Finalization of this proposed rule possible. For example, you should tell Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR would not constitute an irreversible us the numbers of the sections or FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). commitment on our part. paragraphs that are unclearly written, Requests for copies of the regulations Reclassification of the West Indian which sections or sentences are too regarding listed species and inquiries manatee from threatened status back to long, the sections where you feel lists or about prohibitions and permits may be endangered status would be possible if tables would be useful, etc. changes occur in management, addressed to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife References Cited Service, Ecological Services Division, population status, or habitat, or if other 1875 Century Boulevard, Suite 200, factors detrimentally affect or increase A complete list of references cited is Atlanta, GA 30345 (telephone 404–679– threats to the species. available on http://www.regulations.gov 7101, facsimile 404–679–7081). under Docket Number FWS–R4–ES– Required Determinations 2015–0178 or upon request from the Effects of This Rulemaking National Environmental Policy Act North Florida Ecological Services Field This proposed rule, if made final, We have determined that we do not Office or Caribbean Ecological Services FOR FURTHER would revise 50 CFR 17.11(h) to need to prepare an environmental Field Office (see reclassify the West Indian manatee from assessment or environmental impact INFORMATION CONTACT). endangered to threatened on the Federal statement, as defined in the National Authors List of Endangered and Threatened Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 The primary authors of this document Wildlife. It would recognize that the U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), in connection with are the staff members of the North West Indian manatee is no longer in regulations adopted pursuant to section Florida Ecological Services Office and danger of extinction throughout all or a 4(a) of the Endangered Species Act. We Caribbean Ecological Services Field significant portion of its range. published a notice outlining our reasons Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION However, this reclassification would not for this determination in the Federal CONTACT). change the protection afforded to this Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR species under the Act. In addition, even 49244). List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 if the West Indian manatee is reclassified from endangered to Government-to-Government Endangered and Threatened species, threatened, it will still be considered Relationship With Tribes Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, depleted and strategic under the MMPA. In accordance with the President’s Transportation. We are also proposing to amend the memorandum of April 29, 1994, historical range column for the species ‘‘Government-to-Government Relations Proposed Regulation Promulgation within the List of Endangered and with Native American Tribal Accordingly, we propose to amend Threatened Wildlife (List) to clarify the Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title range. As proposed, the text in that Order 13175, and the Department of the 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, column would read: U.S.A. Interior Manual Chapter 512 DM 2, we as set forth below: (Southeastern), Lesser and Greater have considered possible effects on and Antilles (including Puerto Rico), have notified the Native American PART 17—ENDANGERED AND Mexico, Central America, South Tribes within the range of the West THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS America. The historical range Indian manatee about this proposal. information in the List is informational, They have been advised through a ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 not regulatory. written informational mailing from the continues to read as follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 1026 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– ‘‘Mammals’’ in the List of Endangered § 17.11 Endangered and threatened 1544; and 4201–4245; unless otherwise and Threatened Wildlife to read as wildlife. noted. follows: * * * * * ■ 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by revising the (h) * * * entry for ‘‘Manatee, West Indian’’ under

Species Vertebrate population where When Critical Special Historic range endangered or Status listed habitat rules Common name Scientific name threatened

MAMMALS

******* Manatee, West In- Trichechus manatus U.S.A. (South- Entire ...... T 1, 3, ___ 17.95(a) 17.108(a) dian. eastern), Lesser and Greater Antil- les (including Puerto Rico), Mexico, Central America, South America.

*******

* * * * * Dated: December 18, 2015. James W. Kurth, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 2015–32645 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333–15–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:51 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\08JAP2.SGM 08JAP2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Vol. 81 Friday, No. 5 January 8, 2016

Part III

Department of Energy

10 CFR Parts 429 and 431 Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Refrigerated Bottled or Canned Beverage Vending Machines; Final Rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1028 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY index, such as those containing 1. Specific Criteria information that is exempt from public a. Economic Impact on Manufacturers and 10 CFR Parts 429 and 431 disclosure, may not be publicly Customers b. Savings in Operating Costs Compared To [Docket Number EERE–2013–BT–STD– available. A link to the docket Web page can be Increase in Price (LCC and PBP) 0022] c. Energy Savings found at: www.regulations.gov/#!docket d. Lessening of Utility or Performance of RIN 1904–AD00 Detail;D=EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022. The Equipment www.regulations.gov Web page will Energy Conservation Program: Energy e. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition contain instructions on how to access f. Need for National Energy Conservation Conservation Standards for all documents, including public g. Other Factors Refrigerated Bottled or Canned comments, in the docket. 2. Rebuttable Presumption Beverage Vending Machines For further information on how to IV. Methodology and Discussion of Related review the docket, contact Ms. Brenda Comments AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and A. Market and Technology Assessment Renewable Energy, Department of Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or by email: 1. Equipment Classes Energy. [email protected]. a. Class A and Class B Beverage Vending ACTION: Final rule. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Machines John Cymbalsky, U.S. Department of b. Combination Vending Machines SUMMARY: The Energy Policy and Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and c. Definition of Transparent and Optional Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), as Renewable Energy, Building Test Method for Determining Equipment amended, prescribes energy Technologies Office, EE–2J, 1000 Classification conservation standards for various Independence Avenue SW., 2. Machines Vending Perishable Goods Washington, DC 20585–0121. 3. Market Characterization consumer products and certain 4. Technology Options commercial and industrial equipment, Telephone: (202) 287–1692. Email: _ _ _ B. Screening Analysis including refrigerated bottled or canned refrigerated beverage vending 1. Screened-Out Technologies beverage vending machines (beverage [email protected]. 2. Remaining Technologies vending machines or BVM). EPCA also Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of C. Engineering Analysis requires the U.S. Department of Energy Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 1. Baseline Equipment and Representative (DOE) to periodically determine GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue Sizes whether more-stringent standards SW., Washington, DC, 20585–0121. 2. Refrigerants would be technologically feasible and Telephone: (202) 586–1777. Email: a. Refrigerants Used in the Analysis [email protected]. b. DOE Approach economically justified, and would save c. Relative Energy Efficiency of a significant amount of energy. In this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final Refrigerants final rule, DOE is amending the energy rule incorporates by reference into part 3. Screened-In Technologies Not conservation standards for Class A and 431 the following industry standard: Implemented as Design Options Class B beverage vending machines. • ASTM E 1084–86 (Reapproved 4. Design Options Analyzed and Maximum DOE is also amending the definition for 2009), ‘‘Standard Test Method for Solar Technologically Feasible Efficiency Class A equipment to more Transmittance (Terrestrial) of Sheet Level unambiguously differentiate Class A Materials Using Sunlight,’’ approved a. Glass Packs and Class B beverage vending machines. April 1, 2009. b. Evaporator Fan Motor Controls Copies of ASTM standards may be c. Coils In addition, DOE is amending the d. Compressors definition of combination vending obtained from ASTM International, 100 e. Insulation and Vacuum Insulated Panels machine, is defining two new classes of Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West f. Lighting and Lighting Low Power Modes combination vending machines, Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959, (877) g. Fan Motors Combination A and Combination B, and 909–2786, or go to www.astm.org/. h. Performance of Design Option Packages is promulgating standards for those new See section IV.O for a further 5. Manufacturer Production Costs classes. Finally, DOE is adopting new discussion of this standard. D. Markups Analysis provisions that DOE will use to verify Table of Contents E. Energy Use Analysis the appropriate equipment class and I. Synopsis of the Final Rule F. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period A. Benefits and Costs to Customers Analysis refrigerated volume during enforcement B. Impact on Manufacturers 1. Customer Purchase Prices testing. C. National Benefits and Costs 2. Energy Prices DATES: The effective date of this rule is D. Conclusion 3. Maintenance, Repair, and Installation March 8, 2016. Compliance with the II. Introduction Costs new and amended standards established A. Authority 4. Equipment Lifetime for beverage vending machines in this B. Background 5. Discount Rates final rule is required on and after 1. Current Standards 6. Equipment Efficiency in the No-New- January 8, 2019. The incorporation by 2. History of Standards Rulemaking for Standards Case Beverage Vending Machines 7. Split Incentives reference of certain material listed in III. General Discussion G. Shipments Analysis this rule is approved by the Director of A. Equipment Classes and Scope of 1. Market Share by Equipment Class the Federal Register as of March 8, 2016. Coverage 2. Market Share by Refrigerant ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes B. Test Procedure 3. High and Low Shipments Assumptions Federal Register notices, public meeting C. Compliance Dates H. National Impact Analysis attendee lists and transcripts, D. Technological Feasibility 1. Equipment Efficiency Trends comments, and other supporting 1. General 2. National Energy Savings 2. Maximum Technologically Feasible a. Full-Fuel-Cycle Analysis documents/materials, is available for Levels 3. Net Present Value Analysis review at www.regulations.gov. All E. Energy Savings I. Customer Subgroup Analysis documents in the docket are listed in 1. Determination of Savings J. Manufacturer Impact Analysis the www.regulations.gov index. 2. Significance of Savings 1. Overview However, some documents listed in the F. Economic Justification 2. Government Regulatory Impact Model

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:48 Jan 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1029

a. Government Regulatory Impact Model M. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal amending the energy conservation Key Inputs Energy Administration Act of 1974 standards established by the 2009 BVM b. Government Regulatory Impact Model N. Congressional Notification final rule for Class A and Class B Scenarios VII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 3. Discussion of Comments beverage vending machines. In addition, K. Emissions Analysis I. Synopsis of the Final Rule DOE is establishing two new equipment L. Monetizing Carbon Dioxide and Other Title III, Part A 1 of the Energy Policy classes at 10 CFR 431.292, Combination Emissions Impacts and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA or A and Combination B, as well as new 1. Social Cost of Carbon the Act), Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C. energy conservation standards for those a. Monetizing Carbon Dioxide Emissions equipment classes. The new and b. Development of Social Cost of Carbon 6291–6309, as codified), established the Energy Conservation Program for amended standards adopted in this final Values rule will apply to all equipment listed c. Current Approach and Key Assumptions Consumer Products Other Than 2. Social Cost of Other Air Pollutants Automobiles.2 These products include in Table I.1 and manufactured in, or M. Utility Impact Analysis refrigerated bottled or canned beverage imported into, the United States starting N. Employment Impact Analysis vending machines (beverage vending on January 8, 2019. O. Description of Materials Incorporated by machines or BVM), the subject of this Reference document. (42 U.S.C. 6295(v)) 3 TABLE I.1—ENERGY CONSERVATION V. Analytical Results and Conclusions Pursuant to EPCA, any new or STANDARDS FOR BEVERAGE VEND- A. Trial Standard Levels B. Economic Justification and Energy amended energy conservation standard ING MACHINES Savings must be designed to achieve the [Compliance Starting January 8, 2019] 1. Economic Impacts on Individual maximum improvement in energy Customers efficiency that DOE determines is New and amended a. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period technologically feasible and energy conservation standards ** b. Customer Subgroup Analysis economically justified. (42 U.S.C. Equipment class * c. Rebuttable Presumption Payback 6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, the new or Maximum Daily Energy 2. Economic Impacts on Manufacturers Consumption (MDEC) a. Industry Cash Flow Analysis Results amended standard must result in (kWh/day †) b. Impacts on Direct Employment significant conservation of energy. (42 × c. Impacts on Manufacturing Capacity U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) EPCA also Class A ...... 0.052 V + 2.43 ‡ × d. Impacts on Subgroups of Manufacturers provides that not later than 6 years after Class B ...... 0.052 V + 2.20 ‡ × e. Cumulative Regulatory Burden issuance of any final rule establishing or Combination A ... 0.086 V + 2.66 ‡ × 3. National Impact Analysis amending a standard, DOE must publish Combination B ... 0.111 V + 2.04 ‡ a. Significance of Energy Savings either a notice of determination that * See section IV.A.1 of this final rule for a b. Net Present Value of Customer Costs and standards for the equipment do not need discussion of equipment classes. Benefits to be amended, or a notice of proposed ** ‘‘V’’ is the representative value of refrig- c. Indirect Impacts on Employment erated volume (ft3) of the BVM model, as 4. Impact on Utility or Performance of rulemaking including new proposed measured in accordance with the method for Equipment energy conservation standards. (42 determining refrigerated volume adopted in the 5. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) recently amended DOE BVM test procedure 6. Need of the Nation To Conserve Energy In accordance with these and other and appropriate sampling plan requirements at 7. Other Factors 10 CFR 429.52(a)(3). 80 FR 45758 (July 31, statutory provisions discussed in this 2015). See section III.B and V.A of this final 8. Summary of National Economic Impacts document, DOE is adopting new and rule for more details. C. Conclusion amended energy conservation standards † Kilowatt hours per day. 1. Benefits and Burdens of TSLs for beverage vending machines. The ‡ Trial Standard Level (TSL) 3. Considered for BVM Standards 2. Summary of Annualized Benefits and new and amended standards, which are A. Benefits and Costs to Customers Costs of the Adopted Standards described in terms of the maximum VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review daily energy consumption (MDEC) as a Table I.2 and Table I.3 present DOE’s A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 function of refrigerated volume, are evaluation of the economic impacts of and 13563 shown in Table I.1. Specifically, DOE is the new and amended energy B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility conservation standards on customers, or Act 1 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the purchasers, of beverage vending 1. Description of Estimated Number of U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A. machines, as measured by the average Small Entities Regulated 2 All references to EPCA in this document refer life-cycle cost (LCC) savings and the 2. Description and Estimate of Compliance to the statute as amended through the Energy 4 Requirements Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015, Public Law simple payback period (PBP). This 3. Duplication, Overlap, and Conflict With 114–11 (Apr. 30, 2015). Other Rules and Regulations 3 Because Congress included beverage vending 4 The average LCC savings are measured relative 4. Significant Alternatives to the Rule machines in Part A of Title III of EPCA, the to the efficiency distribution in the no-new- C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction consumer product provisions of Part A (not the standards case, which depicts the market in the Act industrial equipment provisions of Part A–1) apply compliance year (see section IV.F.6 of this final to beverage vending machines. DOE placed the rule). The simple PBP, which is designed to D. Review Under the National regulatory requirements specific to beverage compare specific efficiency levels, is measured Environmental Policy Act of 1969 vending machines in Title 10 of the Code of Federal relative to the baseline model (see section IV.C.1 of E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 Regulations (CFR), part 431, ‘‘Energy Efficiency this final rule). DOE acknowledges that not all BVM F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 Program for Certain Commercial and Industrial customers are also the entity that is responsible for G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Equipment’’ as a matter of administrative the energy costs of operating the beverage vending Reform Act of 1995 convenience based on their type and will refer to machine in the field. However, there are many H. Review Under the Treasury and General beverage vending machines as ‘‘equipment’’ different contracting mechanisms for leasing and Government Appropriations Act, 1999 throughout this document because of their operating beverage vending machines, which are I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 placement in 10 CFR part 431. Despite the influenced by many factors, including the capital placement of beverage vending machines in 10 CFR cost of the machine and the annual operating costs. J. Review Under the Treasury and General part 431, the relevant provisions of Title A of EPCA As such, DOE believes that a simple ‘‘customer’’ Government Appropriations Act, 2001 and 10 CFR part 430, which are applicable to all LCC-model accurately demonstrates the cost- K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 product types specified in Title A of EPCA, are effectiveness of the potential energy efficiency L. Review Under the Information Quality applicable to beverage vending machines. See 74 FR improvements resulting from any new or amended Bulletin for Peer Review 44914, 44917 (Aug. 31, 2009). Continued

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:48 Jan 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1030 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

analysis is based upon beverage vending applications under Rule 19 (80 FR feedback from interested parties during machines that use either CO2 (R–744) or 19454, 19491 (April 10, 2015)) and the public meetings, in written comments, propane (R–290). These refrigerants change of status of R–134a to and during manufacturer interviews. were selected for analysis based on the unacceptable in BVM applications Where applicable, the average LCC recent actions of the U.S. Environmental beginning January 1, 2019 under Rule savings are positive for all equipment Protection Agency’s (EPA) Significant 20 (80 FR 42870, 42917–42920 (July 20, classes and refrigerants, and the PBP is New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) 2015)). The selection of these less than the average lifetime of the program,5 including the listing of refrigerants was also guided by visible equipment, which is estimated to be propane as acceptable in BVM trends within the BVM marketplace and 13.5 years.

TABLE I.2—IMPACTS OF NEW AND AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS ON CUSTOMERS OF BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES—CO2 REFRIGERANT

Life-cycle cost Payback Equipment class savings period (2014$) (years)

Class A ...... 65 2.0 Class B ...... 42 1.1 Combination A ...... 990 0.8 Combination B ...... 597 0.5

TABLE I.3—IMPACTS OF NEW AND AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS ON CUSTOMERS OF BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES—PROPANE REFRIGERANT

Life-cycle cost Payback Equipment class savings period (2014$) (years)

Class A ...... * 0 1.1 Class B ...... 361 0.5 Combination A ...... 772 0.7 Combination B ...... 610 0.3 * In this case, $0 savings is a result of all customers in the no-new-standards efficiency distribution already achieving the efficiency standard.

DOE’s analysis of the impacts of the interviews with the manufacturers of machines purchased in the 30-year new and amended standards on beverage vending machines, DOE does period that begins in the anticipated customers is described in section V of not expect significant impacts on year of compliance with the new and this document. manufacturing capacity or loss of amended standards (2019–2048) amount employment for the industry as a whole 8 B. Impact on Manufacturers to 0.122 quadrillion Btu (quads). This to result from the standards for beverage represents a savings of 16 percent The industry net present value (INPV) vending machines. relative to the energy use of this is the sum of the discounted cash flows DOE’s analysis of the impacts of the equipment in the case without amended to the industry from the base year adopted standards on manufacturers is standards (referred to as the ‘‘no-new- through the end of the analysis period described in section IV.J of this standards case’’).9 document. (2015 to 2048). Using a real discount The cumulative net present value rate of 8.5 percent, DOE estimates that C. National Benefits and Costs 7 (NPV) of total customer costs and the (INPV) for manufacturers of savings of the standards for beverage beverage vending machines in the case DOE’s analyses indicate that the vending machines range from $0.21 without amended standards is $94.8 adopted energy conservation standards billion (at a 7-percent discount rate) to million in 2014$. Under the adopted for beverage vending machines would standards, DOE expects that save a significant amount of energy. $0.51 billion (at a 3-percent discount 10 manufacturers may lose up to 0.8 Relative to the case without amended rate). This NPV expresses the percent of this INPV, which is standards, the lifetime energy savings estimated total value of future approximately $0.7 million.6 for Class A, Class B, Combination A, operating-cost savings minus the Additionally, based on DOE’s and Combination B beverage vending estimated increased equipment costs for

standards, regardless of by whom the costs and 7 All monetary values in this section are 9 The no-new-standards case represents a mix of benefits are borne. expressed in 2014 dollars and, where appropriate, efficiencies above the minimum efficiency level (EL 5 The EPA’s SNAP program, which is the U.S. are discounted to 2015 unless explicitly stated 0). Please see section IV.F.6 for a more detail government regulatory program responsible for otherwise. Energy savings in this section refer to the description of associated assumptions. maintaining the list of alternatives to ozone- full-fuel-cycle (FFC) savings (see section IV.H for 10 These discount rates are used in accordance depleting substances allowed for use within discussion). specific applications in the United States, has taken 8 A quad is equal to 1015 British thermal units with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) two rulemaking actions that concern refrigerants for (Btu). The quantity refers to FFC energy savings. guidance to Federal agencies on the development of the U.S. refrigerated vending machine market. See FFC energy savings includes the energy consumed regulatory analysis (OMB Circular A–4, September section IV.C.2 of this final rule for more details. in extracting, processing, and transporting primary 17, 2003), and section E, ‘‘Identifying and 6 All monetary values in section I.B of this final fuels (i.e., coal, natural gas, petroleum fuels), and, Measuring Benefits and Costs,’’ therein. Further rule are expressed in 2014 dollars; discounted thus, presents a more complete picture of the details are provided in section IV.H of this final values are discounted to 2014 unless explicitly impacts of energy efficiency standards. For more rule. stated otherwise. information on the FFC metric, see section IV.H.1.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:48 Jan 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1031

beverage vending machines purchased reduction in CO2 emissions through reduction (not including CO2 equivalent in 2019–2048. 2030 amounts to 1.16 Mt, which is emissions of other gases with global In addition, the standards for beverage equivalent to the emissions resulting warming potential) is between $49 vending machines are projected to yield from the annual electricity use of more million and $701 million, with a value significant environmental benefits. DOE than 160,000 homes. of $230 million using the central SCC estimates that the standards would The value of the CO2 reductions is case represented by $40.0 per metric ton result in cumulative greenhouse gas calculated using a range of values per in 2015. DOE also estimates that the net emission reductions (over the same metric ton of CO2 (otherwise known as present monetary value of the NO period as for energy savings) of 7 the Social Cost of Carbon, or SCC) X emissions reduction to be $16 million at million metric tons (Mt) 11 of carbon developed by a Federal interagency a 7-percent discount rate, and $42.0 dioxide (CO ), 4 thousand tons of sulfur process.13 The derivation of the SCC 2 million at a 3-percent discount rate.14 dioxide (SO2), 13 thousand tons of values is discussed in section IV.L of nitrogen oxides (NOX), 32 thousand tons this final rule. Using discount rates Table I.4 summarizes the national of methane (CH4), 0.09 thousand tons of appropriate for each set of SCC values, economic benefits and costs expected to nitrous oxide (N2O), and 0.02 tons of DOE estimates that the net present result from the adopted standards for 12 mercury (Hg). The cumulative monetary value of the CO2 emissions beverage vending machines.

TABLE I.4—SUMMARY OF NATIONAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS AND COSTS OF NEW AND AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES*

Present value Discount rate Category (million 2014$) (%)

Benefits

Customer Operating Cost Savings ...... 225 7 542 3 CO2 Reduction Monetized Value ($12.2/metric ton case) ** ...... 49 5 CO2 Reduction Monetized Value ($40.0/metric ton case) ** ...... 230 3 CO2 Reduction Monetized Value ($62.3/metric ton case) ** ...... 366 2.5 CO2 Reduction Monetized Value ($117/metric ton case) ** ...... 701 3 NOX Reduction Monetized Value † ...... 16 7 42 3 Total Benefits ‡ ...... 471 7 814 3

Costs

Customer Incremental Installed Costs ...... 18 7 34 3

Net Benefits

Including CO2 and NOX† Reduction Monetized Value ‡ ...... 453 7 780 3 * This table presents the costs and benefits associated with beverage vending machines shipped in 2019–2048. These results include benefits to customers that accrue after the last year of analyzed shipments (2048) from the equipment purchased during the 30-year analysis period. The costs account for the incremental variable and fixed costs incurred by manufacturers due to the standard, some of which may be incurred in preparation for the rule. ** The CO2 values represent global monetized values of the SCC, in 2014$, in 2015 under several scenarios of the updated SCC values. The first three cases use the averages of SCC distributions calculated using 5-percent, 3-percent, and 2.5-percent discount rates, respectively. The fourth case represents the 95th percentile of the SCC distribution calculated using a 3-percent discount rate. The SCC time series used by DOE incorporates an escalation factor. The value for NOX is the average of high and low values found in the literature. † The $/ton values for NOX are described in section IV.L. ‡ Total benefits for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are derived using the series corresponding to average SCC with a 3-percent dis- count rate ($40.0/metric ton case).

11 A metric ton is equivalent to 1.1 short tons. inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for- ACS study (Krewski et al. Extended Follow-Up and Results for NOX and Hg are presented in short tons. regulator-impact-analysis.pdf. Spatial Analysis of the American Cancer Society 14 12 DOE calculated emissions reductions relative DOE estimated the monetized value of NOX Study Linking Particulate Air Pollution and to the no-new-standards case, which reflects key emissions reductions using benefit per ton Mortality. 2009), which is the lower of the two EPA assumptions in the Annual Energy Outlook 2015 estimates from the Regulatory Impact Analysis for central tendencies. DOE is using the lower value as (AEO2015) Reference case, which generally the Proposed Carbon Pollution Guidelines for its primary estimate to be conservative when Existing Power Plants and Emission Standards for making the policy decision concerning whether a represents current legislation and environmental Modified and Reconstructed Power Plants, particular standard level is economically justified. regulations for which implementing regulations published in June 2014 by EPA’s Office of Air DOE also estimated monetized NOX benefits used were available as of October 31, 2014. Quality Planning and Standards. (Available at EPA’s higher benefit-per-ton estimates, and the 13 Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon http://www3.epa.gov/ttnecas1/regdata/RIAs/ overall benefits are over two times larger (see Table for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive 111dproposalRIAfinal0602.pdf.) See section IV.L.2 V.41). See chapter 14 of the TSD for further Order 12866. Interagency Working Group on Social for further discussion. For the monetized NOX description of EPA’s low and high values and the Cost of Carbon, United States Government. May benefits associated with PM2.5 in DOE’s primary study mentioned above. DOE is currently 2013; revised November 2013. Available at estimate, the benefit-per-ton values are based on an investigating valuation of avoided Hg and SO2 www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/ estimate of premature mortality derived from the emissions.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1032 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

The benefits and costs of the adopted 2019–2048. Because CO2 emissions have million per year in increased equipment standards for beverage vending a very long residence time in the costs, while the estimated annual machines sold in 2019–2048 can also be atmosphere,16 the SCC values in future benefits are $30.2 million per year in expressed in terms of annualized values. years reflect future CO2-emissions reduced operating costs, $12.8 million The monetary values for the total impacts that continue beyond 2100. in CO2 reductions, and $2.3 million in annualized net benefits are the sum of Estimates of annualized benefits and reduced NOX emissions. In this case, the (1) the national economic value of the costs of the adopted standards are net benefit amounts to $43 million per benefits in reduced operating costs, shown in Table I.5. The results under year. minus (2) the increases in equipment the primary estimate are as follows. DOE also calculated the low net purchase prices and installation costs, Using a 7-percent discount rate for benefits and high net benefits estimates plus (3) the value of the benefits of CO benefits and costs other than CO2 2 by calculating the operating cost savings and NOX emission reductions, all reduction (for which DOE used a 3- annualized.15 percent discount rate along with the and shipments at the AEO2015 Low Although the value of operating cost SCC series that has a value of $40.0 per Economic Growth case and High 17 savings and CO2 emission reductions metric ton in 2015), the estimated cost Economic Growth case scenarios, are both important, two issues are of the standards in this rule is $1.8 respectively. The low and high benefits relevant. First, the national operating million per year in increased equipment for incremental installed costs were cost savings are domestic U.S. customer costs, while the estimated annual derived using the low and high price monetary savings that occur as a result benefits are $22.2 million in reduced learning scenarios. In addition, the low of market transactions, whereas the equipment operating costs, $12.8 and high benefits estimates reflect low value of CO2 reductions is based on a million in CO2 reductions, and $1.6 and high shipments scenarios (see global value. Second, the assessments of million in reduced NOX emissions. In section IV.G.3 of this final rule). The net operating cost savings and CO2 savings this case, the net benefit amounts to $35 benefits and costs for low and high net are performed with different methods million per year. Using a 3-percent benefits estimates were calculated in the that use different time frames for discount rate for all benefits and costs same manner as the primary estimate by analysis. The national operating cost and the SCC series that has a value of using the corresponding values of savings is measured for the lifetime of $40.0 per metric ton in 2015, the operating cost savings and incremental beverage vending machines shipped in estimated cost of the standards is $1.9 installed costs.

TABLE I.5—ANNUALIZED BENEFITS AND COSTS OF NEW AND AMENDED STANDARDS FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES*

million 2014$/year Discount rate Low net benefits High net benefits Primary estimate * estimate * estimate *

Benefits

Customer Operating Cost Savings .... 7% ...... 22 ...... 16 ...... 27 3% ...... 30 ...... 21 ...... 36 CO2 Reduction Monetized Value 5% ...... 4 ...... 3 ...... 4 ($12.2/metric ton case) **. CO2 Reduction Monetized Value 3% ...... 13 ...... 9 ...... 14 ($40.0/metric ton case) **. CO2 Reduction Monetized Value 2.5% ...... 19 ...... 14 ...... 21 ($62.3/metric ton case) **. CO2 Reduction Monetized Value 3% ...... 39 ...... 29 ...... 44 ($117/metric ton case) **. NOX Reduction Monetized Value † ... 7% ...... 2 ...... 1 to 3 ...... 4 3% ...... 2 ...... 2 to 4 ...... 6 Total Benefits ‡ ...... 7% range ...... 28 to 63 ...... 20 to 46 ...... 36 to 75 7% ...... 37 ...... 26 ...... 46 3% range ...... 36 to 69 ...... 25 to 51 ...... 46 to 86 3% ...... 45 ...... 32 ...... 56

Costs

Incremental Equipment Costs ...... 7% ...... 1.79 ...... 1.38 ...... 2.10 3% ...... 1.89 ...... 1.42 ...... 2.13

Net Benefits

Total ‡ ...... 7% range ...... 26 to 61 ...... 18 to 44 ...... 34 to 73 7% ...... 35 ...... 25 ...... 44

15 To convert the time-series of costs and benefits 7 percent for all costs and benefits except for the to ‘Control of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon into annualized values, DOE calculated a present value of CO2 reductions, for which DOE used case- and organic matter, possibly the most effective value in 2015, the year used for discounting the specific discount rates, as shown in Table I.4. Using method of slowing global warming,’ J. Geophys. NPV of total consumer costs and savings. For the the present value, DOE then calculated the fixed Res. 2005. 110. pp. D14105. annual payment over a 30-year period, starting in benefits, DOE calculated a present value associated 17 with each year’s shipments in the year in which the the compliance year that yields the same present DOE used a 3-percent discount rate because the shipments occur (e.g., 2020 or 2030), and then value. SCC values for the series used in the calculation 16 discounted the present value from each year to The atmospheric lifetime of CO2 is estimated of were derived using a 3-percent discount rate (see 2015. The calculation uses discount rates of 3 and the order of 30–95 years. Jacobson, MZ. Correction section 0).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1033

TABLE I.5—ANNUALIZED BENEFITS AND COSTS OF NEW AND AMENDED STANDARDS FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES*—Continued

million 2014$/year Discount rate Low net benefits High net benefits Primary estimate * estimate * estimate *

3% range ...... 34 to 70 ...... 24 to 50 ...... 44 to 84 3% ...... 43 ...... 31 ...... 54 * This table presents the annualized costs and benefits associated with beverage vending machines shipped in 2019–2048. These results in- clude benefits to customers that accrue after the last year of analyzed shipments (2048) from the equipment purchased in during the 30-year analysis period. The results account for the incremental variable and fixed costs incurred by manufacturers due to the standard, some of which may be incurred in preparation for the rule. The primary, low benefits, and high benefits estimates utilize projections of energy prices from the AEO2015 Reference case, Low Economic Growth case, and High Economic Growth case, respectively as well as the default shipments scenario along with the low and high shipments scenarios. In addition, incremental equipment costs reflect a medium decline rate for projected equipment price trends in the primary estimate, a low decline rate for projected equipment price trends in the low benefits estimate, and a high decline rate for projected equipment price trends in the high benefits estimate. The methods used to derive projected price trends are explained in appendix 8C of the technical support document (TSD). ** The CO2 values represent global monetized SCC values, in 2014$, in 2015 under several scenarios. The first three cases use the averages of SCC distributions calculated using 5-percent, 3-percent, and 2.5-percent discount rates, respectively. The fourth case represents the 95th per- centile of the SCC distribution calculated using a 3-percent discount rate. The SCC time series incorporates an escalation factor. † The $/ton values used for NOX are described in section IV.L.2. The Primary and Low Benefits Estimates used the values at the low end of the ranges estimated by EPA, while the High Benefits Estimate uses the values at the high end of the ranges. ‡ Total benefits for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are derived using the series corresponding to the average SCC with a 3-percent discount rate ($40.0/metric ton case). In the rows labeled ‘‘7% plus CO2 range’’ and ‘‘3% plus CO2 range,’’ the operating cost and NOX benefits are calculated using the labeled discount rate, and those values are added to the full range of CO2 values.

DOE’s analysis of the national impacts However, DOE notes that Class B related information collected and of the adopted standards is described in beverage vending machines using CO2 analyzed during the course of this section V.B.3 of this final rule. are currently available. In addition, rulemaking effort, DOE is adopting Class A and Class B equipment that MDEC levels, in terms of kWh/day, that D. Conclusion meets the new and amended standard are less-stringent than the new and Based on the analyses culminating in levels is currently available, although amended standards proposed in the this final rule, DOE found the benefits such equipment may not use NOPR and represent the standard levels to the nation of the standards (energy refrigerants that will be acceptable resulting in the maximum economic savings, customer LCC savings, positive under EPA SNAP at the time of benefits for the nation. NPV of customer benefit, and emission compliance with these new and II. Introduction reductions) outweigh the burdens (loss amended standards. While DOE of INPV and LCC increases for some acknowledges that industry experience The following section briefly users of these equipment). DOE has with SNAP-compliant refrigerants is discusses the statutory authority concluded that the standards in this limited, DOE believes that the existing underlying this final rule, as well as final rule represent the maximum industry experience in improving the some of the relevant historical improvement in energy efficiency that is efficiency of R–134a-based equipment is background related to the establishment technologically feasible and applicable and transferable to of amended and new standards for economically justified, and would result equipment using CO2 or propane as a beverage vending machines. in significant conservation of energy. refrigerant. DOE has addressed the A. Authority DOE further notes that equipment technical feasibility and economic achieving these standard levels is implications of meeting the new and Title III, Part B of the Energy Policy already commercially available for Class amended standard levels utilizing CO2 and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA or A and Class B beverage vending and propane refrigerants in the analyses the Act), Public Law 94–163 (codified as machines. While DOE does not have presented in this final rule, and based 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309) established the certification data for combination on these analyses, DOE has concluded Energy Conservation Program for equipment to determine the existence or that the benefits of the new and Consumer Products Other Than extent of equipment meeting the amended standards to the nation Automobiles, a program covering most adopted standard levels, DOE believes (energy savings, positive NPV of major household appliances that the standard levels adopted for customer benefits, customer LCC (collectively referred to as ‘‘covered combination equipment are reasonable savings, and emission reductions) products’’), which includes the beverage as they are based on technology options outweigh the burdens (loss of INPV for vending machines that are the subject of that are widely available in the BVM manufacturers). this rulemaking. (42 U.S.C. 6291(40)) As market today (see section III.D). DOE DOE also considered more-stringent part of this program, EPCA directed acknowledges that equipment using the energy efficiency levels as potential DOE to prescribe energy conservation SNAP-approved refrigerants (i.e., CO2 standards. However, DOE concluded standards for beverage vending and propane) meeting the current or that the potential burdens of the more- machines. (42 U.S.C. 6295(v)) In adopted standard levels is not available stringent energy efficiency levels would addition, under 42 U.S.C. 6295(m), DOE for all equipment classes, due to the outweigh the projected benefits. Based must periodically review its established limited use of CO2 as a refrigerant to on consideration of the public energy conservation standards for the date and the fact that propane has only comments DOE received in response to covered equipment. This final rule recently been approved for use in BVM the 2015 BVM energy conservation fulfills these statutory requirements. applications. 80 FR 19454, 19491 (April standards notice of proposed Pursuant to EPCA, DOE’s energy 10, 2015). rulemaking (2015 BVM ECS NOPR) and conservation program for covered

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1034 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

equipment consists essentially of four In deciding whether a standard is same as those generally available in the parts: (1) Testing; (2) labeling; (3) the economically justified, DOE must United States. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(4)) establishment of Federal energy determine whether the benefits of the Additionally, EPCA specifies conservation standards; and (4) standard exceed its burdens. (42 U.S.C. requirements when promulgating an certification and enforcement 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)) DOE must make this energy conservation standard for procedures. The Secretary or the Federal determination after receiving comments covered equipment that has two or more Trade Commission, as appropriate, may on the proposed standard, and by subcategories. DOE must specify a prescribe labeling requirements for considering, to the greatest extent different standard level for a type or beverage vending machines. (42 U.S.C. practicable, the following seven class of equipment that has the same 6294(a)(5)(A)) Subject to certain criteria statutory factors: function or intended use if DOE and conditions, DOE is required to (1) The economic impact of the determines that equipment within such develop test procedures to measure the standard on manufacturers and group: (A) Consume a different kind of energy efficiency, energy use, or consumers of the equipment subject to energy from that consumed by other estimated annual operating cost of the standard; covered equipment within such type (or covered equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6293) (2) The savings in operating costs class); or (B) have a capacity or other Manufacturers of covered equipment throughout the estimated average life of performance-related feature which other must use the prescribed DOE test the covered equipment in the type (or equipment within such type (or class) procedure as the basis for certifying to class) compared to any increase in the do not have and such feature justifies a DOE that their equipment complies with price, initial charges, or maintenance higher or lower standard. (42 U.S.C. the applicable energy conservation expenses for the covered equipment that 6295(q)(1)) In determining whether a standards adopted under EPCA and are likely to result from the standard; performance-related feature justifies a when making representations to the (3) The total projected amount of different standard for certain public regarding the energy use or energy (or as applicable, water) savings equipment, DOE must consider such efficiency of that equipment. (42 U.S.C. likely to result directly from the factors as the utility to the consumer of 6293(c) and 6295(s)) Similarly, DOE standard; such a feature and other factors DOE must use these test procedures to (4) Any lessening of the utility or the deems appropriate. Id. Any rule determine whether the equipment performance of the covered equipment prescribing such a standard must complies with standards adopted likely to result from the standard; include an explanation of the basis on (5) The impact of any lessening of pursuant to EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)) which such higher or lower level was competition, as determined in writing established. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(2)) In DOE updated its test procedure for by the Attorney General, that is likely to this final rule, DOE is prescribing beverage vending machines in a final result from the standard; energy conservation standards for rule published July 31, 2015 (2015 BVM (6) The need for national energy and different classes of beverage vending test procedure final rule). 80 FR 45758. water conservation; and machines and DOE’s basis for In the 2015 BVM test procedure final (7) Other factors the Secretary of establishing such separate classes is rule, DOE adopted several amendments Energy (Secretary) considers relevant. discussed in this final rule. and clarifications to the DOE test (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)–(VII)) Federal energy conservation procedure in appendix A and appendix Further, EPCA, as codified, requirements generally supersede State B of subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431. As establishes a rebuttable presumption laws or regulations concerning energy specified in the 2015 BVM test that a standard is economically justified conservation testing, labeling, and procedure final rule, manufacturers of if the Secretary finds that the additional standards. (42 U.S.C. 6297(a)–(c)) DOE beverage vending machines are required cost to the consumer of purchasing a may, however, grant waivers of Federal to use appendix B to demonstrate piece of equipment complying with an preemption for particular State laws or compliance with any new and amended energy conservation standard level will regulations, in accordance with the energy conservation standards adopted be less than three times the value of the procedures and other provisions set as a result of this rulemaking. energy (and, as applicable, water) forth under 42 U.S.C. 6297(d)). DOE must follow specific statutory savings during the first year that the Finally, pursuant to EPCA any final criteria for prescribing new or amended consumer will receive as a result of the rule for new or amended energy standards for covered equipment, standard, as calculated under the conservation standards promulgated including beverage vending machines. applicable test procedure. (42 U.S.C. after July 1, 2010, must address standby Any new or amended standard for a 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii)) mode and off mode energy use. (42 covered piece of equipment must be EPCA, as codified, also contains what U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)) Specifically, when designed to achieve the maximum is known as an ‘‘anti-backsliding’’ DOE adopts a standard for any covered improvement in energy efficiency that is provision, which prevents the Secretary equipment after that date, it must, if technologically feasible and from prescribing any amended standard justified by the criteria for adoption of economically justified. (42 U.S.C. that either increases the maximum standards under EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A) and (3)(B)) Furthermore, allowable energy use or decreases the 6295(o)), incorporate standby mode and DOE may not adopt any standard that minimum required energy efficiency of off mode energy use into the standard, would not result in the significant a covered equipment type. (42 U.S.C. or, if that is not feasible, adopt a conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)) Also, the Secretary may not separate standard for such energy use 6295(o)(3)) Moreover, DOE may not prescribe an amended or new standard for that equipment. (42 U.S.C. prescribe a standard: (1) For certain if interested persons have established by 6295(gg)(3)(A)–(B)) equipment, including beverage vending a preponderance of the evidence that DOE reviewed the operating modes machines, if no test procedure has been the standard is likely to result in the available for beverage vending machines established for the equipment, or (2) if unavailability in the United States in and determined that this equipment DOE determines by rule that the any covered equipment type (or class) of does not have operating modes that standard is not technologically feasible performance characteristics (including meet the definition of standby mode or or economically justified. (42 U.S.C. reliability), features, sizes, capacities, off mode, as established at 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(A)–(B)) and volumes that are substantially the 6295(gg)(3). Specifically, beverage

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1035

vending machines are typically always machines do not operate under standby 2009 BVM final rule), DOE prescribed providing at least one main function— and off mode conditions as defined in the current energy conservation refrigeration. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A)) EPCA, and that the energy use of a standards for beverage vending DOE recognizes that in a unique beverage vending machine is captured machines. 74 FR 44914 (Aug. 31, 2009). equipment design, the low power mode in any standard established for active The 2009 BVM final rule established includes disabling the refrigeration mode energy use. As such, the new and energy conservation standards for Class system, while for other equipment the amended energy conservation standards A and Class B beverage vending low power mode controls only elevate adopted in this final rule do not machines, with a compliance date of the thermostat set point. Because low specifically address standby mode or off August 31, 2012, as shown in Table II.1. power modes still include some amount mode energy consumption for the DOE also established a class of of refrigeration for the vast majority of equipment. combination machines, but did not set equipment, DOE believes that such a B. Background standards for combination machines, mode does not constitute a ‘‘standby instead reserving a place for possible 1. Current Standards mode,’’ as defined by EPCA, for development of future standards for that beverage vending machines. Therefore, In a final rule published on August equipment. DOE believes that beverage vending 31, 2009 (henceforth referred to as the

TABLE II.1—ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES, PRESCRIBED BY THE 2009 BVM FINAL RULE—COMPLIANCE DATE AUGUST 31, 2012

Class Definition Maximum daily energy consumption

A ...... Class A means a refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending 0.055 × V + 2.56. machine that is fully cooled, and is not a combination vending machine. B ...... Class B means any refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vend- 0.073 × V + 3.16. ing machine not considered to be Class A, and is not a com- bination vending machine. Combination ...... Combination means a refrigerated bottled or canned beverage [reserved]. vending machine that also has non-refrigerated volumes for the purpose of vending other, non-‘‘sealed beverage’’ merchandise.

The 2009 BVM final rule document is machines. DOE published a notice that beverage vending machines relevant to currently available at announced both the availability of the this rulemaking. www.regulations.gov/ framework document and a public DOE then gathered additional #!documentDetail;D=EERE-2006-STD- meeting to discuss the proposed information and performed preliminary 0125-0005. analytical framework for the analyses to help review standards for rulemaking. That notice also invited this equipment. DOE published a notice 2. History of Standards Rulemaking for to announce the availability of the Beverage Vending Machines written comments from the public. 78 FR 33262 (June 4, 2013). That document preliminary analysis TSD and a public EPCA directed the Secretary to issue, is available at www.regulations.gov/ meeting to discuss the preliminary by rule, no later than August 8, 2009, #!docketDetail;D=EERE-2013-BT-STD- analysis results. 79 FR 46379 (Aug. 8, energy conservation standards for 0022. 2014). In the preliminary analysis, DOE beverage vending machines. (42 U.S.C. discussed and requested comment on 6295 (v)) On August 31, 2009, DOE DOE held the framework public the tools and methods DOE used in issued a final rule establishing meeting on June 20, 2013, at which it (1) performing its preliminary analysis, as performance standards for beverage presented the contents of the framework well as analyses results. DOE also vending machines to complete the first document; (2) described the various sought comments concerning other required rulemaking cycle. 74 FR 44914. analyses DOE planned to conduct relevant issues that could affect DOE conducted this energy during the rulemaking; (3) sought potential amended standards for conservation standards rulemaking comments from interested parties on beverage vending machines. Id. pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(m), which these subjects; and (4) in general, sought The preliminary analysis provided an requires that within 6 years of issuing to inform interested parties about, and overview of DOE’s technical and any final rule establishing or amending facilitate their involvement in, the economic analyses supporting new and a standard, DOE shall publish either a rulemaking. Major issues discussed at amended standards for beverage notice of determination that amended the public meeting included: (1) vending machines, discussed the standards are not needed or a NOPR Equipment classes, (2) analytical comments DOE received in response to proposing amended standards. approaches and methods used in the the framework document, and In initiating this rulemaking, DOE rulemaking; (3) impact of standards and addressed issues raised by those prepared a framework document, burden on manufacturers; (5) comments. The preliminary analysis ‘‘Energy Conservation Standards technology options; (6) distribution TSD also described the analytical Rulemaking Framework Document for channels and shipments; (7) impacts of framework that DOE used (and Refrigerated Beverage Vending outside regulations; and (8) continues to use) in considering new Machines’’ (framework document), environmental issues. At the meeting and amended standards for beverage which describes the procedural and and during the comment period on the vending machines, including a analytical approaches DOE anticipates framework document, DOE received description of the methodology, the using to evaluate energy conservation many comments that helped it identify analytical tools, and the relationships standards for beverage vending and resolve issues pertaining to between the various analyses that are

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1036 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

part of this rulemaking. Additionally, NOPR comment period on October 23, In the 2009 BVM final rule, DOE the preliminary analysis TSD presented 2015 until November 23, 2015. 80 FR determined that unique energy in detail each analysis that DOE had 64370 (Oct. 23, 2015). Relevant conservation standards were warranted performed for this equipment up to that comments received during both for Class A and Class B beverage point, including descriptions of inputs, comment periods and the BVM ECS vending machines and added the data sources, methodologies, and NOPR public meeting, as well as DOE’s following definitions to 10 CFR 431.292 results. These analyses included (1) the responses, are provided throughout this to differentiate such equipment: market and technology assessment, (2) document. Class A means a beverage vending the screening analysis, (3) the machine that is fully cooled, and is not engineering analysis, (4) the energy use III. General Discussion a combination vending machine. analysis, (5) the markups analysis, (6) DOE is amending standards for Class Class B means any beverage vending the LCC analysis, (7) the PBP analysis, A and Class B beverage vending machine not considered to be Class A, (8) the shipments analysis, (9) the machines. DOE is also amending the and is not a combination vending national impact analysis (NIA), and (10) definition for Class A equipment to machine. a preliminary manufacturer impact more unambiguously differentiate Class 74 FR 44914, 44967 (Aug. 31, 2009). analysis (MIA). A and Class B beverage vending DOE differentiated Class A and Class The preliminary TSD that presents the machines. In addition, DOE is amending B beverage vending machines based on methodology and results of each of the definition of combination vending whether the refrigerated volume (V) of these analyses is available at machine, creating two classes of equipment was fully cooled, as DOE www.regulations.gov/ combination vending machine determined that this was the most #!docketDetail;D=EERE-2013-BT-STD- equipment, and promulgating standards significant criteria affecting energy 0022. In this final rule, DOE is for those classes. In the subsequent consumption. Id. at 44924. presenting additional and revised sections, DOE discusses the scope of The 2009 BVM final rule also analysis in all of these areas. coverage, test procedure, compliance established a definition for combination The public meeting to review the dates, technical feasibility, energy vending machine at 10 CFR 431.292. preliminary analysis took place on savings, and economic justification of Combination vending machine means September 16, 2014 (preliminary the new and amended standards. a beverage vending machine that also analysis public meeting). At the has non-refrigerated volumes for the preliminary analysis public meeting, A. Equipment Classes and Scope of purpose of vending other, non-‘‘sealed DOE presented the methodologies and Coverage beverage’’ merchandise. results of the analyses prescribed in the EPCA defines a beverage vending 74 FR 44914, 44967 (Aug. 31, 2009). preliminary analysis TSD. Comments machine as ‘‘a commercial refrigerator 19 DOE considered the definition of received in response to the preliminary that cools bottled or canned beverages beverage vending machine broad analysis helped DOE identify and and dispenses the bottled or canned enough to include any vending machine resolve issues related to the preliminary beverages on payment.’’ (42 U.S.C. that cools at least one bottled or canned analyses and helped refine the analyses 6291(40)) beverage and dispenses it upon for beverage vending machines. When evaluating and establishing payment. DOE elected to establish DOE presented its updated analyses energy conservation standards, DOE combination machines as a separate and proposed new and amended divides covered equipment into equipment class because such machines standard levels in the 2015 BVM ECS equipment classes by the type of energy may be challenged by component NOPR, which DOE published on August used or by capacity or other availability and such machines have a 19, 2015. 80 FR 50462 (Aug. 19, 2015). performance-related features that distinct utility that limits their energy On September 29, 2015, DOE held a justifies a different standard. In making efficiency improvement potential public meeting to discuss the 2015 BVM a determination whether a performance- compared to Class A and B beverage ECS NOPR and request comments on related feature justify differing vending machines. However, DOE did DOE’s proposal (BVM ECS NOPR public standards, DOE must consider such not establish standards for combination meeting). DOE received multiple factors as the utility to the customer of machines in the 2009 BVM final rule. comments from interested parties and the feature and other factors DOE Id. at 44920. considered these comments in the determines are appropriate. (42 U.S.C. While DOE’s existing definitions of preparation of the final rule. In response 6295(q)) Class A and Class B equipment to DOE’s 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, several distinguish equipment based on interested parties requested additional 19 EPCA defines commercial refrigerator, freezer, whether or not the refrigerated volume time to prepare their written comments. and refrigerator-freezer as ‘‘refrigeration equipment is ‘‘fully cooled,’’ DOE regulations have (AMS, No. 45 at p. 1; NAMA, No. 44 at that— never defined the term ‘‘fully cooled.’’ (i) is not a consumer product (as defined in In the framework document, DOE p. 1; Royal Vendors, No. 46 at p. 1; and section 6291 of this title); 18 suggested a definition for ‘‘fully cooled’’ Coca-Cola, No. 49 at p. 1). To (ii) is not designed and marketed exclusively for accommodate this request, DOE issued medical, scientific, or research purposes; and further refined that definition in the a notice to reopen the 2015 BVM ECS (iii) operates at a chilled, frozen, combination BVM test procedure NOPR DOE chilled and frozen, or variable temperature; published on Aug. 11, 2014 (2014 BVM 18 DOE will identify comments received in (iv) displays or stores merchandise and other test procedure NOPR). 79 FR 46908, response to the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR and placed perishable materials horizontally, semivertically, or 46934. In response to comments vertically; in Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–STD–0022 by the received on both the framework commenter, the number of document as listed in (v) has transparent or solid doors, sliding or the docket maintained at www.regulations.gov, and hinged doors, a combination of hinged, sliding, document and 2014 BVM test procedure the page number of that document where the transparent, or solid doors, or no doors; NOPR, DOE proposed to modify the comment appears (for example: Coca-Cola, No. 52 (vi) is designed for pull-down temperature definition of Class A to more at p. 2). If a comment was made verbally during the applications or holding temperature applications; unambiguously differentiate Class A BVM ECS NOPR public meeting, DOE will also and and Class B equipment. In this final specifically identify those as being located in the (vii) is connected to a self-contained condensing NOPR public meeting transcript (for example: Coca- unit or to a remote condensing unit.’’ 42 U.S.C. rule, DOE is using the presence of a Cola, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. 184). 6311(9)(A). transparent front on Class A beverage

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1037

vending machines as a key vending machines must be in test procedure due to lighting controls distinguishing characteristic between accordance with the methodology automatically turning off the lights Class A and Class B equipment and is specified in Appendix C of ANSI/ when no one is in the test room. (ASAP, adopting this distinction as part of the ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010. Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. Class A equipment class definition. In the 2015 BVM test procedure final 67) Royal Vendors and SandenVendo In this final rule, DOE is also rule, DOE also adopted several new America (SVA) commented that the amending the definition of combination clarifying amendments including: current standard is achievable without vending machine to better align with (1) eliminating testing at the 90 °F the use of low power modes and that industry definitions and provide more ambient test condition, they test all of their equipment without clarity regarding the physical (2) clarifying the test procedure for low power modes enabled, and do not characteristics of the ‘‘refrigerated’’ and combination vending machines, include payment systems in their ‘‘non-refrigerated’’ volumes, or (3) clarifying the requirements for reported energy consumption. (Royal compartments. In addition, DOE is loading BVM models under the DOE test Vendors, No. 54 at p. 4; SVA, No. 53 at creating two classes of combination procedure, p. 2) The National Automatic vending machines, Combination A and (4) clarifying the specifications of the Merchandising Association (NAMA) Combination B, to differentiate standard product, also commented that at least one combination vending machines based (5) clarifying the next-to-vend manufacturer has achieved the current on criteria similar to those used to beverage temperature test condition, standard level without the use of energy distinguish Class A and Class B (6) specifying placement of management systems, and that reported beverage vending machines (i.e., the thermocouples during the DOE test energy consumption currently does not presence of a transparent front). See procedure, include payment systems. NAMA section IV.A.1 of this final rule for more (7) establishing testing provisions at additionally urged DOE to allow energy discussion on the equipment classes the lowest application product management systems to be enabled addressed in this final rule. temperature, and during testing. (NAMA, No. 50 at p. 5) (8) clarifying the treatment of certain B. Test Procedure In its written comments, NAMA accessories when conducting the DOE requested that DOE review the European The estimates of energy use and test procedure. Vending Association’s Energy energy saving potential presented in the These test procedure amendments are Management Protocol Program and final rule analysis are based on the all reflected in DOE’s new appendix A, stated that it may provide additional performance of beverage vending which became effective August 31, 2015 guidance related to the testing of machines when tested in accordance and must be used, beginning January 27, beverage vending machines in Europe with appendix B of the recently 2016, by manufacturers for that may be applicable to the United amended DOE BVM test procedure representations and to demonstrate States (NAMA, No. 50 at p. 14) located at 10 CFR 431.294. (See sections compliance with the BVM energy Automated Merchandising Systems IV.B, IV.C, and IV.E of this final rule for conservation standards adopted in the (AMS) commented that the revised test more discussion.) On July 31, 2015, 2009 BVM final rule, for which procedure would adversely affect the DOE published the 2015 BVM test compliance was required as of August daily energy consumption (DEC) even procedure final rule, which amended 31, 2012. 80 FR 45758 (July 31, 2015). though performance has not changed. DOE’s test procedure for beverage DOE also adopted amended language at (AMS, No. 57 at p. 2) Specifically, SVA vending machines. 80 FR 45758. In the 10 CFR 429.52(b) and 10 CFR 431.296 commented that including payment 2015 BVM test procedure final rule, clarifying the certification and reporting systems in reported energy consumption DOE adopted several minor requirements for beverage vending effectively lowers the allowable DEC by amendments to clarify DOE’s test machines, which also became effective 0.2 kWh/day, which would account for procedure for beverage vending August 31, 2015. Id. at 45787. over 9 percent of allowable energy machines and also adopted several Appendix B includes all provisions in consumption for Class A and 6 percent amendments related to the impact of appendix A, as well as, provisions for for Class B. (SVA, No. 53 at p. 4) SVA low power modes on the measured daily testing low power modes. The test stated in written comments that the energy consumption of BVM models. Id. procedure found in appendix B is to be inclusion of payment systems in the DOE also reorganized the DOE test used in conjunction with the new and reported energy consumption under the procedure into two new appendices, amended standards established as a new test procedure would make it appendix A and appendix B to subpart result of this final rule. As such, difficult to meet the current standard. Q to part 431 of Title 10 of the Code of manufacturers are not required to use (SVA, No. 53 at p. 2) Similarly, Coca- Federal Regulations, and adopted a appendix B until the compliance date of Cola and Royal Vendors stated that minor change to the certification and the new and amended standards allowances for low power states are reporting requirements for beverage established in this final rule. Id. offset by the inclusion of payment vending machines at 10 CFR During the BVM ECS NOPR public systems in the reported energy 429.52(b)(2) and 10 CFR 431.296. meeting and subsequent comment consumption under the new test The DOE BVM test procedure, as period, several interested parties procedure. (Coca-Cola, No. 52 at p. 3; amended, incorporates by reference commented about DOE’s updated BVM Royal Vendors, No. 54 at p. 1) American National Standards Institute test procedure and how equipment are DOE recognizes that the previous DOE (ANSI)/American Society of Heating, currently tested in the industry. ASAP BVM test procedure adopted in DOE’s Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning commented in the BVM ECS NOPR 2006 test procedure final rule (71 FR Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 32.1– public meeting that there may be 71340 (Dec. 8, 2006)) may have allowed 2010 to describe the measurement potential ambiguity in the BVM test for misinterpretation of some aspects of equipment, test conditions, and test procedure DOE adopted in 2006 (71 FR DOE’s test procedure methodology. protocol applicable to testing beverage 71340 (Dec. 8, 2006)) with regard to However, the clarifications and vending machines. DOE’s test procedure lighting low power modes in that some amendments recently adopted in also specifies that the measurement of machines may have shown artificially appendix A of the DOE BVM test ‘‘refrigerated volume’’ of beverage lower energy consumption under this procedure seeks to unambiguously

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1038 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

clarify how BVM equipment should be BVM test procedure now allows for the Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(v), any configured and tested in accordance use of lighting and refrigeration low energy conservation standard prescribed with the DOE BVM test procedure. 80 power states. In response to NAMA’s for beverage vending machines ‘‘shall FR 45758, 45760 (July 31, 2015). suggestion that DOE consult the apply to [equipment] manufactured 3 Specifically, related to lighting controls, European Vending Association’s Energy years after the date of publication of a appendix A requires that all lights be in Management Protocol Program, DOE final rule establishing the energy the ‘‘on’’ state for the full duration of the appreciates the suggestion from NAMA, conservation standard.’’ As such, DOE is test. However, appendix B, which is but notes that DOE has already clarified not authorized to accommodate the required for demonstrating compliance the appropriate configuration and use of request of commenters and maintains with the energy conservation standards energy management systems when that compliance of the new and adopted in this final rule, allows testing in accordance with the DOE amended standards adopted in this final lighting and other accessories that are BVM test procedure in the recently rule is required beginning 3 years after controlled by an accessory low power published 2015 BVM test procedure the publication date of this final rule in mode to be turned off (by the accessory final rule. 80 FR 45758. DOE also notes the Federal Register, or on January 8, low power mode) for a period of 6 that EPCA requires that the DOE BVM 2019. hours. DOE believes this accurately test procedure for beverage vending D. Technological Feasibility represents the impact of accessory low machines shall be based on ASHRAE power modes on BVM DEC. Regarding Standard 32.1–2004, entitled ‘‘Methods 1. General of Testing for Rating Vending Machines the energy consumption and In each energy conservation standards for Bottled, Canned or Other Sealed configuration of payment mechanisms rulemaking, DOE conducts a screening Beverages.’’ 42 U.S.C. 6395(15) when testing beverage vending analysis based on information gathered machines, DOE clarified in the 2015 C. Compliance Dates on all current technology options and BVM test procedure final rule that Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(v)(3), the prototype designs that could improve energy consumed by BVM payment the efficiency of the equipment that are systems should be included in the new and amended standards in this final rule will apply to equipment the subject of the rulemaking. As the measured energy consumption of this first step in such an analysis, DOE equipment under both appendix A and manufactured beginning on January 8, 2019, 3 years after the publication date develops a list of technology options for appendix B. consideration in consultation with In the analysis supporting this final of this final rule in the Federal Register. In its analysis, DOE used a 30-year manufacturers, design engineers, and rule, DOE has analyzed equipment other interested parties. DOE then under appendix B, which accounts for analysis period of 2019–2048. In written comments submitted in determines which of those means for the use of accessory and refrigeration response to the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, improving efficiency are technologically low power modes. DOE’s analysis also Coca-Cola, NAMA, Royal Vendors, and feasible. DOE considers technologies assumes the energy consumption of the American Beverage Association incorporated in commercially available payment mechanisms are accounted for (ABA) requested that the compliance equipment or in working prototypes to in the DEC of BVM equipment. DOE date for DOE’s proposed standards be be technologically feasible. 10 CFR part recognizes that some test procedure delayed until 2022, 3 years after the 430, subpart C, appendix A, section amendments included in appendix B, compliance date for the new EPA SNAP 4(a)(4)(i). such as those addressing accessory and Rules 19 and 20, which list as After DOE has determined that lighting low power modes, may change acceptable the use of CO2, propane, and particular technology options are the measured energy consumption of isobutane refrigerants (80 FR 19454, technologically feasible, it further covered equipment. As such, as stated 19491 (April 10, 2015)) and phase out evaluates each technology option in in the 2015 BVM test procedure final the use of R–134a refrigerant for BVM light of the following additional rule, use of appendix B is only applications (80 FR 42870, 42917–42920 screening criteria: (1) Practicability to permitted to demonstrate compliance (July 20, 2015)), respectively. (Coca- manufacture, install, and service; (2) with the new and amended standards Cola, No. 52 at p. 1; NAMA, No. 50 at adverse impacts on equipment utility or adopted in this final rule. 80 FR 45758, p. 2; Royal Vendors, No. 54 at p. 2; ABA availability; and (3) adverse impacts on 45760–45761. DOE notes that, on the No. 63 at p. 3) During the written health or safety. 10 CFR part 430, effective date of this BVM ECS final comment period following the subpart C, appendix A, section rule, manufacturers may elect to begin publication of the 2015 BVM ECS 4(a)(4)(ii)–(iv). Additionally, it is DOE using the appendix B test procedure NOPR, DOE also received 1,140 policy not to include in its analysis any prior to the compliance date, provided identical form letters (hereafter referred proprietary technology that is a unique they use the results of such testing to to as the Form Letters) from interested pathway to achieving a certain demonstrate compliance with the new parties (the Form Letter Writers) efficiency level. Section IV.B of this and amended standards adopted in this regarding several aspects of DOE’s document discusses the results of the final rule. Manufacturers may not use proposal. In the Form Letter, screening analysis for beverage vending the results of testing under appendix B commenters echoed the request for an machines, particularly the designs DOE to demonstrate compliance with the extension of the compliance date to considered, those it screened out, and energy conservation standards adopted 2022. (The Form Letter Writers, No. 64 those that are the basis for the standard 20 in the 2009 BVM final rule. and 65 at p. 1) levels considered in this rulemaking. In response to NAMA’s comment In response to the request for an For further details on the screening requesting that DOE allow for the use of alternative compliance date for the new analysis for this rulemaking, see chapter energy management systems during and amended BVM standards 4 of the final rule TSD. testing, DOE notes that the revised DOE established as a result of this In response to the proposed standard rulemaking, DOE notes that it does not levels in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE 20 See DOE’s test procedure guidance on this topic at https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ have the discretion to deviate from the received several comments regarding appliance_standards/pdfs/tp_earlyuse_faq_2014-8- compliance period for beverage vending the technological feasibility of those 25.pdf. machines established under EPCA. proposed standard levels. In written

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1039

comments, the Appliance Standards Advocacy expressed agreement that the (CCMS) and ENERGY STAR® Awareness Project (ASAP), Alliance to current standards could be met using directories in order to confirm the Save Energy (ASE), Natural Resources any refrigerant but disagreement that the validity and accuracy of its engineering Defense Council (NRDC), Northwest efficiency levels in the NOPR TSD could analysis inputs and results. Chapter 3 of Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA), and be met. (SVA, No. 53 at p. 3; SBA the final rule TSD contains plots of the the Northwest Power and Conservation Advocacy, No. 61 at p. 3) SVA relevant ENERGY STAR and CCMS Council (NPCC) (herein referred to as additionally expressed disagreement certification data, while Chapter 5 of the the Energy Efficiency Advocates Joint with DOE’s assumption that all baseline final rule TSD discusses DOE’s Commenters, or EEA Joint Commenters) Class A and Class B propane equipment methodology in selecting units for submitted a joint comment ((herein and Class A CO2 equipment would be testing and teardown. referred to as the EEA Joint Comment) able to meet EL1 because it believes DOE also revised certain assumptions expressing support for DOE’s proposed many of DOE’s proposed design options regarding the cost of more-efficient standards. (EEA Joint Commenters, No. have already been implemented to meet components and the cost to maintain, 56 at p. 1) Conversely, in the BVM ECS the 2009 standard. (SVA, No. 53 at p. 7) repair, and/or replace those more- NOPR public meeting and in written AMS commented that it would not be efficient components to better reflect the comments, NAMA, SVA, Coca-Cola, able to meet even the 2009 standard for BVM market today and throughout the Royal Vendors, AMS, Seaga class A with CO2 refrigerant, and further analysis period. Component costs, as Manufacturing (Seaga), and the U.S. stated that it might be possible to meet well as maintenance, repair, and Small Business Administration’s Office trial standard level (TSL) 1 for Class A replacement costs are discussed in of Advocacy (SBA Advocacy) all stated with substantial design changes. AMS chapters 5 and 8 of the final rule TSD, that DOE’s proposed standards were too additionally commented that it may be respectively. Based on these revised aggressive, especially in light of EPA possible for it to meet TSL 2 for analyses, DOE is adopting in this final SNAP regulations concurrent with Combination A equipment using CO2 rule new and amended standards for DOE’s rulemaking. (NAMA, No. 50 at p. and TSL 3 with propane with beverage vending machines that are less 1; SVA, No. 53 at p. 10; Coca-Cola, No. substantial design changes. (AMS, No. stringent than the MDEC levels 52 at p. 1; Royal Vendors, AMS, and 57 at p. 4) In written comments, the proposed in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR. Seaga, Public Meeting Transcript, No. Form Letter Writers stated DOE has not As discussed further in section V, the 48 at pp. 175, 177; SBA Advocacy, No. provided proof that CO2 machines MDEC levels adopted in this final rule 61 at p. 3) ABA requested that DOE meeting the proposed standards are represent the standard levels for each coordinate with EPA to ensure the already available. (The Form Letter equipment class with the maximum net proposed standards are technologically Writers, No. 64 and 65 at p. 1) Further, benefits for the nation. DOE’s and economically feasible relative to in the Form Letters, commenters stated engineering and economic analyses ENERGY STAR equipment the combination vending machines have presented in this final rule represent the specifications. (ABA, No. 63 at p. 3) The not been tested to the proposed best available data on BVM performance European Vending Association stated standard. (The Form Letter Writers, No. and costs and include substantial input that adopting a standard more stringent 64 and 65 at p. 1) from interested parties received than ENERGY STAR was not justifiable In the BVM ECS NOPR public throughout the course of the in Europe and it would not be feasible meeting, SVA stated that the proposed rulemaking. As such, DOE believes the for DOE to adopt more stringent standards do not leave room for any MDEC standard levels adopted in this new or innovative features which final rule are technologically feasible standards (EVA, No. 60 at p. 1) NAMA, consume energy. (SVA, Public Meeting and economically justified. DOE also SVA, and SBA Advocacy stated that the Transcript, No. 48 at p. 174) In its analyzed these adopted standard levels proposed standards are not written comment, Coca-Cola stated that against the reported and tested DEC technologically feasible or economically the proposed standards would make it values of currently available equipment justified and will cause substantial difficult for suppliers to offer equipment and notes that there are several models negative impacts on the industry if with display panels for equipment of Class A and Class B equipment that enacted. (NAMA, No. 50 at p. 1; SVA, interaction, video content, or would meet the amended MDEC levels No. 53 at p. 10; SBA Advocacy, No. 61 advertising, and would therefore reduce under either appendix A or appendix B at p. 3) AMS, SVA, and Royal Vendors utility of the equipment. (Coca-Cola, No. (that is, with or without low power stated in the BVM ECS NOPR public 52 at p. 4) modes employed). While DOE meeting and in written comments that DOE appreciates the support for acknowledges that not all of these compliance with DOE’s proposed DOE’s proposed standard levels from models use refrigerants that will be standards is unattainable, and Royal the EEA Joint Commenters. Regarding required in 2019 when compliance with Vendors added that compliance would the concerns raised by Coca-Cola, the amended standards is required, DOE require cutting 1 kWh/day from its Class NAMA, Royal Vendors, AMS, Seaga, notes that at least one BVM model using A machines and 1.5 kWh/day from its and SBA Advocacy DOE has revised its CO2 as a refrigerant are listed in the Class B machines. (AMS, SVA, and engineering and economic analyses ENERGY STAR database that comply Royal Vendors, Public Meeting based on the specific feedback of with the amended MDEC standard for Transcript, No. 48 at p. 175; Royal interested parties. DOE believes that its Class B equipment adopted in this final Vendors, No. 54 at p. 1) analyses accurately reflect the rule. In the BVM ECS NOPR public capabilities of existing current In response to ABA and EVA’s meeting, Coca-Cola inquired about the equipment designs and component comments suggesting that DOE manufacturer of the CO2 unit that DOE design options. Specifically, DOE coordinate with ENERGY STAR and examined and found to meet the 2009 compared its engineering outputs to highlighting the technological feasibility standard, and expressed doubt that an empirical DEC data gathered from the of the ENERGY STAR standard levels, existing CO2 machine would be able to units that DOE selected for testing and DOE notes that DOE coordinates closely meet the proposed standard. (Coca-Cola, teardowns, as well as to certified DEC with EPA’s ENERGY STAR program. Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at pp. data included in the Compliance Regarding the technological feasibility 96–101) Similarly, SVA and SBA Certification Management System of the new and amended standards

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1040 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

adopted in this final rule as compared amended standard level when tested accessories and components. 80 FR to ENERGY STAR levels, DOE is until the new appendix B test procedure 45758, 45778–45780 (July 31, 2015). obligated to adopt the standard levels adopted in the 2015 BVM test procedure Specifically, the DOE BVM test that represent the maximum final rule. 80 FR 45758 (July 31, 2015). procedure specifies that external improvement in energy efficiency that is BVM models of Class A and customer display signs, lights, or digital technologically feasible and combination equipment using CO2 screens should be de-energized or, if economically justified, subject to refrigerant have not yet been developed, they cannot be de-energized without specific criteria established by EPCA. so a similar comparison is not possible. impacting the primary functionality of In response to commenters concerns (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2) and (3)(B)) DOE the equipment, placed in the external regarding combination equipment, DOE specifically analyzed the technological accessory standby mode (if available) or feasibility and economic benefits of the notes that combination equipment manufacturers are currently not the lowest energy consuming state (if no current ENERGY STAR levels for Class external accessory standby mode is A and Class B equipment (and required to report their DEC or comply available) that maintains such comparable levels for Combination with any energy conservation standards functionality. 10 CFR 431.292. As the equipment) as TSL 1. DOE’s analysis and, as such, DOE does not have the incremental energy consumption of considers only those technology options data that would be needed to perform a considered to be technologically similar comparative analysis of the display signs and digital screens feasible, as discussed in section III.D.2 analytically-determined performance referred to by Coca-Cola and SVA and IV.B. Therefore, by definition, all levels from the engineering analysis potentially are not included in the ELs and TSLs analyzed by DOE versus certification or testing data. measured DEC for such BVM models, represent technologically feasible However, DOE notes that the design DOE does not believe that innovation of energy consumption levels for beverage options that DOE modeled in the manufacturers to include such features vending machines. Based on DOE’s engineering analysis as included at the and accessories will be affected by the analysis, as discussed further in section adopted standard levels for newly adopted test procedure or the V.B, DOE found TSL 3 to result in the Combination A and Combination B standard levels adopted in this final maximum economic benefits for the equipment are commonly available rule. If any BVM manufacturers produce nation. Therefore, while the current technologies that are also included in a BVM model with any features or ENERGY STAR are also technologically the packages of design options analyzed accessories that cannot be feasible, TSL 3 represents the maximum at the amended standard levels for Class accommodated by the DOE BVM test improvement in energy efficiency that is A and B. That is, DOE believes that all procedure or believe that application of technologically feasible and Combination A and Combination B the DOE BVM test procedure would economically justified, based on DOE’s equipment should be able to meet the produce results that are not adequately analysis. new energy conservation standard levels representative of the energy using the same technology options and consumption of the equipment, the In response to the Form Letter Writers equipment designs that would be manufacturer of that equipment may statement that DOE has not provided employed by Class A and Class B proof that CO2 machines meeting the equipment in meeting the amended submit a petition for a test procedure proposed standards are already standard levels adopted for the waiver in accordance with the 21 available, DOE recognizes that there was equipment. This determination was provisions in 10 CFR 431.401. a statement in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR made based on an assessment of the that may have been misinterpreted by 2. Maximum Technologically Feasible commonalities in design present Levels some to indicate that Class B equipment between the analogous classes, for using CO2 as a refrigerant was available example the presence of a transparent When DOE proposes to adopt an that met the standard level proposed in front and lighting in Class A and amended standard for a type or class of the NOPR. Specifically, in both the 2015 Combination A machines, and the use of covered equipment, it must determine BVM ECS NOPR public meeting and in a fully insulated cabinet and zone the maximum improvement in energy written comments, Coca-Cola stated that cooling in Class B and Combination B efficiency or maximum reduction in it does not believe that there is a machines. A full discussion of DOE’s energy use that is technologically beverage vending machine with a CO 2 analysis of the performance potential of feasible for such equipment. (42 U.S.C. refrigeration system that is capable of combination vending machines is 6295(p)(1)) Accordingly, in the meeting the proposed standards, even contained in Chapter 5 of the TSD. with credits for low power modes. engineering analysis, DOE determined In response to SVA and Coca-Cola’s the maximum technologically feasible (Coca-Cola, No. 52 at p. 2; Coca-Cola, concerns regarding the ability of BVM (‘‘max-tech’’) improvements in energy Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. models that feature digital display efficiency for beverage vending 184) In this final rule, DOE clarifies that screens or other innovative, interactive the sentence in the 2015 BVM ECS designs, DOE notes that compliance machines, using the design parameters NOPR was intended to read ‘‘Class B with the new and amended standards is for the most efficient equipment available on the market or in working equipment that utilizes CO2 as a assessed based on the tested DEC, as refrigerant and Class B equipment that measured in accordance with appendix prototypes. The max-tech levels that meets the proposed standard level is B of the recently updated DOE BVM test DOE determined for this rulemaking are currently available.’’ 80 FR 50462, procedure (80 FR 45758 (July 31, 2015)), described in section III.D.2 of this final 50467 (August 19, 2015). However, and appropriate sampling plans (10 CFR rule and in chapter 5 of the final rule regarding the standard adopted in this 429.52(a)). In both appendix A and TSD. final rule, DOE reiterates that at least appendix B of the recently amended one BVM model using CO2 refrigerant is DOE BVM test procedure, DOE adopted 21 DOE issued a final rule amending its listed in the ENERGY STAR data base specific provisions clarifying the regulations governing petitions for waiver and interim waiver from DOE test procedures for that meets the amended Class B configuration of BVM models featuring consumer products and commercial and industrial standard level, and it is possible that external customer display signs, lights, equipment. 79 FR 26591 (May 9, 2014). This final additional units would meet the or digital screens, among other rule became effective on June 9, 2014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1041

E. Energy Savings Cir. 1985), indicated that Congress disproportionately by a national intended ‘‘significant’’ energy savings in standard. 1. Determination of Savings the context of EPCA to be savings that b. Savings in Operating Costs Compared For each TSL, DOE projected energy were not ‘‘genuinely trivial.’’ The energy To Increase in Price (LCC and PBP) savings from application of the TSL to savings for all the TSLs considered in beverage vending machines purchased this rulemaking, including the adopted EPCA requires DOE to consider the in the 30-year period that begins in the standards, are nontrivial; therefore, DOE savings in operating costs throughout year of compliance with any new and considers them ‘‘significant’’ within the the estimated average life of the covered amended standards (2019–2048).22 The meaning of section 325 of EPCA. equipment in the type (or class) savings are measured over the entire compared to any increase in the price lifetime of equipment purchased in the F. Economic Justification of, or in the initial charges for, or 30-year analysis period. DOE quantified 1. Specific Criteria maintenance expenses of, the covered the energy savings attributable to each equipment that are likely to result from TSL as the difference in energy As noted above, EPCA provides seven a standard. (42 U.S.C. consumption between each standards factors to be evaluated in determining 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(II)) DOE conducts this case and the no-new-standards case. whether a potential energy conservation comparison in its LCC and PBP analysis. The no-new-standards case represents a standard is economically justified. (42 The LCC is the sum of the purchase projection of energy consumption that U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)) The following price of a piece of equipment and the reflects how the market for the sections discuss how DOE has operating cost (including energy, equipment would likely evolve in the addressed each of those seven factors in maintenance, and repair expenditures) absence of new and amended energy this rulemaking. discounted over the lifetime of the conservation standards. equipment. The LCC analysis requires a DOE used its NIA spreadsheet models a. Economic Impact on Manufacturers variety of inputs, such as equipment to estimate energy savings from new and and Customers prices, equipment energy consumption, amended standards for beverage In determining the impacts of a energy prices, maintenance and repair vending machines. The NIA spreadsheet potential amended standard on costs, equipment lifetime, and discount model (described in section IV.H of this manufacturers, DOE conducts an MIA, rates appropriate for customers. To document) calculates savings in site as discussed in section IV.J of this account for uncertainty and variability energy, which is the energy directly document. DOE first uses an annual in specific inputs, such as equipment consumed by equipment at the locations cash-flow approach to determine the lifetime and discount rate, DOE uses a where they are used. Based on the site quantitative impacts. This step includes distribution of values, with probabilities energy, DOE calculates national energy both a short-term assessment—based on attached to each value. savings (NES) in terms of primary the cost and capital requirements during The PBP is the estimated amount of energy savings at the site or at power the period between when a regulation is time (in years) it takes customers to plants, and also in terms of full-fuel- issued and when entities must comply recover the increased purchase cost cycle (FFC) energy savings. The FFC with the regulation—and a long-term (including installation) of a more- metric includes the energy consumed in assessment over a 30-year period. The efficient piece of equipment through extracting, processing, and transporting industry-wide impacts analyzed lower operating costs. DOE calculates primary fuels (i.e., coal, natural gas, include: (1) The INPV, which values the the PBP by dividing the change in petroleum fuels), and thus presents a industry on the basis of expected future purchase cost due to a more-stringent more complete picture of the impacts of cash flows; (2) cash flows by year; (3) standard by the change in annual energy conservation standards.23 DOE’s operating cost for the year that approach is based on the calculation of changes in revenue and income; and (4) other measures of impact, as standards are assumed to take effect. an FFC multiplier for each of the energy For its LCC and PBP analysis, DOE appropriate. Second, DOE analyzes and types used by covered equipment. For assumed that customers will purchase reports the impacts on different types of more information on FFC energy the covered equipment in the first year manufacturers, including impacts on savings, see section IV.H.2 of this of compliance with amended standards. small manufacturers. Third, DOE document. The LCC savings for the considered considers the impact of standards on efficiency levels are calculated relative 2. Significance of Savings domestic manufacturer employment and to the case that reflects projected market manufacturing capacity, as well as the To adopt standards for any covered trends in the absence of amended potential for standards to result in plant equipment, DOE must determine that standards. DOE identifies the percentage closures and loss of capital investment. such action would result in of customers estimated to experience an Finally, DOE takes into account ‘‘significant’’ energy savings. (42 U.S.C. LCC increase, as well as calculates the cumulative impacts of various DOE 6295(o)(3)(B)) Although the term average LCC savings associated with a regulations and other regulatory ‘‘significant’’ is not defined in the Act, particular standard level. DOE’s LCC requirements on manufacturers. the U.S. Court of Appeals, for the and PBP analyses are discussed in District of Columbia Circuit in Natural For individual customers, measures of further detail in section IV.F of this Resources Defense Council v. economic impact include the changes in document. Herrington, 768 F.2d 1355, 1373 (D.C. LCC and PBP associated with new or amended standards. These measures are c. Energy Savings 22 Each TSL is composed of specific efficiency discussed further in the following Although significant conservation of levels for each equipment class. The TSL considered for this final rule are described in section. For customers in the aggregate, energy is a separate statutory section V.A. DOE also presents a sensitivity DOE also calculates the national NPV of requirement for adopting an energy analysis that considers impacts for equipment the economic impacts applicable to a conservation standard, EPCA requires shipped in a 9-year period. particular rulemaking. DOE also DOE, in determining the economic 23 The FFC metric is discussed in DOE’s statement of policy and notice of policy evaluates the LCC impacts of potential justification of a standard, to consider amendment. 76 FR 51282 (Aug. 18, 2011), as standards on identifiable subgroups of the total projected energy savings that amended at 77 FR 49701 (Aug. 17, 2012). customers that may be affected are expected to result directly from the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1042 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(III)) analysis to estimate how potential DOE used several analytical tools to As discussed in section IV.H of this standards may affect these emissions, as estimate the impact of the standards document, DOE uses the NIA discussed in section IV.K of this final considered in this document. The first spreadsheet models to project NES. rule; the emissions impacts are reported tool is a spreadsheet that calculates the in section V.B.6 of this document. DOE LCC savings and PBP of potential d. Lessening of Utility or Performance of also estimates the economic value of amended or new energy conservation Equipment emissions reductions resulting from the standards. The NIA uses a second In establishing equipment classes, and considered TSLs, as discussed in spreadsheet set that provides shipments in evaluating design options and the section IV.L of this document. forecasts and calculates NES and NPV of impact of potential standard levels, DOE total customer costs and savings g. Other Factors evaluates potential standards that would expected to result from potential energy not lessen the utility or performance of EPCA allows the Secretary of Energy, conservation standards. DOE uses the the considered equipment. (42 U.S.C. in determining whether a standard is third spreadsheet tool, the Government 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(IV)) DOE determined economically justified, to consider any Regulatory Impact Model (GRIM), to based on the data available that the other factors that the Secretary deems to assess manufacturer impacts of potential standards adopted in this final rule will be relevant. (42 U.S.C. standards. These three spreadsheet tools not reduce the utility or performance of 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(VII)) To the extent are available on the DOE Web site for the equipment under consideration in interested parties submit any relevant this rulemaking: https://www1.eere. this rulemaking. information regarding economic energy.gov/buildings/appliance_ justification that does not fit into the e. Impact of Any Lessening of standards/rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/73. other categories described above, DOE Competition Additionally, DOE used output from the could consider such information under latest version of EIA’s AEO, a widely EPCA directs DOE to consider the ‘‘other factors.’’ known energy forecast for the United impact of any lessening of competition, 2. Rebuttable Presumption States, for the emissions and utility as determined in writing by the impact analyses. Attorney General that is likely to result EPCA sets forth a rebuttable from a standard. (42 U.S.C. presumption that an energy A. Market and Technology Assessment 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V)) It also directs the conservation standard is economically DOE develops information in the Attorney General to determine the justified if the additional cost to the market and technology assessment that impact, if any, of any lessening of customer of a piece of equipment that provides an overall picture of the competition likely to result from a meets the standard is less than three market for the equipment concerned, standard and to transmit such times the value of the first year’s energy including the purpose of the equipment, determination to the Secretary within 60 savings resulting from the standard, as the industry structure, manufacturers, days of the publication of a proposed calculated under the applicable DOE market characteristics, and technologies rule, together with an analysis of the test procedure. (42 U.S.C. used in the equipment. This activity nature and extent of the impact. (42 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii)) DOE’s LCC and PBP includes both quantitative and U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(ii)) DOE analyses generate values used to qualitative assessments, based primarily transmitted a copy of its proposed rule calculate the effect the new and on publicly available information. to the Attorney General with a request amended energy conservation standards DOE reviewed relevant literature and that the Department of Justice (DOJ) have on the PBP for customers. These interviewed manufacturers to develop provide its determination on this issue. analyses include, but are not limited to, an overall picture of the BVM market in DOE received no adverse comments the 3-year PBP contemplated under the the United States. Industry publications, from DOJ regarding the proposed rule. rebuttable-presumption test. In addition, trade journals, government agencies, DOE routinely conducts an economic and trade organizations provided the f. Need for National Energy analysis that considers the full range of bulk of the information, including (1) Conservation impacts to customers, manufacturers, manufacturers and their market shares, DOE also considers the need for the Nation, and the environment, as (2) shipments by equipment type, (3) national energy conservation in required under 42 U.S.C. detailed equipment information, (4) determining whether a new or amended 6295(o)(2)(B)(i). The results of this industry trends, and (5) existing standard is economically justified. (42 analysis serve as the basis for DOE’s regulatory and non-regulatory U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(VI)) The energy evaluation of the economic justification equipment efficiency improvement savings from the adopted standards are for a potential standard level (thereby initiatives. The key findings of DOE’s likely to provide improvements to the supporting or rebutting the results of market assessment are summarized security and reliability of the nation’s any preliminary determination of below. See chapter 3 of the final rule energy system. Reductions in the economic justification). The rebuttable TSD for further discussion of the market demand for electricity also may result in presumption payback calculation is and technology assessment. reduced costs for maintaining the discussed in section IV.F of this final 1. Equipment Classes reliability of the nation’s electricity rule. system. DOE conducts a utility impact In this final rule, DOE is amending analysis to estimate how standards may IV. Methodology and Discussion of the energy conservation standards affect the nation’s needed power Related Comments established by the 2009 BVM final rule generation capacity, as discussed in This section addresses the analyses for Class A and Class B beverage section IV.M of this document. DOE has performed for this rulemaking vending machines. DOE believes that The adopted standards also are likely with regard to beverage vending Class A and Class B equipment classes to result in environmental benefits in machines. Each component of DOE’s continue to provide distinct utility to the form of reduced emissions of air analysis is discussed in the following customers and have different energy pollutants and greenhouse gases subsections, and DOE summarizes and profiles and applicable design options, associated with energy production and responds to associated comments as described below. As such, DOE has use. DOE conducts an emissions received in response to the NOPR. determined that it is appropriate to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1043

separately analyze and regulate Class A volumes, or compartments.24 In A and Class B beverage vending and Class B equipment. As noted addition, DOE is defining two new machines. previously, DOE is amending the equipment classes, Combination A and Table IV.1 summarizes the new and definition for Class A equipment to Combination B, as well as establishing amended definitions for the four more clearly and unambiguously new energy conservation standards for equipment classes analyzed in this final describe the equipment characteristics those equipment classes. In the 2009 rule. The definitions, as well as the that distinguishing Class A from Class B BVM final rule, DOE also established a general characteristics and equipment. Specifically, DOE definition for combination vending differentiating features, of the four distinguishes Class A equipment from machines but elected not to set equipment classes adopted in this final Class B equipment based on the standards for them at that time. 74 FR rule are described in the following presence of a transparent front. DOE is 44914, 44920 (Aug. 31, 2009). In subsections of this document. In also amending the definition of considering standards for combination addition, the following subsections combination vending machine to better vending machines as part of this address any comments received from align with industry definitions and rulemaking, DOE determined that the interested parties on DOE’s proposed provide more clarity regarding the presence of a transparent front is an definitions presented in the 2015 BVM physical characteristics of the important differentiating feature for ECS NOPR and DOE’s response to those ‘‘refrigerated’’ and ‘‘non-refrigerated’’ combination equipment, similar to Class comments.

TABLE IV.1—EQUIPMENT CLASSES FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES

Class Definition

A ...... A refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that is not a combination vending ma- chine and in which 25 percent or more of the surface area on the front side of the beverage vend- ing machine is transparent.25 B ...... Any refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that is not considered to be Class A and is not a combination vending machine. Combination A ...... A combination vending machine where 25 percent or more of the surface area on the front side of the beverage vending machine is transparent. Combination B ...... A combination vending machine that is not considered to be Combination A.

a. Class A and Class B Beverage Vending unambiguous definitions for Class A equipment types to better capture Machines and Class B beverage vending machines. differences in energy consumption. In a Specifically, in the 2014 DOE BVM test joint comment submitted on behalf of Class A and Class B equipment are procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to the California investor-owned utilities currently differentiated based on the define ‘‘fully cooled’’ as ‘‘a condition in (Pacific Gas and Electric Company cooling mechanism employed by the which the refrigeration system of a (PG&E), Southern California Gas equipment. The distinguishing criterion beverage vending machine cools Company (SCGC), San Diego Gas and between these two equipment classes is product throughout the entire Electric (SDG&E), Southern California whether the equipment is fully cooled. refrigerated volume of a machine Edison (SCE), and Arizona Public 10 CFR 431.292. instead of being directed at a fraction (or Service (APS); hereafter referred to as When the definitions of Class A and zone) of the refrigerated volume as CA IOUs) commenters suggested that Class B were established as part of the measured by the average temperature of the presence of a transparent or opaque 2009 final rule, DOE did not define the the standard test packages in the front and/or the arrangement of term ‘‘fully cooled.’’ In the framework furthest from the next-to-vend positions products within the machine could be document, DOE suggested defining being no more than 10 °F above the potential differentiating criteria that are ‘‘fully cooled’’ to mean a beverage integrated average temperature of the more appropriate and consistent with vending machine within which each standard test packages.’’ 79 FR 46908, the differentiation between equipment item in the beverage vending machine is 46934 (Aug. 11, 2014). To accompany configurations applied in industry. brought to and stored at temperatures DOE’s proposed definition of ‘‘fully (Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–TP–0045, ± ° that fall within 2 F of the average cooled,’’ the 2014 BVM test procedure CA IOUs, No. 0005 at p. 1) SVA also beverage temperature, which is the NOPR also proposed to adopt an supported this position. (Docket No. average of the temperatures of all the optional test method that could be used EERE–2013–BT–TP–0045, SVA, Public items in the next-to-vend position for to quantitatively differentiate between Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 52) each selection. 78 FR 33262 (June 4, Class A and Class B equipment. 79 FR Many interested parties also commented 2013). at 46917. on the difficulty of establishing a Throughout the course of this In response to the definition of ‘‘fully quantitative temperature threshold to rulemaking and the parallel DOE BVM cooled’’ proposed in the 2014 BVM test differentiate fully cooled equipment test procedure rulemaking, DOE has procedure NOPR, several interested from non-fully cooled equipment that discussed and received comments on parties recommended that DOE consider would be applicable across all BVM the most appropriate, clear, and an alternative differentiation between models. (Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–

24 The definition of combination vending captures the same intent as the term ‘‘volumes’’ in term ‘‘combination vending machine,’’ as that is the machine established by DOE in the 2009 BVM final the previous definition, but better indicates that the defined term for combination equipment at 10 CFR rule referenced the presence of ‘‘non-refrigerated ‘‘volumes’’ are to be physically separate. 431.292. DOE notes that this minor editorial change volumes’’ to differentiate combination vending 25 DOE notes that in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, does not affect the meaning or scope of the machines from other styles of beverage vending DOE proposed to the definition of Class A to definition, just ensure consistency between all of machines. In the amended definition for include the term ‘‘combination beverage vending the definition pertinent to the regulation of this combination vending machine, DOE is referring machine.’’ In this final rule, DOE is adopting a equipment. instead to ‘‘compartments,’’ which DOE believes definition of Class A that, instead, references the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1044 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

TP–0045, AMS, Public Meeting procedure NOPR and proposed an transparent front, while beverage Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 54; Docket alternative approach to differentiate vending machines with vertical product No. EERE–2013–BT–TP–0045, Coca- Class A and Class B equipment in the stacks are typically zone cooled and are Cola, No. 0010 at p. 4; Docket No. 2015 BVM ECS NOPR. Specifically, in fully opaque. DOE added that it is not EERE–2013–BT–TP–0045, Coca-Cola, the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE aware of any instances of BVM models No. 0010 at p. 4; Docket No. EERE– proposed to amend the definition of that are not fully cooled but which have 2013–BT–TP–0045, SVA, No. 0008 at p. Class A beverage vending machines to a transparent front and/or horizontal 2; Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–TP–0045, read as follows: product configuration or BVM models NEEA, No. 0009 at p. 1) Class A means a refrigerated bottled that are fully cooled but which have and or canned beverage vending machine opaque front and/or vertical stacks. In light of the extent and scope of the that is not a combination vending comments received in response to the Thus, DOE believed that, based on machine and in which 25 percent or current equipment designs, using amendments proposed in the 2014 BVM more of the surface area on the front criteria of (a) whether the equipment is test procedure NOPR regarding the side of the beverage vending machine is fully cooled, (b) whether the equipment proposed definition of fully cooled, transparent. alternative criteria for differentiating DOE did not propose in the 2015 has a transparent front, or (c) whether Class A and Class B equipment, and the BVM ECS NOPR to substantively the product arrangement is horizontal or optional fully cooled verification test modify the definition of Class B, since vertical, would result in virtually protocol, DOE wished to further Class B is defined as the mutually identical equipment categorization. consider potential classification options exclusive converse of Class A. However, Finally, DOE also noted that, since and criteria suggested by interested DOE made a minor editorial change to DOE’s engineering analysis considers parties, as well as provide interested include the term ‘‘that’’ to improve typical, representative equipment parties an additional opportunity to readability of the definition. 80 FR designs for each equipment class (see provide feedback on any proposals to 50462, 50474–50475 (Aug. 19, 2015). section IV.C), the cooling method, the amend the equipment class definitions. DOE also noted in the 2015 BVM ECS presence of a transparent or opaque As such, DOE responded to the NOPR that beverage vending machines front,26 and product arrangement are comments presented by interested with horizontal product rows are linked in DOE’s engineering analysis, as parties in response to the 2014 BVM test typically fully cooled and have a shown in Table IV.2. Id.

TABLE IV.2—EQUIPMENT CLASSES DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES MODELED IN THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

Vendible product Class Cooling method Transparent or opaque front orientation

A ...... Fully cooled ...... Transparent front ...... Horizontal product rows. B ...... Zone cooled ...... Opaque front ...... Vertical product stacks. Combination A ...... Fully cooled ...... Transparent front ...... Horizontal product rows. Combination B ...... Zone cooled ...... Opaque front ...... Vertical product stacks.

In response to DOE’s 2015 BVM ECS the use of digital video display screens product configuration and presence of a NOPR, NAMA and Royal Vendors, in in Class A equipment (NAMA, No. 50 at transparent front. Therefore, their written comments, stated that the p. 3) SVA agreed with NAMA and differentiating Class A and Class B presence of a transparent front does not expressed its belief that vending equipment based on either the product’s always correlate with fully-cooled machines with digital video display configuration or the transparency of the equipment, and that at least one screens should be considered as Class A front side of the BVM, rather than the manufacturer has developed fully- instead of Class B equipment (SVA, cooling method, would preserve the cooled vending machines with solid Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. same utility in each class of equipment. fronts. (NAMA, No. 50 at p. 3; Royal 19) Conversely, the CA IOUs expressed The presence of a transparent front Vendors, No. 54 at p. 3) SVA expressed their belief that equipment with provides a specific utility that allows a disagreement with DOE’s proposed transparent and opaque video screen customer to view and select from all of definition of Class A equipment because fronts should be regulated as separate the various next-to-vend product it stated that not all fully-cooled equipment classes, with non-transparent selections, which are all maintained at beverage vending machines have a screens classified as Class B and the appropriate vending temperature. In transparent panel and that this may transparent screens classified as Class this manner, the presence of a discourage the production of Class B A. (CA IOUs, No. 58 at p. 1) transparent front is inherently related to equipment due to the more stringent In determining the best way to clarify the cooling method of a beverage proposed standards for Class B. (SVA, the differentiation of Class A and Class vending machine (i.e., whether or not No. 53 at p. 1) AMS stated that the B equipment, DOE considered all the equipment is ‘‘fully cooled’’). DOE presence of a transparent front does not comments submitted by interested acknowledges that there may be some necessarily reflect the design intent or parties, as well as the manner in which fully cooled beverage vending machines energy consumption characteristics of equipment is currently categorized by that have an opaque front and, as such, the machine (AMS, No. 57 at p. 2) DOE and industry. It is DOE’s continued will be subject to the energy NAMA also expressed concern that understanding that the cooling method conservation standard for Class B. For the transparency requirement excludes is significantly correlated with the example, in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR,

26 In this notice, DOE uses the terms ‘‘solid front,’’ meet DOE’s definition of Class A or Combination beverage vending machine does not meet the ‘‘opaque front,’’ and ‘‘non-transparent’’ front A. That is, equipment where greater than 75 percent definition of ‘‘transparent’’ adopted in this final interchangeably to refer to equipment that does not of the material used to construct the front of the rule.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1045

DOE pointed to test data that differing only in one design meeting, the panel behind any external demonstrated some equipment with characteristic—either a transparent front customer display signs or digital screens opaque fronts and small refrigerated or a fully cooled interior. That is, DOE is typically insulated. (SVA, Public volumes experience temperature modeled the following three BVM unit Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. 24–25) differentials of less than 2 °F between configurations: DOE notes that external customer digital the next-to-vend and furthest from next- (1) A BVM unit with a fully cooled screens and customer display signs are to-vend beverage locations and are, refrigerated volume and a transparent not required to be energized during the therefore, effectively ‘‘fully cooled.’’ 80 front testing of beverage vending machines, in FR 50462, 50478 (Aug. 19, 2015). (2) a BVM unit with a fully cooled accordance with the newly adopted However, DOE believes that the Class B refrigerated volume and a solid front BVM test procedure. 80 FR 45758, standards are more appropriate for such (3) a BVM unit with a zone cooled 45778–45780 (July 31, 2015). equipment because the insulating refrigerated volume and a transparent Accordingly, the energy consumption quality of the transparent versus non- front. and heat transfer characteristics of a transparent front has a larger impact on DOE compared the modeled DEC of BVM model with an external, opaque energy consumption than the cooling number 1) and number 2) to determine digital screen is much more similar to method. the impact of a transparent front and the energy consumption and heat DOE believes that the presence of a compared number 1) and number 3) to transfer characteristics of a BVM model transparent front provides the customer determine the impact of the cooling with an opaque, insulated front than a with the specific utility of being able to method. The results of this analysis BVM model with a transparent front. see all the available the product indicated that the difference in energy Regarding equipment with selections and choose from the larger consumption between a BVM model transparent digital screens, DOE number of merchandise options that are that has a transparent front as compared acknowledges the statement by CA IOUs provided by Class A equipment. In to a model that does not is greater than that equipment with transparent display addition, DOE notes that the presence of the difference in energy consumption screens where all materials between the a transparent material on the front side between a BVM model that is fully refrigerated space and external ambient of a beverage vending machine has a cooled as compared to one that is not. environment meet the definition of larger impact on the energy Based on this analysis, DOE has transparent will be treated as part of the consumption of a given beverage determined that the presence of a transparent surface area under DOE’s vending machine than the cooling transparent front is closely correlated to definition. As such, equipment with method or equipment product the utility associated with Class A large transparent display screens (such arrangement. Thus, while DOE equipment and directly corresponds to as, potentially, holograms projected continues to believe that the presence of the energy consumption of the onto glass) that still enabled the BVM a transparent front, a ‘‘fully cooled’’ equipment. Because the cooling method user to see the refrigerated merchandise refrigerated volume, and horizontal and the presence of a glass or solid front inside the BVM refrigerated product placement are all representative are correlated in practice for the vast compartment and constitute at least 25 characteristics of most Class A majority of equipment, DOE believes percent of the front side of the beverage equipment, DOE believes that defining that clarifying DOE’s equipment class vending machine would be categorized equipment classes based on the feature definitions using the presence of a as a Class A beverage vending machine. that is most related to the unique utility transparent front (an unambiguous However, DOE notes that it is not aware and which has the largest impact on the equipment characteristic based on of any such technology on the market energy use of the equipment is the most customer utility) will not result in today. appropriate criterion to use to ensure significant changes to the classification Consequently, in this final rule, DOE that the utility provided by Class A of BVM models that are currently maintains that only BVM models where equipment is maintained in the available on the market. at least 25 percent of the surface area on marketplace. Similarly, regarding the treatment of the front side of the beverage vending While DOE acknowledges that there digital screens, DOE agrees with CA machine is transparent, and that is not may be some opaque front equipment IOUs that the transparency of BVM a combination vending machine, will be that is fully cooled, DOE believes that it models equipped with digital screens considered to be Class A. Conversely, if is more appropriate for such equipment should be ascertained as it is for BVM greater than 75 percent of the surface to be treated as Class B. Because an models with conventional glass or panel area on the front side of the beverage opaque, insulated panel has materials. That is, transparency should vending machine is not transparent, and significantly different heat transfer be determined for all the materials the beverage vending machine is not a characteristics than a transparent glass between the refrigerated volume and the combination vending machine, then the front, a BVM model that is insulated on ambient environment and only if the beverage vending machine will be all six sides should use less energy than aggregate performance of all those considered to be Class B. DOE notes that a similar BVM model with a transparent materials yields a light transmittance of the amended Class A definition only front. That is, DOE believes energy greater than or equal to 45 percent considers transparent area on the front consumption and the presence of a would that area be treated as side of beverage vending machine and transparent front are correlated. transparent. transparency must be determined for the DOE performed a sensitivity analysis DOE believes that this is the most entire panel, as described in section using the engineering analysis appropriate and reasonable treatment of IV.A.1.c. spreadsheet to compare the impact of a equipment with digital screens because As interested parties did not suggest transparent front versus solid front on the energy consumption of BVM models any alternative definitions or DEC with the impact of a fully cooled with opaque digital screens is more differentiating characteristics, DOE refrigerated volume versus a zone similar to the energy consumption of believes that modifying the definitions cooled refrigerated volume on DEC. BVM models with opaque, insulated of Class A and Class B to rely on the Specifically, DOE compared the fronts than to BVM models with presence of a transparent front allows analytically derived performance of two transparent fronts. That is, as noted by for the most clear and unambiguous specific sets of representative units SVA in the BVM ECS NOPR public differentiation of equipment classes.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1046 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

Further, DOE believes referencing the ‘‘refrigerated’’ and ‘‘non-refrigerated’’ shelf separating refrigerated and non- presence of a transparent front to compartments contained in a refrigerated compartments and identify Class A equipment generally combination vending machine based on temperature controls in the aligns with DOE’s and industry’s whether a compartment is designed to compartment intended to be interpretation of Class A machines to be refrigerated, as demonstrated by the refrigerated, DOE notes that this is in date. DOE notes that the amended Class presence of temperature controls. 80 FR fact consistent with its proposed A and Class B definitions are effective 50462, 50478–50480 (Aug. 19, 2015). definition for combination vending on the effective date of this final rule. DOE also proposed that, similar to machines, provided the insulated shelf Class A and Class B equipment classes, is a ‘‘solid partition’’ and does not allow b. Combination Vending Machines the transparency of the front side of the for air transfer between the In the 2009 BVM final rule, DOE vending machine can differentiate compartments outside of the product established a definition for combination certain styles of combination vending delivery chute. To clarify, DOE notes vending machines (74 FR 44914, 44920 machines that provide a unique utility that the combination vending machine (Aug. 31, 2009)). That definition in the marketplace because their definition only requires temperature describes a combination vending specific design attributes allow the controls in the compartment that is machine as a refrigerated bottled or equipment to be stocked with a wider designed to be refrigerated. canned beverage machine that also has variety of product selections that can be In response to Mr. Chesney’s inquiry non-refrigerated volumes for the viewed directly through the regarding whether two separate cabinets purpose of vending other, non-‘‘sealed equipment’s transparent front. As such, attached to each other would constitute beverage’’ merchandise. 10 CFR in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE a combination vending machine, DOE 431.292. However, the 2009 BVM final proposed to define two new equipment clarifies that, consistent with all rule did not consider or differentiate classes at 10 CFR 431.292, Combination equipment, compliance for each model equipment within the combination A and Combination B, and defined is based on how that model is vending machine equipment category or those equipment classes as follows: distributed in commerce. That is, if the address any specific criteria that could Combination A means a combination vending machine: (1) Is distributed in be used to differentiate ‘‘refrigerated’’ vending machine where 25 percent or commerce as a single piece of and ‘‘non-refrigerated.’’ more of the surface area on the front equipment and (2) includes at least one In its recent test procedure side of the beverage vending machine is compartment that was designed to be rulemaking, culminating in the 2015 transparent. refrigerated (demonstrated by the BVM test procedure final rule, DOE Combination B means a combination presence of temperature controls) and at considered the applicability of the vending machine that is not considered least one compartment that is not combination vending machine to be Combination A. designed to be refrigerated (and, definition to equipment designs it has Id. therefore, does not include temperature encountered on the market, and In response to DOE’s proposed new controls) separated by a solid partition, considered stakeholder comments on and amended definitions for such equipment meets the definition of the definition of ‘‘combination vending Combination A, Combination B, and combination vending machine and machine.’’ 80 FR 45758, 45765–45767 combination vending machine, several would be classified as either (July 31, 2015). In the 2015 BVM test interested parties raised questions about Combination A or Combination B for the procedure final rule, DOE clarified the DOE’s proposed definitions. In purposes of compliance with DOE’s test procedure for combination vending particular, AMS stated that machines energy conservation standards. Such machines and noted that such intended to dispense both refrigerated equipment may share the same product equipment must include compartments and unrefrigerated products have an deliver chute or include separate that are physically separated, while insulated tray between the refrigerated product delivery chutes. acknowledging that some combination and unrefrigerated compartments and In response to EVA’s suggestion that equipment designs may employ a are defined as combination vending DOE use simple and understandable common product delivery chute machines by their company. (AMS, definitions, similar to those in the between the refrigerated and non- Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. European vending market, DOE refrigerated compartments for the 18) AMS also stated that its combination researched the definitions used in purposes of delivering vendible vending machines only have Europe to describe beverage vending merchandise to the customer. DOE also temperature controls for the machines and was not able to find gave notice that it would seek to further compartment intended to be refrigerated consistent definitions or terminology clarify the definition of ‘‘combination and therefore do not meet DOE’s that are publically available and such vending machine’’ in this BVM energy proposed definition for combination definitions were note provided in EVA’s conservation standard final rule. Id. at vending machines. (AMS, No. 57 at p. comments. However, DOE continues to 45765–45767. 2) Steven Chesney of Seaga inquired if believe that the definitions adopted in As such, in consideration of the input a non-cooled refrigerated compartment this final rule represent the clearest and from various commenters throughout attached to a separate cabinet with a most unambiguous approach to both the test procedure and energy refrigerated compartment would be differentiating equipment classes for the conservation standards rulemaking considered as a combination vending U.S. market. processes, as well as of the range of machine. (Steven Chesney, Public In response to DOE’s 2015 BVM ECS equipment designs that DOE has Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. 26) NOPR, NAMA stated that DOE’s observed for sale on the market, DOE EVA commented that DOE should use proposed definition of combination proposed in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR ‘‘simple and understandable’’ vending machines is inconsistent with an amended definition of ‘‘combination definitions and consider defining them industry practice and the EPA’s vending machine.’’ Specifically, DOE similar to the European definitions. ENERGY STAR definition and requested proposed to amend the definition of (EVA, No. 60 at p. 2) that DOE change this definition to be ‘‘combination vending machine’’ to In response to AMS’s comments consistent with industry practice. more clearly and unambiguously regarding their combination vending NAMA specifically stated that very few establish the distinction between machine designs, featuring an insulated vending machines have a [fully-

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1047

extending] solid partition, and that exchange between compartments occurs clearly determine whether a BVM model instead many of them allow air to only unintentionally through the ‘‘has a transparent front’’ based on the comingle between the unrefrigerated common product delivery chute. If a percentage of transparent surface area and refrigerated compartments. NAMA vending machine model were to feature on the front side of the beverage additionally stated that the openings in the solid partition designed vending machine. Specifically, DOE unrefrigerated space pulls down to to allow for air transfer between the proposed the procedure by which DOE nearly the same temperature as the compartments, other than the product would (1) determine the surface area of refrigerated volume over time in delivery chute, such equipment would beverage vending machines and (2) machines it considers to be combination not be considered a combination determine whether such surface area is vending machines. (NAMA, No. 50 at p. vending machine as it would not transparent. However, DOE noted that 1) In the Form Letters, commenters include any ‘‘non-refrigerated’’ these procedures would not be required stated the definition of combination compartments. That is, DOE interprets for rating and certification of specific vending machines were not consistent the designed presence of openings in BVM models. Under the proposal, with terms used in industry. (The Form the solid partition as a means of manufacturers would be able to certify Letter Writers, No. 64 and 65 at p. 1) ‘‘intentional refrigeration’’ of that equipment as Class A, Class B, compartment. Therefore, equipment that In response to comments from NAMA Combination A, or Combination B based is designed for air transfer between and the Form Letter Writers that DOE’s on knowledge of the specific equipment compartments is treated as Class A or definition of combination vending dimensions and characteristics. Class B, depending on whether or not machine should be consistent with the However, DOE would use these the equipment featured a transparent ENERGY STAR or other industry procedures in enforcement testing to front (see sections IV.A.1.a and IV.A.1.c) definitions for such equipment, DOE verify the appropriate equipment Based on the comments submitted by classification for all cases. As such, DOE notes that the ENERGY STAR definition interested parties, DOE is adopting, in of combination vending machines is also noted that where the appropriate this final rule, the amended definition equipment classification is not identical to the current DOE definition for combination vending machine and for combination vending machine. DOE abundantly clear, manufacturers may new definitions for Combination A and elect to perform the test to ensure they is not aware of any other specific Combination B, as proposed in the 2015 industry definitions that are relevant for are categorizing their equipment BVM ECS NOPR. As noted in the 2015 properly. To clarify that such this equipment, and notes that the BVM test procedure final rule, DOE ‘‘industry’’ terms mentioned by The procedures are only optional for believes that both appendix A and manufacturers, DOE proposed to add Form Letter Writers were not provided appendix B of the amended DOE BVM in comments. As noted previously, DOE such procedures to the product-specific test procedure are applicable to enforcement provisions at 10 CFR believes the existing definition could be combination vending machines. 80 FR made more clear and unambiguous to 429.134. 80 FR 50462, 50476–50480 45758 (July 31, 2015). Specifically, (Aug. 19, 2015). improve the consistency of equipment appendix A of the DOE BVM test definition for regulatory purposes. In procedure is applicable to combination Specifically, to determine the surface addition, in response to NAMA’s vending machines for the purposes of area, DOE proposed to specify that the observation that typical combination making any representations regarding total surface area of the front side of the vending machines do not have a fully the energy consumption of such beverage vending machine, from edge to extending solid partition, DOE notes equipment beginning January 27, 2016. edge, be determined as the total length that the definition of combination Id. However, beginning on the multiplied by the total height of a specifies that such equipment have two compliance date of this final rule, beverage vending machine. DOE also compartments, separated by a solid manufacturers of combination vending proposed to specify that the transparent partition, but that such equipment may machines will be required to use surface area would consist of all areas also include a common product delivery appendix B of the DOE BVM test composed of transparent material on the chute. DOE agrees with NAMA that, for procedure for the purposes of front side of a beverage vending many designs of combination demonstrating compliance with any machine, and that the non-transparent equipment on the market today, the such energy conservation standards and surface area would consist of all areas common product delivery chute may when making representations regarding composed of material that is not prevent the solid partition separating the energy consumption of covered transparent on the front side of a the refrigerated and non-refrigerated equipment. beverage vending machine, where the compartments from fully extending sum of the transparent and non- from front to back and side to side. That c. Definition of Transparent and transparent surface areas should equal is, the solid partition need not thermally Optional Test Method for Determining the total surface area of the front side of isolate the refrigerated compartment(s) Equipment Classification a beverage vending machine, as shown from the non-refrigerated In the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE in Figure IV.1. 80 FR 50462, 50476 compartment(s) provided any air proposed a quantitative criterion to (Aug. 19, 2015).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1048 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

In the 2014 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE compartment(s) would not be equipment or containing the product also noted that the same optional test considered. That is, all the surfaces that selection and delivery apparatus) would protocol to determine the transparency surround and enclose the compartment be considered in the calculation of of materials and the relative surface designed to be refrigerated (as transparent and non-transparent surface areas of transparent and non-transparent demonstrated by the presence of area for a beverage vending machine, as surfaces would be applicable to temperature controls), as well as any shown in Figure IV.2. 80 FR at 50479 combination vending machines except surfaces that do not enclose any (Aug. 19, 2015). that, the external surface areas product-containing compartments (e.g., surrounding the non-refrigerated surfaces surrounding any mechanical

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 ER08JA16.000 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1049

For both Class A and Combination A the intended direction of viewing. With (CA IOUs, No. 58 at p. 1) Similarly, in beverage vending machines, in the 2015 regard to beverage vending machines, written comments, NAMA and Royal BVM ECS NOPR, DOE also proposed a DOE also clarified that, when Vendors stated that the 45 percent light specific definition and criteria to determining material properties, that the transmittance criterion for the determine whether a material is transparency of the BVM cabinet determination of transparency of the transparent. Specifically, DOE proposed materials should be determined with glass front of a vending machine is to adopt the definition of transparent consideration of all the materials used acceptable at this time, but may not be that is applicable to commercial to construct the wall segment(s), since so in the future if better low-emissivity refrigeration equipment,27 as adopted in the utility of the transparent material is coatings are developed. (NAMA, No. 50 the 2014 commercial refrigeration only applicable if the viewer can clearly at p. 3; Royal Vendors, No. 54 at p. 3) equipment test procedure final rule. 10 see the refrigerated products contained In written comments, Royal Vendors CFR 431.62; 79 FR 22277, 22286–22287, within the refrigerated volume of the stated also that the definition of Class A and 22308 (April 21, 2014). Under this beverage vending machine. 80 FR would apply to a unit in which at least definition, the term ‘‘transparent’’ 50462, 50477 (Aug. 19, 2015). 25 percent of the front surface area is would apply to any material with transparent, but that the definition of greater than or equal to 45 percent light In response to DOE’s proposed definition of transparent and optional transparency would not always be met transmittance, as determined in by equipment Royal Vendors considers accordance with the ASTM Standard E test method for determining the relative transparent surface area, DOE received to be ‘‘Class A.’’ (Royal Vendors, No. 54 1084–86 (Reapproved 2009), ‘‘Standard at p. 3) Test Method for Solar Transmittance several comments and suggestions from (Terrestrial) of Sheet Materials Using interested parties. The CA IOUs In response to the comments Sunlight,’’ at normal incidence and in recommended that DOE more clearly submitted by the CA IOUs regarding the define the equipment classes being treatment of certain equipment with 27 As a beverage vending machine is defined as regulated using the term, ‘‘transparent.’’ respect to the term ‘‘transparent,’’ DOE a type of commercial refrigerator, DOE believes that The CA IOUs also recommended that clarifies that the definition of it is consistent and appropriate to use the same DOE amend its definition of Class A transparent adopted in this final rule is definition of transparent for both commercial refrigeration equipment and beverage vending equipment to take into account possible applicable to all classes of beverage machines. fluctuations in transparency of the front. vending machines. In particular, the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 ER08JA16.001 1050 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

definition of transparent is pertinent to DOE’s definition of transparent and, if maintenance needed to preserve differentiating Class A equipment from necessary, revise the definition of perishables are achieved through the Class B equipment and Combination A transparent accordingly. application of control settings rather equipment from Combination B Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is than through design changes. In equipment. Similarly, DOE also uses the adopting a definition of transparent addition, such equipment can be tested term to determine equipment applicable to materials with greater than using DOE’s existing method of testing classification for commercial or equal to 45 percent light and does not have significantly different refrigeration equipment, the definition transmittance based testing in energy consumption profiles from other of transparent adopted in this final rule accordance with ASTM Standard E beverage vending machines when tested is pertinent only to beverage vending 1084–86 (Reapproved 2009). DOE using DOE’s methodology. Therefore, machines. reiterates that this test method is DOE does not believe separate In response to the comments by CA optional and is not required for equipment classes and standard levels IOUs, NAMA, and Royal Vendors equipment certification or testing by are warranted for beverage vending regarding the suitability of the 45 manufacturers. Specifically, machines that are capable of vending percent threshold for light manufacturers may continue to specify perishable goods, and DOE is not transmittance, DOE notes that it has the appropriate equipment class without implementing a separate class for such considered the current and potential determining the light transmittance of equipment in this final rule. As such, future characteristics of advanced, high- materials based on testing in accordance equipment that vends perishable with ASTM Standard E 1084–86 performing glass and acrylic products products along with at least one sealed (Reapproved 2009) However, if the featuring low-emissivity coatings, low beverage must be tested in accordance transparency of a material is in solar heat gain, or other features that with the DOE test procedure and must question, the determination of the light may impact the overall light meet applicable energy conservation transmittance of a transparent material transmittance of the material. In the standards. Vending machines that are must be determined in accordance with commercial refrigeration equipment test not capable of vending sealed beverages ASTM Standard E 1084–86 (Reapproved procedure NOPR, DOE had originally or are not refrigerated do not meet 2009) and DOE will use this test method DOE’s definition of beverage vending proposed that a transparent material to determine equipment classification in machine and, as such, are not subject to was any material with greater than or enforcement testing. standards, test procedures, and equal to 65 percent light transmittance, certification and reporting requirements consistent with the definition of total 2. Machines Vending Perishable Goods for beverage vending machines. display area in the Air-Conditioning, In response to DOE’s 2015 BVM ECS DOE agrees with SVA that beverage Heating, and Refrigeration Institute NOPR, NAMA and Royal Vendors stated vending machines that may be (AHRI) Standard 1200 (I–P)–2010 (AHRI that vending machines that vend configured to, or capable of, vending 1200–2010), ‘‘Performance Rating of perishable goods should be regulated perishable goods do not require a Commercial Refrigerated Display under a separate equipment class separate equipment class or separate Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets.’’ because they must maintain energy conservation standards. 78 FR 64295, 64301–64302 (Oct. 28, temperatures that do not allow for a Specifically, as noted in comments 2013). However, after conducting refrigeration low power mode credit. provided by interested parties in market research regarding the visible (NAMA, No. 50 at p. 5; Royal Vendors, response to the framework document, transmittance of typical materials used No. 54 at p. 4) Conversely, SVA including Witterns, Crane, AMS, and in commercial refrigeration equipment expressed agreement with DOE’s NAMA (see preliminary TSD chapter 2) manufacturing, as well as new high- position that vending machines that DOE understands that the same BVM performing glass products that could be vend perishable goods do not require a models may be configured to vend used in such an application, DOE separate equipment classification. (SVA, perishable or non-perishable goods. adopted a threshold of 45 percent in the No. 53 at p. 2) DOE also believes, based on market 2014 CRE test procedure final rule. 79 DOE notes that there are beverage research and input from interested FR 22277, 22287 (April 21, 2014). In vending machines that are capable of parties, that, if the BVM model is support of this BVM ECS final rule, DOE vending certain perishable products that configured to vend perishable goods, the conducted additional research into the may require more strict temperature refrigeration low power mode that may glass and acrylic products typically control than beverage vending machines be installed on the machine as used by manufacturers to produce Class that only vend non-perishable products, distributed in commerce is simply A and Combination A beverage vending such as bottled or canned soda, juice, or disabled or overridden for that machines, as well as any new, high- water. DOE notes such perishable particular installation. DOE additionally performing glass products that may have products may or may not be sealed understands that installations where been introduced since DOE’s review for beverages but that, if a vending machine beverage vending machines are the 2014 CRE test procedure final rule. is refrigerated and is capable of, or can configured to vend perishable goods Based on its review, DOE believes that be configured to, vend sealed beverages represent a minority of installations, a the threshold of 45 percent light for at least one of the product selections, position supported in public comments transmittance to determine transparency then the vending machine meets DOE’s provided by Royal Vendors and NAMA is equally applicable to materials that definition of beverage vending machine (see preliminary TSD chapter 2). are typically used to manufacture both and must comply with DOE’s commercial refrigeration equipment and regulations for this equipment. 3. Market Characterization beverage vending machines. DOE will Based on input from interested parties As part of the market and technology continue to monitor the BVM and CRE provided throughout this rulemaking, assessment, DOE identified and market for any new materials integrated DOE believes that machines capable of characterized relevant trade into equipment designs that meet DOE’s vending perishable goods are generally associations, manufacturers and their intent of allow customers to view the not materially different from other market shares, and current regulatory merchandise contained within the beverage vending machines, and that programs and non-regulatory initiatives refrigerated space but do not meet the necessary levels of temperature related to BVM energy use. Details

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1051

related to this characterization are in STAR standards as a result of today’s analysis. While DOE notes that the chapter 3 of the final rule TSD. rulemaking, DOE notes that ENERGY majority of currently available In response to the 2015 BVM ECS STAR is a voluntary program that exists equipment uses R–134a for its NOPR, DOE received several comments to help customers identify energy- refrigerant, and R–134a will no longer related to the role that the ENERGY efficient equipment on the market and be available for BVM applications at the STAR program plays in the U.S. BVM save on energy costs. Specifically, the time compliance will be required with market. In the BVM ECS NOPR public ENERGY STAR program includes only any amended standards established as meeting and in written comments, EEA those equipment that exceeds mandated part of this final rule (80 FR 42870, Joint Commenters expressed the belief minimum standards that DOE is 42917–42920 (July 20, 2015)), DOE that minimum efficiency standards and required by statute to set and enforce. believes that the majority of technology the ENERGY STAR program are Due to its nature as a voluntary options considered in DOE’s analysis complementary and that, by nature of program, DOE does not consider the and presented in the following list are being mandatory, DOE’s energy impact of its energy conservation applicable to all beverage vending conservation standards program is able standards on potential updates to machines, regardless of the refrigerant to save more energy than ENERGY ENERGY STAR standards in its utilized. Specifically, DOE considered STAR alone. (EEA Joint Commenters, analysis. DOE coordinates with EPA on the following technologies in this final No. 56 at p. 4; EEA Joint Commenters, ENERGY STAR in order to reevaluate rule analyses: Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. the ENERGY STAR specifications when • Higher efficiency lighting 118) The Form Letter Writers stated DOE promulgates new or amended • higher efficiency evaporator fan standards would eliminate the current standards. motors ENERGY STAR specification as the DOE also received several comments • higher efficiency evaporator fan most efficient which would remove the in response to the 2015 BVM ECS blades credibility of the ENERGY STAR NOPR’s request for updated estimates • improved evaporator design Industry. (The Form Letter Writers, No. for the market share of combination • evaporator fan motor controllers 64 and 65 at p. 1) SVA expressed its vending machines. AMS commented • low-pressure-differential belief at the BVM ECS NOPR public that it only manufactures Class A evaporators • meeting that voluntary standards such machines and that its production insulation improvements (including as ENERGY STAR are more effective in volume is split roughly evenly between foam insulation thickness increase and driving the market towards more Class A and Combination A machines. use of improved materials such as efficient equipment than DOE’s (AMS, No. 57 at p. 2) In its written vacuum insulated panels) • mandatory standards. (SVA, Public submission, NAMA stated that it did not improved glass pack (for Class A and Combination A equipment) Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. 117) In have data to estimate the market share • written comments, Royal Vendors, of combination vending machines higher efficiency defrost mechanism NAMA, and Coca-Cola stated that specifically, but it estimated that • ENERGY STAR certification is required beverage vending machines are higher efficiency compressors • variable speed compressors by a majority of equipment purchasers, approximately 60 percent of the total • increased condenser performance and that DOE’s proposed standards market for vending machines. • higher efficiency condenser fan DOE thanks these stakeholders for would trigger a revision to ENERGY motors STAR to further reduce allowable their submission of specific data and • higher efficiency condenser fan energy consumption below the DOE has incorporated it into the analysis. blades standard. These stakeholders added that 4. Technology Options • microchannel heat exchangers a revision to the ENERGY STAR • higher efficiency expansion valves standard in response to DOE’s BVM ECS As part of the technology assessment, • improved anti-sweat heaters rulemaking would make it more DOE developed a list of technologies to • lighting controls (including timers difficult to meet their customers’ consider for improving the efficiency of and/or sensors) expectations for the ENERGY STAR beverage vending machines. DOE • refrigeration low power modes. label. Coca Cola added that considers as design options all Chapter 3 of the final rule TSD manufacturers may devote more technologies that meet the screening includes the detailed description of all resources to developing technologies criteria (see section I.B) and that technology options DOE identified for that can immediately meet newly- produce quantifiable results under the consideration in this rulemaking. DOE test procedure. revised ENERGY STAR standards, B. Screening Analysis instead of investing in the development DOE typically uses information about of technologies that may result in more existing and past technology options The purpose of the screening analysis significant energy savings in the long and prototype designs to help determine is to evaluate the technologies identified term. (Royal Vendors, No. 54 at p. 7; which technologies manufacturers can in the technology assessment to NAMA, No. 50 at p. 14; Coca-Cola, No. use to attain higher energy performance determine which technologies to 52 at p. 3). levels. In consultation with interested consider further and which technologies DOE thanks the EEA Joint parties, DOE develops a list of to screen out. DOE consulted with Commenters and SVA for their technologies for consideration in its industry, technical experts, and other comments regarding the efficacy of screening and engineering analyses. interested parties in developing a list of ENERGY STAR in driving the market Initially these technologies encompass energy-saving technologies for the towards increased efficiency and agrees all those that DOE believes are technology assessment, detailed in with the EEA Joint Commenters’ technologically feasible. Since many chapter 3 of the final rule TSD. DOE assessment of ENERGY STAR and options for improving equipment then applied the screening criteria to DOE’s energy conservation standards as efficiency are available in existing determine which technologies were being complementary and more equipment, equipment literature and unsuitable for further consideration in effective than voluntary standards direct examination of BVM units this rulemaking. Chapter 4 of the final alone. In response to comments currently on the market provided much rule TSD contains details about DOE’s regarding potential revision to ENERGY of the information underlying this screening criteria.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1052 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

DOE uses the following four screening proprietary, and thus, did not eliminate A design-option approach identifies criteria to determine which technology any technologies for that reason. individual technology options (from the options are suitable for further market and technology assessment) that 2. Remaining Technologies consideration in an energy conservation can be used alone or in combination standards rulemaking: Through a review of each technology, with other technology options to (1) Technological feasibility. DOE DOE concludes that all of the other increase the energy efficiency of a given considers only those technologies identified technologies listed in this BVM unit. Under this approach, cost incorporated in commercial equipment section IV.B.2 met all four screening estimates of the baseline equipment and or in working prototypes to be criteria to be examined further as design more-efficient equipment that technologically feasible. options in DOE’s final rule analysis. In incorporates design options are based (2) Practicability to manufacture, summary, DOE did not screen out the on manufacturer or component supplier install, and service. If it is determined following technology options: data or engineering computer • Higher efficiency lighting simulation models. Individual design that mass production and reliable • installation and servicing of a higher efficiency evaporator fan options, or combinations of design technology in commercial equipment motors options, are added to the baseline model • higher efficiency evaporator fan could not be achieved on the scale in descending order of cost- blades effectiveness. necessary to serve the relevant market at • evaporator fan motor controllers the time of the projected compliance • An efficiency-level approach improved evaporator design establishes the relationship between date of the standard, then that • low-pressure differential technology will not be considered manufacturer cost and increased evaporators efficiency at predetermined efficiency further. • improvements to anti-sweat heaters levels above the baseline. Under this (3) Impacts on equipment utility or • improved or thicker insulation product availability. If it is determined • higher efficiency defrost approach, DOE typically assesses that a technology would have significant mechanisms increases in manufacturer cost for adverse impact on the utility of the • higher efficiency compressors incremental increases in efficiency, without identifying the technology or product to significant subgroups of • variable speed compressors • design options that would be used to customers or would result in the microchannel heat exchangers • achieve such increases. unavailability of any covered equipment improved condenser design • higher efficiency condenser fan A reverse-engineering, or cost- type with performance characteristics assessment, approach involves (including reliability), features, sizes, motors • higher efficiency condenser fan disassembling representative units of capacities, and volumes that are blades beverage vending machines, and substantially the same as equipment • improved glass pack design (for estimating the manufacturing costs generally available in the United States Class A and Combination A machines) based on a ‘‘bottom-up’’ manufacturing at the time, it will not be considered • lighting controls cost assessment; such assessments use further. • refrigeration low power modes detailed data to estimate the costs for (4) Adverse impacts on health or DOE determined that these parts and materials, labor, shipping/ safety. If it is determined that a technology options are technologically packaging, and investment for models technology would have significant feasible because they are being used or that operate at particular efficiency adverse impacts on health or safety, it have previously been used in levels. will not be considered further. commercially available equipment or As discussed in the 2015 BVM ECS 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix working prototypes. DOE also finds that NOPR, DOE employed the design-option A, 4(a)(4) and 5(b). all of the remaining technology options approach to develop the relationship In sum, if DOE determines that a meet the other screening criteria (i.e., between energy use of a beverage technology, or a combination of practicable to manufacture, install, and vending machine and MSP. The technologies, fails to meet one or more service and do not result in adverse decision to use this approach was made of the above four criteria, it will be impacts on customer utility, equipment due to several factors, including the lack excluded from further consideration in availability, health, or safety). For of numerous discrete levels of the engineering analysis. The reasons additional details, see chapter 4 of the equipment efficiency currently available for eliminating any technology are final rule TSD. on the market and the prevalence of discussed below. energy-saving technologies applicable to The subsequent sections address C. Engineering Analysis this equipment. More specifically, DOE DOE’s evaluation of each technology The engineering analysis establishes identified design options for analysis option against the screening analysis the relationship between an increase in and used a combination of industry criteria and DOE’s determination of energy efficiency of the equipment and research and teardown-based cost technology options excluded (‘‘screened the corresponding increase in modeling to determine manufacturing out’’) based on the screening criteria. manufacturer selling price (MSP) costs, then employed numerical associated with that efficiency level. modeling to determine the energy 1. Screened-Out Technologies This relationship serves as the basis for consumption of each combination of These four screening criteria do not cost-benefit calculations for individual design options employed in increasing include the propriety status of design customers, manufacturers, and the equipment efficiency. The resulting options. As noted previously, DOE will nation. DOE typically structures its range of equipment efficiency levels and only consider efficiency levels achieved engineering analysis using one of three associated manufacturer production through the use of proprietary designs approaches: (1) The design-option costs (MPCs) were converted to MSPs in the engineering analysis if they are approach, (2) the efficiency-level using information regarding typical not part of a unique path to achieve that approach, or (3) the cost-assessment manufacturer markups and outbound efficiency level. DOE does not believe (reverse engineering) approach. The freight costs. Typical manufacturer that any of the technologies identified in next paragraphs provide overviews of markups are presented in chapter 5 of the technology assessment are these three approaches. the final rule TSD.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1053

DOE revised the engineering analysis efficient combination of technologies also realizes that no two manufacturers presented in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR available. may necessarily use the same design based on the feedback from Representative sizes for Combination option pathways to improve energy stakeholders, additional industry A and Combination B were established performance. As such, DOE notes that research, and responses to recent in the preliminary analysis based on its engineering analyses represent just regulatory changes implemented by equipment available in the current one potential pathway to achieve the EPA’s SNAP program. In particular, market, and have been maintained for efficiency levels modeled in DOE revised its assumptions for the this final rule. Specific details of the downstream analyses, the one that its thermal modeling of combination representative sizes chosen for analysis analysis shows to be the most cost- vending machines to account for some and design options representing each of efficient. cooling in the compartment that is not the baseline equipment definitions for After the NOPR stage, stakeholders designed to be refrigerated, incorporated Class A, Class B, Combination A, and provided comments regarding DOE’s higher production costs associated with Combination B beverage vending analysis of baseline equipment. In specific requirements for beverage machines are described in more detail written comments, AMS commented vending machines using flammable in appendix 5A of the final rule TSD. that the baseline level calculated for refrigerants (propane), and revised Based on input from manufacturers at Combination A beverage vending which design options were included in the BVM ECS NOPR public meeting as machines is far more efficient than the Class A and Class B baseline well as feedback received in the performance of actual machines in use configurations. In addition, DOE preliminary analysis phase of the today. Specifically, AMS stated that adjusted the efficiency of CO2 rulemaking, DOE adjusted the machines it manufactures, which would compressors relative to R–134a assumptions it used in its analysis of meet DOE’s proposed definition of a compressors, increased the amount of baseline level for Class A and Class B Combination A vending machine, were LED lighting accounted for in place of beverage vending machines, for which tested, they would consume 8.09 kWh/ T8 lighting, decreased the impact there are current standards. In this final day as opposed to the 6.18 kW/day attributed to enhanced coils, rule, DOE began its engineering analysis baseline that DOE presented in the incorporated a single-pane glass pack by analyzing equipment designs that NOPR TSD. (AMS, No. 57, at p. 10) for Combination A vending machines at had levels of energy consumption much AMS specifically stated that converting baseline, removed the most-efficient higher than allowed by the standard a Class A machine to a Combination A compressor design option from the 2015 level set in the 2009 final rule. DOE’s machine only reduces energy by 25 BVM ECS NOPR, and updated its cost analysis then implemented all percent even though the refrigerated estimates for several design options. applicable design options (including volume was reduced by 60 percent and some which likely were implemented in urged DOE to reconsider its 1. Baseline Equipment and order to meet the 2009 final rule Representative Sizes assumptions for baseline combination standard levels) in order of ascending vending machines. (AMS, No. 57 at p. For each of the two classes of payback period. Such an approach 11) equipment with current standards (Class results in equipment designs that better DOE appreciates the submission of A and Class B), DOE developed baseline reflect the current BVM market. To specific data by stakeholders and used configurations containing design determine the MPC for a beverage this data to better inform its rulemaking options consistent with units designed vending machine that is minimally- activities. In response to comments and to perform at a level that approximates compliant with the current BVM data submitted after the 2015 BVM ECS the existing 2009 BVM standard. DOE standards each size, refrigerant, and NOPR, DOE has refined its engineering based its representative size equipment class combination DOE model for Combination A vending assumptions for Class A and Class B analyzed, DOE linearly interpolated machines to better account for air equipment on the representative sizes between the energy consumption levels comingling between the compartment(s) assumed in the 2009 BVM rulemaking just above (more consumptive) and just that are designed to be refrigerated and and input from manufacturers during below (less consumptive) than the the compartment(s) that are not the framework, preliminary analysis, standard. Additional design options designed to be refrigerated, which and NOPR phases of this rulemaking, as were then added as part of the design effectively increases the heat load well as data gathered from supplemental option engineering analysis. This associated with the non-refrigerated sources. DOE believes that these methodology represents the approach volumes and, correspondingly, energy representative sizes continue to reflect that a new entrant to the market, or an consumption. DOE notes that the results the design and features of current existing manufacturer conducting a of this updated analysis now more baseline equipment for Class A and redesign, would take to meet the new closely align with AMS’s reported test Class B equipment. standard analyzed in this rule, and results. For Combination A and Combination allows cost and price associated with B equipment, DOE set its baseline meeting the current standard with 2. Refrigerants efficiency level differently than for Class appendix B of the amended test At the time of the final rule analysis, A and Class B equipment, since there procedure. See Table Table IV.4 for an hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) refrigerants, are no current regulatory standards for example of this methodology. and specifically R–134a, were used in this equipment. Specifically, DOE Most of the design options analyzed most beverage vending machines on the modeled the baseline level of efficiency in this final rule were observed by DOE market in the United States. In addition, for the Combination A and Combination in some portion of the equipment based on equipment certification reports B equipment as representing the least- currently on the market. The presence of received by DOE, public statements efficient technology generally found in these design options in equipment that from major end users of beverage the BVM market currently for each exceeds the current standard level vending machines such as Coca-Cola,28 design option analyzed. That is, the serves as validation of the energy baseline efficiency level for performance improvements over the 28 One example of such a public statement is Combination A and Combination B baseline level that are possible with available at www.coca-colacompany.com/ equipment represented the least- these design options. However, DOE Continued

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1054 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

and information DOE obtained through publication of final Rule 19. Although refrigerant landscape applicable at the confidential manufacturer interviews DOE is not aware of any BVM models time when compliance with new and (see section IV.J), DOE has come to that are currently commercially amended standards will be required. understand that CO2 refrigerant is used available using propane as a refrigerant, In conducting its CO2 analysis, DOE in a small but growing portion of the DOE accounted for the use of propane adjusted its engineering analysis to BVM market. as an alternative refrigerant, in addition account for an increase in energy use for As discussed earlier, the refrigerants to CO2, as a potential refrigerant for a beverage vending machine that uses that are available for use in the U.S. BVM application. This was based on use CO2 versus a similarly equipped unit BVM market are changing as a result of of propane as a refrigerant in other using R–134a. Specifically, in its final two recent rulemaking actions by EPA similar, self-contained commercial rule analysis, DOE used a 10-percent SNAP. First, EPA published proposed refrigeration applications. compressor power increase, based on a Rule 19 (Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR– DOE did not receive any comments separate analytical comparison of HFC 2014–0198) on July 9, 2014, that disagreeing with the use of these two and CO2 compressors and feedback from proposed, among other things, to list refrigerants in the analysis. In response manufacturers, to account for the several hydrocarbons—isobutane and to DOE’s 2015 BVM ECS NOPR request inherent relative inefficiency of CO2. propane—and the hydrocarbon blend for comment, SVA stated that it has no This figure was reviewed with R–441A as acceptable alternatives under plans to use isobutane as a refrigerant. manufacturers during interviews and SNAP in BVM applications, subject to (SVA, No. 53 at p. 5) SVA stated that it through requests for public comment on certain use conditions. 79 FR 38811. A is in the early stages of research and the preliminary analysis. DOE also final rule adopting these proposals development (R&D) for propane analyzed components for CO2 became effective on May 11, 2015, and refrigerants and is concerned about EPA refrigeration systems such as was published in the Federal Register and UL requirements that restrict BVM compressors and refrigeration coils as on April 10, 2015. 80 FR 19454, 19491. placement, as well as significant having higher costs than those for HFC EPA’s second rulemaking under SNAP, equipment and facilities costs refrigeration systems. Additionally, as Proposed Rule 20 (Docket No. EPA–HQ– associated with flammable refrigerants. CO2 models were currently available on OAR–2013–0748), was published on AMS commented that beverage vending the market for purchase at the time of August 6, 2014 and proposed to change machines with propane refrigeration this analysis, DOE was able to procure, the status of certain refrigerants to systems require spark-proof motors to test, and tear down CO2 equipment to unacceptable for certain applications, maintain safe operation in the event of use in corroborating its analysis. including R–134a for BVM application. a refrigerant leak. AMS stated that these For propane equipment, DOE used a 79 FR 46126. A final rule corresponding motors are roughly three times the cost similar methodology to that applied for to proposed Rule 20 was published in of non-spark proof motors and that this CO2. The engineering analysis used the Federal Register on July 20, 2015. and other changes would add several adjusted values for compressor 80 FR 42870, 42917–42920 (July 20, hundred dollars to the cost of each performance, incorporating a 15-percent 2015). This rule changes the status of R– machine. (SVA, No. 53 at p. 5; AMS, No. reduction in energy consumption as 134a for new beverage vending 57 at p. 8) compared to an R–134a compressor, as machines to unacceptable beginning on DOE thanks SVA and AMS for their well as adjustments to the cost of the January 1, 2019. Therefore, equipment comments. DOE has reviewed the compressor, heat exchangers, and other complying with the amended BVM relevant section of the UL 541 standard system components. These factors were standards DOE is adopting in this final regarding flammable refrigerants in developed through a separate, focused BVM applications and agrees with AMS analysis targeting the inherent rule will do so using the refrigerants that additional related costs should be differences in performance potential allowable under the newly amended accounted for in order to appropriately between HFC and hydrocarbon SNAP listings. Due in large part to the EPA SNAP reflect the cost of procuring motors in refrigerants. Additionally, as mentioned rulemaking, DOE received a number of compliance with the UL requirements. above, DOE reviewed the requirements stakeholder comments related to Accordingly, DOE has revised its cost in UL 541 Supplement SA, and refrigerants in this rulemaking. In model to account for the increased cost accordingly included an additional MPC particular, commenters addressed of the motors required by this standard. factor representative of changes that may be needed to vend motors and which refrigerants were likely to be b. DOE Approach other electronic components in order to used in the future, DOE’s approach to In the engineering analysis for this comply with the UL requirements for all analyzing the different refrigerants, and final rule, DOE first conducted an units modeled with propane refrigerant. the relative energy efficiency of the analysis for each equipment class based For a detailed explanation of the different refrigerants. on equipment using R–134a refrigerant, methodology used in adjusting the a. Refrigerants Used in the Analysis the refrigerant found in the majority of analysis conducted on equipment using equipment available today and therefore DOE notes that while CO has been R–134a refrigerant for analyzing CO2 2 providing the most specific and approved for use in the United States in and propane beverage vending comprehensive data available. DOE then refrigerated beverage vending machines in this final rule, please see conducted analysis on each equipment applications by EPA SNAP for several chapter 5 of the final rule TSD. class using CO years, other refrigerants such as 2 and propane In the BVM ECS NOPR public hydrocarbons, including propane, were refrigerants, by adjusting the R–134a meeting and in written comments, EEA only recently listed as acceptable analysis to account for the performance Joint Commenters and the CA IOUs alternatives for use in refrigerated differences attributable to the new requested that DOE treat more efficient beverage vending applications in the refrigerants. This methodology allowed refrigerants as a design option in its United States with EPA’s recent DOE to leverage the large existing base engineering analysis rather than of experience, data, and models for sale conducting the analysis such that the innovation/coca-cola-installs-1-millionth-hfc-free- utilizing R–134a while ensuring that its proposed standards could be met by cooler-globally-preventing-525mm-metrics-tons-of- engineering model and downstream either CO2 or propane. The EEA Joint co2. analyses properly addressed the Commenters expressed the belief that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1055

DOE’s refrigerant-neutral approach (EVA, No. 60 at p. 2) SVA commented the small market. (AMS, No. 57 at p. 3) overestimates cost and underestimates that its experience with CO2 SVA commented that it is not aware of potential energy savings as a result of refrigeration systems indicates any variable speed CO2 compressors. any update to the standard. (EEA Joint comparable efficiency performance to (SVA, No. 53 at p. 5) In the BVM ECS Commenters, No. 56 at p. 2; CA IOUs, R–134a systems if optimized solely for NOPR public meeting and written No. 58 at p. 2; EAA Joint Commenters, steady-state conditions but stated that comments, CA IOUs and the EEA Joint Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at pp. these systems must be designed for pull- Commenters stated their belief that the 8, 43) down requirements associated with three operating modes of beverage DOE thanks the CA IOUs and EEA equipment reload at higher ambient vending machines (pull-down, steady- Joint Commenters for their comments. temperature and/or humidity state, and low power mode) make them However, as noted by DOE in the BVM conditions, and that this causes CO2 good candidates for variable speed ECS NOPR public meeting, DOE’s systems tend to be about 5 percent less compressors to reduce energy analysis for beverage vending machines energy efficient than R–134a. (SVA, No. consumption and inquired as to why has taken a refrigerant-neutral approach 53 at p. 3) Additionally, AMS DOE chose to exclude them as design to maintain diversity and customer commented that it had no direct options. (CA IOUs and EEA Joint choice with regard to refrigerant in the knowledge with CO2 but that its limited Commenters, Public Meeting Transcript, BVM market. For example, Coca-Cola testing with propane showed equal or No. 48 at p. 35) In its written comments, acknowledged in the BVM ECS NOPR only slightly better efficiency than R– the CA IOUs requested that DOE public meeting that its choice for the 134a. (AMS, No. 57 at p. 4) consider variable speed compressors as North American business unit was CO2 DOE thanks these stakeholders for a design option. (CA IOUs, No. 58 at p. as a refrigerant. (Coca-Cola, Public their comments. It is DOE’s 2) Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. 48–50). understanding that the difference in DOE thanks these stakeholders for Coca-Cola’s statement is consistent with performance between equipment using their comments and notes that DOE’s understanding that BVM the different refrigerants is primarily a manufacturers are not precluded from customers may select different result of the different compressor exploring variable speed compressors as refrigerants for a variety of reasons and efficiencies. DOE has incorporated these a means to meet the updated energy DOE does not wish the standards differences into its analysis and notes conservation standards for beverage adopted as a result of this final rule to that its analytical results are in line with vending machines. However, limit the availability or viability of comments provided and specifically manufacturer comments are consistent certain SNAP-approved refrigerants in that the efficiency penalty associated with DOE’s conclusion in the 2015 BVM the BVM market. Therefore, in this final with CO2 refrigeration systems in the ECS NOPR that there are currently no rule analysis, DOE has maintained a analysis is bounded by the estimates variable speed compressors with refrigerant-neutral analysis approach provided. Additional information about operating capacity ranges applicable to that ensures equitability across these results is in the compressors beverage vending machines available on refrigerant platforms and continued section of IV.C.4 and in chapter 5 of the the market that use refrigerants other availability of CO2 as a refrigerant final rule TSD. than R–134a, which will not be option for beverage vending machines. available for use in vending machine 3. Screened-In Technologies Not That is, DOE has maintained an analysis applications by the compliance date of Implemented as Design Options approach that independently analyzes this rulemaking due to EPA’s SNAP CO2- and propane-refrigerant equipment DOE removed several screened-in regulations. Because DOE is required to so that the economic results can be technologies from consideration in the set energy conservation standards that analyzed individually. Such an engineering analysis due to lack of data, are both technologically feasible and approach results in selection of new and lack of availability, competing effects, or economically justified, DOE did not amended standard levels that result in lack of measurable energy savings when include variable speed compressors as a the highest NPV for both refrigerants tested to the DOE test procedure. The design option in its analysis. and that does not disadvantage another technologies included higher efficiency refrigerant. fan blades for evaporator and condenser 4. Design Options Analyzed and fans, low-pressure differential Maximum Technologically Feasible c. Relative Energy Efficiency of evaporators, improvements to anti-sweat Efficiency Level Refrigerants heaters, higher efficiency defrost In response to the 2015 BVM ECS NAMA and Royal Vendors mechanisms, variable speed NOPR, DOE received comments with commented in their written submissions compressors, and microchannel heat specific feedback regarding several of that CO2 systems consume exchangers. More information about the design options analyzed, including approximately 15 percent more energy these technologies and the reasons they glass packs, improved insulation and than their R–134a counterparts and were removed from consideration can vacuum insulated panels, higher cautioned that data may not be available be found in chapter 5 of the final rule efficiency lighting, lighting low power due to the lack of current use. (NAMA, TSD. modes, fan motors, evaporator fan No. 50 at p. 5; Royal Vendors, No. 54 at DOE received several comments controls, coils, and higher efficiency p. 4) SBA Advocacy agreed that CO2 is regarding one of the technologies it compressors. about 15 percent less efficient than R– removed from consideration in the 134a and, therefore, claimed that it is engineering analysis, variable speed a. Glass Packs not a technologically feasible compressors. In response to DOE’s In written comments, Coca-Cola alternative. (SBA Advocacy, No. 61 at p. request for comment on the use of expressed its belief that enhanced glass 3) EVA also commented that CO2 is 15 variable speed compressors in beverage packs, specifically those using three percent less efficient than an R–134a vending machines, AMS commented panes of glass, are not economically unit and the cost in Europe for ‘‘a that although it had used variable speed justified for the energy savings cooling unit operating on CO2 is double compressors for energy savings in the delivered. Coca-Cola further stated that that of an R–134a unit as a result of a past, this technology was no longer some of its current Class A equipment lack of availability of CO2 compressors.’’ available for BVM applications due to with CO2 refrigeration systems use

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1056 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

double pane, argon-filled, low E glass to meet the current standard, and that ‘‘Improved single speed reciprocating and cannot accommodate triple pane enhanced condenser coils reduce compressor’’ design option (which glass pack without a major redesign. equipment utility. (SVA, No. 53 at pp. corresponds to the FFU130HAX, (Coca-Cola, No. 52 at p. 3) Similarly, 3–4) adjusted according to the refrigerant- Royal Vendors commented that its Class DOE thanks SVA for their comments specific analysis) in all Class A baseline A machines currently use double-pane, and has revised the cost and energy equipment configurations. argon-filled, low-emissivity glass and improvement associated with enhanced Regarding CO2 compressors, in cannot accommodate triple-pane glass coils in this final rule. DOE additionally written comments, AMS commented packs without major redesigns, large notes that in all of the final rule analysis that CO2 refrigerant has a significant development costs, and substantial points, the resulting reduction in DEC efficiency penalty, and that it is aware machine cost increases. (Royal Vendors, attributable to changes in the evaporator of only one supplier that makes CO2 No. 54 at p. 2) SVA also commented that coil is shown to be well less than 10 compressors in the capacity range enhanced glass packs are not percent. In addition, DOE notes that required for BVM applications. (AMS, economically justified. (SVA, No. 53 at such ‘‘enhanced’’ evaporator and No. 57 at p. 8) Coca-Cola also stated in p. 4) condenser coil options are already its written comments that it is aware of DOE thanks Coca-Cola, Royal commonly implemented and only one CO2 compressor supplier in Vendors, and SVA for their comments commercially-available design options. the U.S. for beverage vending machines. and has increased the cost associated (Coca-Cola, No. 52 at p. 2) Additionally, d. Compressors with the enhanced glass pack design in the BVM ECS NOPR public meeting, option from that used during the NOPR, DOE received several comments Coca-Cola stated that it was aware of six in order to better represent the regarding different compressors. CO2 compressors, all early in the economic ramifications of implementing Specifically, DOE received comments technology curve, and suggested that that design option. DOE notes that the regarding the higher efficiency DOE take into account potential rapid engineering analysis in this final rule compressor design option and regarding improvements in efficiency for CO2 considers the enhanced glass pack CO2 compressors. In the BVM ECS compressors as a result of maturing design option, which is a triple-paned NOPR public meeting, SVA expressed engineering and supply chains into glass pack, as technologically feasible, doubt that a beverage vending machine account in its analysis. (Public Meeting but that the economic analysis does not with the compressor that DOE Transcript, No. 48 at p. 51) deem it to be part of the least-cost considered as baseline in its engineering DOE thanks Coca-Cola and AMS for approach to meeting the new standard model would be able to meet the 2009 their comments. DOE is aware that there levels at any analysis point. standard, and stated that DOE should is currently a limited selection of CO2 Additionally, DOE accounted for the instead consider the Embraco compressors available to BVM cost of equipment redesign and FFU130HAX compressor as the baseline manufacturers in the United States. production equipment cost increases in efficiency level. SVA additionally stated Based on the feedback received, CO2 its manufacturer impact and customer that CO2 compressors capable of compressors were analyzed in the final subgroup analyses (See sections IV.J and reducing energy consumption to the rule engineering analysis as using 10 IV.I, respectively). degree indicated in DOE’s 2015 BVM percent more energy than an R–134a ECS NOPR analysis do not exist on the compressor of similar design, as b. Evaporator Fan Motor Controls market. (SVA, Public Meeting opposed to the 6 percent value used in Royal Vendors stated in written Transcript, No. 48 at pp. 63–72) In the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR engineering. comments that its machines already use written comments, Royal Vendors stated e. Insulation and Vacuum Insulated evaporator fan controls to meet the that it is not aware of any compressors Panels current standards. (Royal Vendors, No. with higher efficiency than the Embraco 54 at p. 2) FFU130HAX for R–134a or the Sanden Royal Vendors commented that the DOE thanks Royal Vendors for their SRABB for CO2 and that therefore DOE only design options considered by DOE comment and agrees that most should not consider a more efficient in this rulemaking that it has not equipment on the market today makes compressor as a design option to reduce already implemented to meet existing use of evaporator fan motor controls. energy consumption. (Royal Vendors, energy conservation standards are Accordingly, in DOE’s engineering No. 54 at p. 1) In its written comments, increased insulation thickness and analysis in this final rule, the evaporator Coca-Cola similarly stated that the vacuum insulated panels, and stated fan motor controls design option is assumed ability to move to higher that increased insulation thickness implemented in the baseline level for all efficiency compressors does not exist. would require large investments in Class A and most Class B analysis (Coca-Cola, No. 52 at p. 3) redesign and new foaming fixtures. points. See section IV.C.1 for While, through testing and teardowns, Royal Vendors additionally stated that it information on how DOE established DOE has observed equipment on the does not know the viability of vacuum baseline levels for Class A and Class B current market that meets the current insulated panels. (Royal Vendors, No. equipment in this analysis. energy conservation standards that uses 54 at p. 2) Coca-Cola commented that compressors other than the Embraco vacuum insulated panels are highly c. Coils FFU130HAX, DOE agrees with costly to implement and that its supply In their written comments, SVA stakeholder comments in that it is not base has not worked to develop this questioned DOE’s assumption of 14 currently aware of a compressor option. (Coca-Cola, No. 52 at p. 3) EEA percent energy savings due to enhanced available for use in beverage vending Joint Commenters stated that DOE’s evaporator coils, and stated their general machines in the United States that is analysis may overestimate the cost and belief that predicted efficiency more efficient than the Embraco underestimate the performance of improvements based on software FFU130HAX. Accordingly, DOE has vacuum insulated panels due to modeling are typically optimistic removed from the analysis the design possibly outdated information. (EEA compared to test results. SVA also option that represented a higher Joint Commenters, No. 56 at p. 3) SVA stated that for its Class A equipment, it efficiency compressor. Additionally, the commented that they are already using already uses enhanced evaporator coils engineering analysis now includes the increased insulation thickness on their

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1057

Class B equipment to meet the existing including lighting systems, for each Combination A at 6 total feet of LED standard. (SVA, No. 53 at p. 4). equipment class. DOE notes that fixtures. DOE has accounted for redesign and manufacturers are free to choose g. Fan Motors increased materials costs in its whichever design path they wish in manufacturer impact and engineering order to meet current and future energy In the BVM ECS NOPR public analyses, respectively. (See sections IV.J conservation standards. DOE analyzes meeting, SVA commented that 9 watt and chapter 12 of the TSD for and orders design options based on its fan motors are unrealistic for BVM information on the manufacturer impact determination of the relative cost- applications and provided more detail analysis.) In response to Royals’ effectiveness of each design option. DOE in its written comments, stating that it comment concerning the viability of notes that its engineering analysis agrees uses 4 watt fan motors for its evaporator vacuum insulated panels in BVM with Royal Vendors and accounts for and condenser fans. In written applications, DOE notes that proof of the use of LED lighting in order to meet comments, SVA also stated that its Class concept for enhanced insulation to the baseline level at many Class A B equipment already implements PSC increase energy efficiency has been analysis points. condenser fan motors and that ECM shown in related industries such as Regarding lighting low power modes, condenser fan motors are not commercial refrigerator manufacturing in the BVM ECS NOPR public meeting, economically justified. (SVA, Public and serves as a basis on which to assess SVA expressed the belief that test Meeting Transcript, No. 488 at p. 174; technological feasibility. Regarding results currently included in SVA, No. 53 at p. 4) In written comments, Royal Vendors stated that it Coca-Cola’s comment, DOE has certification directories and showing is already using ECM evaporator fan quantified the costs to implement high levels of efficiency may have been motors and PSC condenser fan motors to vacuum insulated panels, which it developed using lighting low power meet the current standards and added agrees to be sizably higher at this time modes. (SVA, Public Meeting that converting from PSC to ECM than those of traditional foam Transcript, No. 48 at p. 66) Also in the condenser fan motors would not yield insulation, and has incorporated those public meeting, SVA expressed doubt significant energy savings for the added costs into its engineering analysis. In that the 6-hour allowance for lighting response to the comment by EEA Joint cost. (Royal Vendors, No. 54 at p. 1) low power states under the updated test In response to SVA’s comment Commenters regarding the cost and procedure could account for as steep a performance of vacuum insulated regarding fan power draw, DOE notes drop in energy consumption as DOE’s that it used fan motor wattage values panels, DOE notes that it has continued analysis shows. (SVA, Public Meeting research into this technology in that were shown to be typical of the Transcript, No. 48 at p. 66) In its written concurrent rulemakings and that its BVM market as evidenced by their comments, SVA estimated that 20 assessment for beverage vending inclusion in numerous models percent energy savings over a baseline machines is based on the most up to examined during DOE’s teardown model was possible if LED lighting date information that it has obtained analysis. DOE thanks Royal Vendors for systems are used in conjunction with through manufacturer interviews and its comment regarding the use of fan lighting controls, and 10 percent energy other sources. motor design options and notes that it savings were possible if lighting has reviewed the energy consumption f. Lighting and Lighting Low Power controls are used with T–8 lighting model in its engineering analysis and Modes systems. (SVA, No. 53 at p. 4) SVA also that Royal’s and SVA’s comments Regarding lighting, CA IOUs in the stated that it only uses one LED bulb in generally align with DOE’s engineering BVM ECS NOPR public meeting and its Class A equipment while DOE analysis with ECM evaporator fan EEA Joint Commenters in their written assumes two LED bulbs in its motors often being among the more cost- comment expressed the belief that DOE engineering model. (SVA, No. 53 at p. effective design options and ECM should have accounted for a greater 4) condenser fan motors being among the variation in LED lighting system DOE thanks SVA for its comments, least cost-effective. efficiency rather than considering it as and especially appreciates the a single efficiency tier. (CA IOUs and submission of specific data on potential h. Performance of Design Option the EEA Joint Commenters, Public energy savings as a result of increased Packages Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. 59; CA efficiency lighting. With regard to SVA’s DOE also received several more IOUs, No. 58 at p. 4) In written comment on the number of LED bulbs, general comments regarding the design comments, Royal Vendors stated that it DOE notes that its engineering model is options being used by manufacturers is already using LED lighting in its Class based on equipment configurations and the maximum technologically A machines to meet the current equipment found in teardowns, and that feasible level. In the BVM ECS NOPR standard. (Royal Vendors, No. 54 at p. it believes to be generally representative public meeting and in written 1) of the beverage vending machine market submission, SVA commented that it was DOE thanks the CA IOUs, EEA Joint due to the presence of similar already implementing many of DOE’s Commenters, and Royal Vendors for configurations across multiple proposed design options to meet their comments. DOE acknowledges that manufacturers. DOE acknowledges that existing ENERGY STAR levels and that there are a range of LED efficiencies individual models may not have the it would not be able to come close to available on the market and notes that same components. Additionally, DOE meeting DOE’s proposed standard several design options in the analysis revisited the specifications of models levels. SVA stated that many of the could be implemented to different available on the markets and, after design options DOE analyzed are not extents, including, for example, lighting additional review of available data, in technologically feasible or economically systems, thicker insulation, and various its final rule analysis, DOE increased the justified and that the remaining design types of controls (e.g., accessory and linear footage of LED fixtures used options for Class A equipment are refrigeration low power modes). In its within the case to replace T8 lighting in automatic lighting controls and engineering model, DOE used Class B and Combination B analyses to refrigeration low power modes, which it representative values for the energy 8 total feet of LED fixtures, and believes would yield approximately 5 consumption of each design option, maintained the values for Class A and percent energy savings. SVA listed the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1058 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

remaining design options for Class B that while LEDs can save energy, ECM that have survived the screening equipment as including automatic condenser fan motors have minimal analysis. At the engineering analysis lighting controls, enhanced evaporator impact on energy consumption. (Coca- phase, DOE only screens out those coils, LED lighting, and refrigeration Cola, No. 52 at p. 3) technologies that are not technologically low power states. (SVA, No. 53 at pp. SVA commented that many of the feasible; are not practical to 3–4; Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 design options considered by DOE are manufacture, install, and service; do not at 173) not technologically feasible, are not impact equipment utility or equipment AMS commented in its written economically justified, or otherwise availability; and do not adversely affect submission that it has already have a negative impact on equipment health and safety (see section IV.B). incorporated several design options to utility, citing the rebuttable DOE considers the economic meet the 2009 energy conservation presumption that the cost to the implications of any screened-in design standards and that reducing daily customer will be less than three times options in its downstream analyses and energy consumption by an additional 25 the value of the energy savings during sets new and amended standard levels percent is not feasible with present the first year for energy conservation based on any improvements in technologies and would require drastic standards to be economically justified efficiency that are economically changes to overall cabinet sizes and (Title 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)) and stated that justified based on the new costs and door design. (AMS, No. 57 at p. 9) this should preclude DOE from benefits accrued by the nation, as well Similarly, Royal Vendors commented considering design options that do not as the specific impacts on that it has already employed most of the yield an energy cost savings of at least manufacturers (see section IV.J) and design options considered by DOE in its one third of their incremental cost. certain customer subgroups (see section analysis to meet the 2009 standards and (SVA, No. 53 at p. 3) Additionally, in IV.I). In the LCC and PBP analyses, DOE therefore does not believe it can meet the BVM ECS NOPR public meeting, considers the time, in years, it takes for the proposed standard using any SVA expressed the belief that DOE the cumulative energy savings from refrigerant. (Royal Vendors, No. 54 at p. should have more fully disclosed the more efficient equipment to recover any 4) NAMA commented that most data used in its analysis and that DOE’s incremental increase in equipment cost manufacturers have already employed assumptions are generally off base with necessary to achieve those efficiency most of the design options considered regard to manufacturer capability. (SVA, improvements. DOE notes that the PBP by DOE and specifically stated that Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. analysis is assessed based on the total some manufacturers already use ECM 181) incremental equipment cost necessary evaporator fan motors, split capacitor In response to stakeholder comments, to achieve a given efficiency level and condenser fan motors, LED lighting, and DOE has revised its engineering model the commensurate energy savings, evaporator fan controls to meet the to better represent which design options rather than determining the PBP of current standard. (NAMA, No. 50 at p. are already being used to meet the individual design options. 42 U.S.C. 5) Coca-Cola commented that many existing standard and therefore not be 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii) DOE further discusses vending machines with CO2 considered as potential sources of the methodology for the PBP analysis in refrigeration systems that it purchases further incremental energy savings. In section IV.F and presents the results of are already using LED lighting, ECM response to SVA’s comment regarding such analyses in section V.B.1.a. evaporator fan motors, and PSC the economic justification of design The design options included in this condenser fan motors to meet ENERGY options, DOE notes that it includes in final rule analysis are shown in Table STAR. Coca-Cola additionally stated the engineering analysis all technologies IV.4.

TABLE IV.3—DESIGN OPTIONS MODELED IN THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

Design option Notes

Higher efficiency lighting ...... e.g., LEDs. Higher efficiency evaporator fan motors ...... e.g., Electronically commutated motors. Evaporator fan controls. Improved evaporator design. Insulation increases or improvements ...... e.g., Thicker insulation, vacuum insulated panels. Improved glass pack ...... Class A and Combination A only. Higher efficiency condenser fan motors ...... e.g., Electronically commutated motors. Improved condenser design. Higher efficiency compressors. Lighting low power modes ...... e.g., Lighting timers. Refrigeration low power modes ...... e.g., Timer-based cabinet temperature rise.

An example of the results of the medium refrigerated volume is provided engineering analysis for a Class A BVM in Table IV.4 of this notice. model with CO2 refrigerant and a

TABLE IV.4—EXAMPLE OF DESIGN OPTION ANALYSIS—CLASS A MEDIUM CO2 REFRIGERANT

DEC MPC MSP (kWh/day) ($) ($) Design option added

8.598 ...... $1,736.52 $2,340.77 High Energy Use; with SPM fan motors, no energy controls, T8 lighting, double-pane glass pack, 1″ insulation, etc. 7.552 ...... 1,740.50 2,345.63 Evaporator Fan Controls.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1059

TABLE IV.4—EXAMPLE OF DESIGN OPTION ANALYSIS—CLASS A MEDIUM CO2 REFRIGERANT—Continued

DEC MPC MSP (kWh/day) ($) ($) Design option added

5.555 ...... 1,755.03 2,363.36 Improved Single Speed Reciprocating Compressor. 5.126 ...... 1,759.01 2,368.22 Automatic Lighting Controls. 4.604 ...... 1,764.90 2,375.40 Permanent Split Capacitor Evaporator Fan Motor. 4.348 ...... 1,770.79 2,382.59 Permanent Split Capacitor Condenser Fan Motor. 3.867 ...... 1,786.90 2,402.24 LED Lighting. 3.792 ...... 1,789.48 2,405.38 Baseline—Interpolated—Exactly Meets Current Standards; Includes all Design Options Above le. 3.751 ...... 1,790.88 2,407.10 Refrigeration Low Power State. 3.487 ...... 1,806.03 2,425.57 Enhanced Evaporator Coil. 3.372 ...... 1,830.10 2,454.94 Electronically-Commutated Evaporator Fan Motor. 3.267 ...... 1,857.71 2,488.62 1.125″ Thick Insulation. 2.966 ...... 1,984.86 2,643.75 Enhanced Glass Pack.

5. Manufacturer Production Costs MPCs are underestimated. (SVA, No. 53 purchase prices. The markups analysis at p. 2) developed appropriate markups (e.g., In its engineering analysis, DOE In response to NAMA, DOE agrees manufacturer markups, retailer estimates costs for manufacturers to that additional teardowns might have markups, distributor markups, produce equipment at the baseline provided further information regarding contractor markups) in the distribution energy use level and at increasingly combination vending machines. chain and sales taxes to convert the higher levels of energy efficiency. In this However, difficulty in procuring MPC estimates derived in the final rule, DOE based the manufacturer combination vending equipment engineering analysis to customer prices, production cost model upon data from ultimately made such teardowns which were then used in the LCC and physical disassembly of units available impracticable. Instead, DOE used data PBP analysis and in the manufacturer on the market, corroborated with gathered through teardowns of Class A impact analysis. At each step in the information from manufacturer and Class B machines and extended distribution channel, companies mark literature, discussions with industry those data to the analysis of up the price of the equipment to cover experts, input from manufacturer combination machines, drawing on the business costs and profit margin. interviews (see section IV.J of this final inherent physical and design In order to develop markups, DOE rule), and other sources. The baseline similarities between the analogous identified distribution channels (i.e., units modeled in the engineering equipment classes. In response to SVA, how the equipment is distributed from analysis only incorporated refrigerants DOE notes that its MPC estimates are the manufacturer to the customer). Once allowable under SNAP regulations at built up as the sum of individual proper distribution channels for each of the time of the effective date of any new component and system cost estimates, the equipment classes were established, or amended standards, namely propane which have been subjected to numerous DOE relied on economic data from the and CO2. As such, the manufacturer rounds of stakeholder review in U.S. Census Bureau and input from the production costs at the baseline and previous stages of this rulemaking. DOE industry to determine to what extent increasing levels of efficiency all reflect has incorporated into its cost modeling equipment prices increase as they pass the costs incurred in producing analysis all specific, actionable cost from the manufacturer to the customer equipment using acceptable refrigerants information received at each stage of the (see chapter 6 of the final rule TSD). under the final SNAP regulations issued rulemaking. DOE additionally notes that DOE identified three distribution in 2015. The incremental cost associated as mentioned elsewhere in this final channels, as described below: with producing a given BVM unit using rule, it has updated its cost model for (1) Equipment Manufacturer → propane units to account for motors and propane or CO2 refrigerant, as compared Vending Machine Operator (e.g., bottler, to a similar BVM unit using R–134a other components that comply with beverage distributor, large food refrigerant is accounted for through the applicable UL standards, and that this operator) → use of these refrigerant-specific cost has had the net result of increasing MPC (2) Equipment Manufacturer → curves. Chapter 5 of the final rule TSD values for those units. Distributor Vending Machine Operator provides a detailed description of the D. Markups Analysis → manufacturing cost analysis. (3) Equipment Manufacturer DOE uses manufacturer-to-customer Distributor → Site Owner DOE received comments regarding the markups to convert the MSP estimates Chapter 6 of the final rule TSD selection of units for teardown and from the engineering analysis into provides details on DOE’s development regarding the MPCs that resulted from customer purchase prices, which are of markups for beverage vending the analysis. Specifically, in written subsequently used in the LCC and PBP machines. comments, NAMA expressed concern analysis to evaluate how the increased that no combination vending machines cost of higher efficiency equipment E. Energy Use Analysis were directly torn down and tested and compares to the annual and lifetime The purpose of the energy use requested that DOE perform such testing energy and operating cost savings analysis is to establish an estimate of before regulations are imposed on this resulting from such efficiency annual energy consumption (AEC) of equipment class. (NAMA, No. 50 at p. improvements. Accordingly, DOE beverage vending machines now and 4) And, in its written comments, SVA estimated markups for baseline and all over the 30-year analysis period and to expressed agreement with DOE’s higher efficiency levels that are applied assess the energy-savings potential of assumed markups for Class A and Class to the MSPs from the engineering different equipment efficiencies. DOE B equipment but added that it believes analysis to obtain final customer uses the resulting estimated AEC in the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1060 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

LCC and PBP analysis (section IV.F of relative humidity conditions (chapter 7 the Northeast and Deep South in the this final rule) to establish the customer of the 2009 BVM final rule TSD). dataset that DOE used and operating cost savings of efficiency (Docket No. EERE–2006–STD–0125, No. recommended that DOE expand its data improvements considered. DOE also 79) DOE then estimated the AEC of a collection to include these two regions uses the estimate of energy use at the given Class B or Combination B of the country. (NAMA, No. 50 at p. 7) baseline and at higher levels of beverage vending machine installed Royal Vendors agreed with DOE that use efficiency to estimate NES in the NIA outside by multiplying the DEC value by of cold weather heaters should not be (section IV.H of this final rule). the linear equation determined from considered in the NIA. (Royal Vendors, The energy use analysis assessed the based on the 2009 BVM rulemaking No. 54 at p. 5) Similarly, AMS estimated AEC of a beverage vending analysis. Id. expressed agreement with DOE’s machine as installed in the field. DOE Regarding DOE’s analysis of Class B analysis with regard to its methodology recognizes that a variety of factors may and Combination B beverage vending in calculating annual energy affect the actual energy use of a beverage machines installed outdoors, DOE’s consumption. (AMS, No. 57 at p. 5) vending machine in the field, including NOPR analysis did not consider the DOE appreciates AMS and Royal ambient conditions, use and stocking incremental energy use of any electric Vendor’s support of DOE’s energy use profiles, and other factors. In the 2015 resistance heating elements energized to assessment methodology and treatment BVM ECS NOPR, to model the AEC of prevent freezing in cold temperatures, of cold weather heaters, respectively. In each BVM unit, DOE separately as DOE lacked sufficient data to do so response to Seaga and NAMA’s estimated the energy use of equipment and such energy use is not directly concerns regarding the number and type installed indoors and outdoors, to affected by improved efficiency levels of beverage vending machines located account for the impact of ambient considered by DOE because the outdoors, DOE believes that the data temperature and relative humidity on technology options DOE considered in from six colleges and universities field-installed BVM energy use. 80 FR the engineering analysis do not include around the country are sufficiently 5050462, 50486 (Aug. 19, 2015). any design changes that would impact representative of the general BVM To determine the AEC of BVM units the energy use of resistance heaters. As population because college campuses installed indoors, DOE estimated that such, DOE noted that accounting for the typically have a mix of building types the DEC modeled in the engineering energy use of cold weather heaters that mirror some of the major markets analysis and measured according to the would not significantly impact the for beverage vending machines, DOE test procedure is representative of energy use analysis, LCC analysis, or including retail, commercial lodging, the average energy consumption for that NIA results. Id. offices, public assembly, and outdoor equipment every day of the year. DOE In the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE spaces (see chapter 7 in the final rule believes this is a reasonable assumption, estimated, based on publicly available TSD for a full discussion of the building as beverage vending machines installed data from college campuses,29 that 16 types represented in the sample from indoors are typically subject to percent of Class B machines were college campuses). DOE appreciates the relatively constant temperature and installed outdoors. DOE believes that comments from Seaga and NAMA but, relative humidity conditions consistent these data from college campuses are without data to improve DOE’s with the nominal DOE test conditions reasonably representative of BVM estimates of outdoor BVM installations, (75 °F and 45 percent relative locations nationally due to the wide DOE was not able to identify any data humidity). DOE estimated that Class A variety of building types and outdoor or information supporting such claims. and Combination A beverage vending spaces on large college campuses, which DOE acknowledges that these trends machines and a majority of Class B and can be correlated with the likely BVM could underestimate the outdoor Combination B beverage vending locations expected. Id. instances of outdoor Class A machines machines will all be installed inside. Id. In addition, the engineering analysis and specific regional installation trends. However, DOE understands that some considered three specific sizes (small, However, DOE continues to believe that, Class B and Combination B beverage medium, and large) for Class A and on average, the majority of outdoor BVM vending machines are installed outdoors Class B equipment, and two specific installations across the country are Class and will be subject to potentially more sizes (medium and large) for B or Combination B units and that the variable ambient temperature and Combination A and Combination B number of Class A outdoor installations relative humidity conditions than BVM equipment. However, DOE based its is small. In addition, DOE acknowledges units installed indoors. Therefore, in the energy use analysis on a ‘‘representative that the six-school sample may 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE modeled size’’ beverage vending machine for underrepresent certain climatic regions the AEC of BVM units installed each equipment class, determined based in the United States. However, DOE outdoors based on a linear relationship on a weighted average of the equipment does not have reason to believe that the that was developed between the DEC sizes modeled in the engineering installation trends for BVM in those determined in accordance with the DOE analysis. Id. at 50487. regions would be significantly different test procedure, as modeled in the In response to DOE’s energy use from those in the regions represented in engineering analysis, and the AEC for analysis presented in the NOPR, Seaga the data. Therefore, in this final rule, Class B and Combination B beverage stated the belief that DOE should not DOE maintained the assumption that 16 vending machines installed outdoors. consider the number of Class A percent of Class B beverage vending DOE developed this linear regression machines installed outside to be machines are installed outside. based on analysis performed in support negligible, but did not provide any In the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE of the 2009 BVM rulemaking, where additional data (Seaga, Public Meeting also requested comments on any other DOE modified its energy consumption Transcript, No. 48 at p. 84). NAMA also variables that it should account for in its model developed in the engineering noted the lack of college campuses from estimate of national energy use. In analysis to reflect the equipment’s response, DOE received several thermal and compressor performance 29 Beverage vending machine Outdoor Location comments regarding the effect of dirty ° characteristics and to simulate the and Elevated (90 F) Outdoor Temperature coils in field installations. Mr. Richard Analysis. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. realistic performance of the machine June 2014. Available at http://eetd.lbl.gov/sites/all/ Kenelly of CoilPod LLC commented that exposed to varying temperature and files/lbnl-6744e.pdf. dirty coils lead to reduced performance

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1061

and higher energy use (CoilPod LLC, the warranty on the equipment,31 which aggregate impacts on customer, No. 42 at p. 1) and added that energy DOE believes may compel such regular manufacturers, and the nation in consumption may be reduced 45 to 50 preventative maintenance. While DOE performing the analyses required by 42 percent after coils are cleaned (CoilPod acknowledges that some BVM operators U.S.C. 6295(o)(2). LLC, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 may not adhere to the recommended Chapter 7 of the final rule TSD at p. 53). SVA added that increased maintenance schedule, manufacturers provides additional details on DOE’s condenser efficiency is often achieved do not have control over the actions of energy use analysis for beverage by increasing fin density that can lead BVM operators. vending machines. Furthermore, DOE does not have to accelerated coil fouling, which F. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period authority to address such application- decreases energy consumption under Analysis actual use conditions. (SVA, Public based usage as part of these equipment Meeting Transcript, No. 54 at p. 54). standards, which are applied at the New or amended energy conservation USelectIt (USI) agreed with SVA’s point of manufacture when the coil is standards usually decrease equipment statement that increased fin density is clean. Therefore, DOE is electing not to operating expenses and increase the used to increase condenser coil consider the impact of failure to clean initial purchase price. DOE analyzes the efficiency and that because customers condenser coils or otherwise properly net effect of new or amended standards don’t generally clean their coils, they maintain BVM equipment in the field in on customers by evaluating the net LCC. have implemented technology that runs the energy use analysis. DOE notes that To evaluate the net LCC, DOE uses the the condenser fan motors backwards in BVM operators may install and operate cost-efficiency relationship derived in an attempt to automatically clean the their equipment in any number of the engineering analysis and the energy coils. USI also agreed with SVA that inadvisable ways that may have an costs derived from the energy use under real-world conditions, efficiency impact on energy use of the equipment. analysis. Inputs to the LCC calculation would decrease substantially due to coil However, in this analysis, DOE is include the installed cost of equipment degradation and that including higher accounting for the anticipated energy to the customer, operating expenses efficiency condenser coils may work use of beverage vending machines in the (energy expenses, and maintenance and against DOE’s intended goal of energy field as intended by manufacturers and repair costs), the lifetime of the unit, savings, as the higher fin density of distributors. DOE believes that BVM and a discount rate. these coils makes them more difficult to manufacturers, who are subject to these Because the installed cost of clean (USI, Public Meeting Transcript, standards, should not be held equipment typically increases while No. 54 at p. 5). In written comments, responsible for any failure by BVM operating costs typically decrease under Coca-Cola, Royal Vendors, and SVA operators to properly operate BVM new standards, there is a time in the life expressed concern that increasing coil equipment in the field. DOE also notes of equipment having higher-than- fin density will hinder performance in that, were DOE to account for the baseline efficiency when the net the field due to increased fouling and impact of coil fouling in the energy use operating-cost benefit (in dollars) since shorter equipment life. Royal Vendors analysis, it would likely affect all the time of purchase is equal to the provided the specific example of higher equipment classes and ELs equivalently incremental first cost of purchasing the compressor strain due to higher static and, thus, would not affect the LCC equipment. The time required for pressure and increased coil restriction analysis or NIA results because only equipment to reach this cost- in the case of increased fin density costs that vary with efficiency levels equivalence point is known as the PBP. (Coca-Cola, No. 52 at p. 3; Royal (ELs) (incremental costs) lead to changes DOE uses Monte Carlo simulation and Vendors, No. 54 at pp. 2, 6; SVA, No. in these results. probability distributions to incorporate 53 at p. 6). In addition, CA IOUs requested that uncertainty and variability in the LCC DOE understands the importance of DOE provide state level energy savings and PBP analysis. DOE used Microsoft proper maintenance, including cleaning projections for its proposed standard Excel combined with Crystal BallTM (a of the condenser coil, on the energy use (CA IOUs, No. 58 at p. 6) In response to commercially available program) to and lifetime of beverage vending this request, DOE notes that it is develop an LCC and PBP spreadsheet machines. DOE has accounted for obligated by EPCA to consider the model that incorporates both Monte regular maintenance of BVM equipment national benefits and costs, including Carlo simulation and probability in the LCC model, which accounts for the total national energy savings, of any distributions. The LCC subgroup an annual preventative maintenance new or amended standards to determine analysis includes an assessment of cost that includes coil cleaning, whether such standards are impacts on customer subgroups. cleaning the exterior of the machine and technologically feasible and DOE determined several input values machine components, and inspection of economically justified. EPCA does not for the LCC and PBP analysis including the refrigeration system (see section IV.F require DOE to consider such state- (1) customer purchase prices; (2) and chapter 8 of the TSD). DOE notes specific information in considering and electricity prices; (3) maintenance, that BVM manufacturers and promulgating Federal standards. (42 service, and installation costs; (4) distributors encourage regular coil U.S.C. 6295 (o)(2)) Furthermore, DOE equipment lifetimes; (5) discount rates; cleaning in their operation manuals.30 does not believe that such detailed (6) equipment efficiency in the no-new- In addition, some manufacturers and analysis would significantly improve standards case; and (7) split incentives. distributors require adherence to the the analysis or affect the outcome of The approach and data DOE used to operations manual in order to maintain such analysis. Therefore, DOE did not derive these input values are described perform a state-level analysis and has below. based the standards analysis conducted 30 See e.g., Dixie Narco. Glassfront BevMax 3 1. Customer Purchase Prices Vender Technical Manual. Crane. http:// in this final rule on the national 69.129.141.51:8080/RD/techbulletins.nsf/ DOE multiplied the MSPs estimated e667893fe32caf4785256bcd0066752b/ 31 See e.g., Drop’s Vending in the engineering analysis by the 67ec964a7ec11a7f85257346004b668b/$FILE/ www.dropsvending.com/Merchant2/ supply-chain markups to calculate Bev%20Max%203%20CC%20Man%20260.01.pdf merchant.mvc?Screen=TERMPOL or Royal http:// or Sma’s Club http://scene7.samsclub.com/is/ royalvendors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/ customer purchase prices for the LCC content/samsclub/633055_P1pdf. Domestic-Vender-Warranty.pdf. and PBP analysis. DOE determined, on

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1062 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

average, 15 percent of this equipment commercial locations and 40 percent the 2009 BVM final rule 34 for the passes through a distributor or were in industrial locations. annualized cost of refurbishment. wholesaler, and 85 percent of the In response to the 2015 BVM ECS In the 2009 BVM rulemaking, DOE equipment is sold by a manufacturer NOPR, Coca-Cola asked if electricity assumed that more-efficient beverage prices from EIA used in the analysis are directly to the end user. In the LCC and vending machines would not incur based on a national average or if any PBP analysis, approximately 15 percent increased installation costs. Further, kind of weighting or regionality was of the Monte Carlo iterations include a DOE did not find evidence of a change taken into account. Coca-Cola also distributor or wholesaler markup, while in repair or maintenance costs by inquired whether DOE considered 85 percent of the iterations use a efficiency level with the exception of marginal costs of electricity (Coca-Cola, markup factor of 1.0, indicative of no repair cost decreases for efficiency Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. additional markup on top of the MSPs levels that used LED lighting. (besides sales tax). 110). DOE notes that the LCC and PBP DOE developed a projection of price analysis uses state-level electricity In the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE trends for beverage vending machines in prices in its Monte Carlo approach, and requested comment on the maintenance the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, based on as such inherently includes regional and repair costs modeled in the LCC historical price trends that projected the variability in prices. DOE has analysis, especially additional data MSP to decline by almost 2 percent considered using marginal costs of regarding differences in maintenance or from the 2014 MSP estimates through electricity but opted to use average repair costs that vary as a function of the 2019 assumed compliance date of electricity prices by state in this final refrigerant, equipment class, or new or amended standards. rule analysis because compiling and efficiency level. DOE received two comments. Royal Vendors commented DOE re-examined the data available utilizing marginal rates for the that maintenance and repair costs will and updated the price trend analysis for commercial sector across the nation is extremely complex, and data is difficult be higher for units using new this final rule analysis. DOE continued to obtain. refrigerants than they currently are for to use the automatic merchandising R–134a units, and that more efficient machines PPI and included historical 3. Maintenance, Repair, and Installation components are more expensive, thus shipments data from the U.S. Census Costs higher efficiency levels should have Bureau’s current industrial reports to DOE considered any expected higher maintenance costs. However, examine the decline in inflation- changes to maintenance, repair, and Royal Vendors did not supply adjusted PPI as a function of cumulative installation costs for the beverage supporting data. (Royal Vendors, No. 54 BVM shipments. Using these data for vending machines covered in this at p. 6) AMS commented that they had the BVM price trends analysis and rulemaking. Typically, small observed no measurable differences in DOE’s projections for future shipments incremental changes in equipment cost or frequency of service calls for yields a price decline of roughly 10 efficiency incur little or no changes in higher efficiency Class A machines. percent over the period of 2014 through repair and maintenance costs over (AMS, No. 57 at pp. 5–6) 2048. For the LCC model, between 2014 baseline equipment. The repair cost is and 2019, the price decline is almost 2 the cost to the customer for replacing or In response to these comments, in this percent. DOE used this revised price repairing components in the BVM final rule analysis DOE included higher trend in the final rule analysis, which equipment that have failed. The maintenance costs for more efficient reflects analytical techniques more maintenance cost is the cost to the machines which implemented such consistent with the methodology DOE customer of maintaining equipment design options as enhanced condenser has preferentially used for other operation. There is a greater probability coils, improved compressors, and high appliances. See appendix 8C of the TSD that equipment with efficiencies that are performance fans. Please see chapter 8 for further details on the price learning significantly higher than the baseline of the final rule TSD for more analysis. will incur increased repair and information regarding maintenance and repair costs. 2. Energy Prices maintenance costs, as such equipment is more likely to incorporate technologies 4. Equipment Lifetime DOE derived electricity prices from that are not widely available or are state-level EIA energy price data for the potentially less reliable than DOE used information from various commercial and industrial sectors conventional, baseline technologies. literature sources and input from (manufacturing facilities). DOE used DOE based repair costs for baseline manufacturers and other interested projections of these energy prices for equipment on data in a Foster-Miller parties to establish average equipment commercial and industrial customers to Inc.32 report with adjustments to lifetimes for use in the LCC and estimate future energy prices in the LCC account for LED lighting. Maintenance subsequent analyses. The 2009 final rule and PBP analysis. EIA’s Annual Energy costs include both preventative assumed that average BVM lifetime is 10 Outlook 2015 (AEO2015) was used as maintenance and annualized cost of years. 74 FR 44914, 44927 (Aug. 31, the source of projections for future refurbishment. DOE estimated that 2009). For this final rule, a longer energy prices. beverage vending machines undergo average lifetime of 13.5 years is assumed DOE developed estimates of refurbishment every 4.5 years based on based on refurbishments occurring commercial and industrial electricity two ENERGY STAR reports indicating twice during the life of the equipment prices for each state and the District of that beverage vending machines are at an interval of 4.5 years. As discussed Columbia. DOE derived these average refurbished every 4 to 5 years. DOE used in section IV.F.3, this estimate is based energy prices from data that are RSMeans 33 data for preventative published annually based on EIA Form maintenance costs and used data from 34 U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy 826. DOE then used EIA’s AEO2015 Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Chapter 8 Life- price projections to estimate state-level 32 Foster-Miller, Inc. Vending Machine Service Cycle Cost And Payback Period Analyses, Beverage Call Reduction Using the VendingMiser. February Vending Machines Final Rule Technical Support commercial and industrial electricity 18, 2002. Report BAY–01197. Waltham, MA. Document. 2009. Washington, DC. Available online prices in future years. DOE assumed 33 RSMeans Facilities Maintenance & Repair at www.regulations.gov under Docket No. EERE– that 60 percent of installations were in 2010, 17th Annual Edition. 2009. Kingston, MA. 2006–STD–0125.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1063

on a 2010 ENERGY STAR webinar,35 DOE appreciates these comments, and ENERGY STAR databases,38 these data which reported average lifetimes of 12 maintained its average lifetime were used to determine the efficiency to 15 years, and data on the distribution assumption of approximately 13.5 years distribution of models within the of equipment ages in the stock of for this final rule. However, DOE did equipment class, which only included beverage vending machines in the compensate for the effects of enhanced Class B CO2 equipment. 80 FR 50462, Pacific Northwest from the Northwest evaporator and condenser fans in the 50492 (Aug. 19, 2015). Power and Conservation Council 2007 repair and maintenance costs For Class A and Class B equipment Regional Technical Forum 36 (RTF), component of the LCC and PBP that is not represented in DOE’s which observed the age of the units in analysis. In this analysis, while the combined BVM models database (Class service to be approximately 8 years on shorter life of these fans does not A CO2 equipment and Class A and Class average. shorten the overall life of the BVM B propane equipment), DOE assumed all Refurbishment costs are included in equipment, the costs to maintain more equipment would be ENERGY STAR- the maintenance costs presented in efficient equipment is greater. compliant or use design options consistent with ENERGY STAR section IV.F.3 of this final rule, and a DOE notes that assumptions regarding equipment in the no-new-standards discussion of how maintenance and equipment lifetime and refurbishment case. That is, DOE assumed that if a repair costs are derived is in chapter 8 cycles also affect DOE’s shipments of the final rule TSD. DOE believes a manufacturer did not reengineer the model, which is discussed in section model to meet the ENERGY STAR level lifetime of 13.5 years across efficiency IV.G of this final rule. levels is a representative lifetime independently, DOE assumed that it is assumption for beverage vending 5. Discount Rates likely that a manufacturer would use the same case and basic accessory set (i.e., machines. DOE used this assumption in DOE developed discount rates by its analysis for this final rule. non-refrigeration system components) estimating the average cost of capital to available on other similar ENERGY At the NOPR stage, DOE requested companies that purchase beverage STAR-listed models using R–134a, comment on the assumed lifetime of vending machines covered under this changing only the compressor and other beverage vending machines and if the rulemaking. DOE commonly uses the sealed-system components, as opposed lifetime of beverage vending machines cost of capital to estimate the present to building or purchasing separate, less is likely to be longer or shorter in the value of cash flows to be derived from efficient, components for any new future. In addition, DOE requested a typical company project or propane models. This analysis approach comment on its assumption that a investment. Most companies use both resulted in selection of the first beverage vending machine will typically debt and equity capital to fund efficiency level above the baseline, or undergo two refurbishments during the investments, so the cost of capital is the EL 1, for Class A and Class B propane course of its life and if refurbishments weighted-average cost to the firm of equipment and for Class A CO2 beverage are likely to increase or decrease in the equity and debt financing. vending machines. Id. future. DOE also requested comment on For Combination A and Combination 6. Equipment Efficiency in the No-New- the applicability of this assumption to B beverage vending machines, DOE all equipment classes. Standards Case notes that very little data exists DOE received several additional To accurately analyze the incremental regarding the efficiency distribution of comments on equipment lifetime in costs and benefits of the adopted such equipment. However, because response to the NOPR analysis. AMS standard levels, DOE’s analyses most manufacturers of Combination A generally agreed with DOE’s consider the projected distribution of and Combination B equipment also methodology and results for equipment equipment efficiencies in the no-new- produce Class A and/or Class B lifetime (AMS, No.57 at p. 6), but AMS standards case (the case without new equipment, DOE employed a also noted that new component types energy efficiency standards). That is, methodology to estimate the efficiency with unproven reliability records may DOE calculates the percentage of distribution of existing Combination A either shorten or lengthen BVM customers who will be affected by a and Combination B equipment based on lifetimes. (AMS, No. 57 at p. 6) Royal standard at a particular efficiency level the known efficiency of Class A and Vendors commented that the evaporator (in the LCC and PBP analysis, discussed Class B equipment. Therefore, based on fan and condenser fan will have shorter in this section IV.F), as well as the the same analytical methodology used life with increased fan density, thereby national benefits (in the NIA, discussed for Class A and Class B propane decreasing performance and shortening in section IV.H) and impacts on equipment and Class A CO2 equipment, compressor lifetime. (Royal Vendors, manufacturers (in the MIA, discussed in DOE estimated the efficiency No. 54 at p. 6) NAMA commented that section IV.J) recognizing that a range of distribution of Combination A and the lifetime of machine could be longer efficiencies currently exist in the Combination B equipment based on the in the future because BVM owners will marketplace for beverage vending set of design options reflected in the retrofit instead of buy new machines. machines and will continue to exist in efficiency distribution for Class A and (NAMA, No. 50 at p. 8) the no-new-standards case. Class B equipment that is currently available on the market. However, DOE To estimate the efficiency 35 EPA. Always Count Your Change, How notes that there are some BVM ENERGY STAR Refrigerated Vending Machines distributions for each equipment class, manufacturers that produce only Class Save Your Facility Money and Energy. 2010. DOE relied on all publicly available A and/or Class B equipment and these www.energystar.gov/ia/products/ energy use data. Specifically, the market _ manufacturers typically produce the vending machines/ efficiency distribution was determined Vending_Machine_Webinar_Transcript.pdf. most efficient units. Therefore, DOE 36 Haeri, H., D. Bruchs, D. Korn, S. Shaw, J. separately for each equipment class and assumed that the design option set Schott. Characterization and Energy Efficiency for each refrigerant. For equipment for corresponding to the ENERGY STAR Opportunities in Vending Machines for the which certification information was levels for Class A and Class B Northwestern US Market. Prepared for Northwest available in the DOE certification 37 and Power and Conservation Council Regional Technical Forum by Quantec, LLC and The Cadmus 38 www.energystar.gov/productfinder/product/ Group, Inc. Portland, OR. July 24, 2007. 37 www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms. certified-vending-machines/results.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1064 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

equipment, which is the most common assumed to have shipments below certified in CCMS but were not ENERGY design, represented the maximum ENERGY STAR and in some cases has STAR-qualified did not have low power efficiency for combination equipment shipments of BVM models with modes and, thus, their energy and higher efficiency Class A and Class efficiency levels far exceeding the consumption was not adjusted. B models did not have commensurate ENERGY STAR requirement. Some commenters observed that some combination equipment platforms. DOE also notes that the values in the certified ratings in the CCMS or Therefore, equivalent market share for ENEGY STAR and CCMS databases ENERGY STAR databases may be based combination equipment and the represent values gathered under the on testing of equipment without remaining shipments were equally existing DOE test procedure, or accounting for the energy consumption distributed between the ‘‘ENERGY appendix A. Because this final rule of money processing equipment and/or STAR equivalent’’ efficiency level and analysis is conducted based on testing without lighting fully energized for the the baseline efficiency level, or EL 0. Id. in accordance with appendix B, DOE duration of the test, as is currently To project this efficiency distribution elected to translate the existing required under appendix A (see section over the analysis time frame in the no- equipment efficiency data to be III.B). DOE notes that the recently new-standards case, DOE assumed that representative of testing under appendix published 2015 BVM test procedure the efficiency distribution that currently B. To do this, DOE calculated the final rule adopted a new appendix A exists in the market will be maintained average energy savings, in kWh/day, for that clarifies the treatment of certain over the analysis period (2019–2048). accessory low power mode and accessories, including lighting, under refrigeration low power mode for those Id. the DOE test procedure. Specifically, In response to the 2015 BVM ECS equipment classes represented in the appendix A provides that, while energy NOPR analysis, DOE received comments ENERGY STAR and CCMS databases,39 management systems that cannot be from interested parties regarding DOE’s as these are the test procedure adjusted by the machine operator may efficiency distribution assumptions. In provisions in appendix B that affect the be employed, all lighting is to be particular, AMS commented that it sells measured DEC of covered equipment. illuminated to the maximum extent Combination A machines with and The energy savings from accessory and throughout the test and the energy without features found in their ENERGY refrigeration low power mode will vary consumption of payment mechanisms is STAR Class A machines and that less based on the specific technologies and to be accounted for the DEC for each than 10 percent of its customers components implemented in each BVM model. 80 FR 45758 (July 31, purchase more efficient models because different BVM model. However, DOE the company does not see the energy believes that the design options and 2015). DOE also notes that appendix A savings benefits themselves. (AMS, No. technologies modeled in the engineering of the amended BVM test procedure 57 at p. 7) NAMA also expressed analysis are representative of typical must currently be used to certify concern that DOE’s definition for equipment available in the market; equipment with existing energy combination vending machines may therefore, the average energy savings for conservation standards. While DOE make the assumption that Combination the accessory and refrigeration low acknowledges that some manufacturers A and Combination B machines have power mode generated based on the may have previously misinterpreted the similar efficiency distributions to their engineering analysis are similarly DOE test procedure and certified Class A and Class B counterparts false. representative of the average change in equipment without lighting fully (NAMA, No. 50 at p. 9) daily energy consumption that BVM illuminated and/or without money Regarding the efficiency distribution models with low power modes would processing equipment in place, DOE of combination machines, as stated observe when testing in accordance notes that the analysis supporting the above, DOE assumed that combination with appendix B. That is, DOE’s standard levels adopted in this final rule vending machines enter the market at analysis calculates the average change was done based on a modeled efficiency levels similar to, but slightly in measured DEC when testing under engineering analysis, which was less than, the comparable Class A and appendix B, with low power modes validated based on testing DOE Class B efficiency distributions. enabled, compared to appendix A, for conducted in accordance with the Consistent with AMS and NAMA’s the typical BVM model. amended BVM test procedure adopted comments, DOE acknowledges that To adjust the CCMS and ENERGY in the 2015 BVM test procedure final Combination A and Combination B STAR certified ratings, DOE assumed rule. Based on the engineering analysis equipment classes may be less efficient that all ENERGY STAR-certified and testing results, DOE maintains that than Class A and B equipment because equipment would have both accessory equipment can meet the current and these classes have not previously been low power mode and lighting low amended standard levels when testing subject to standards. Therefore, DOE power mode. DOE notes that ENERGY in accordance with the 2015 BVM test defined the baseline efficiency STAR prescribes that either accessory or procedure final rule test procedure distribution for Combination A and refrigeration low power mode (or both) amendments. In addition, DOE notes Combination B equipment as be present in order for a model to that the CCMS and ENERGY STAR significantly less efficient than Class A qualify for ENERGY STAR certification. databases are only used to inform the and Class B equipment. That is, Therefore, all ENERGY STAR models distribution of equipment efficiencies Combination A and Combination B are offset by the average energy savings currently available in the market. As equipment is assumed to fall between resulting from the use of low power DOE does not have information on the baseline efficiency unit (the least modes when testing under appendix B whether and which specific models may efficient combination unit that could be (0.21 kWh/day for Class B equipment). have been testing without lighting fully produced) and the EL with comparable DOE assumed that the models that were illuminated and/or without money design options to the ENERGY STAR EL processing devices in place, DOE for Class A and Class B equipment. DOE 39 While DOE performed this analysis for both declines to modify the DEC values notes that this is significantly less Class A and Class B equipment represented in the found in the CCMS and ENERGY STAR efficient than the baseline efficiency CCMS and ENERGY STAR database, only Class B databases to account for these potential CO2 units are relevant for DOE’s analysis, as all distribution for Class A and Class B Class A units in the ENERGY STAR and CCMS misinterpretations. However, DOE did equipment, as this equipment is not databases use R–134a refrigerant. conduct a sensitivity analysis to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1065

determine the impact of any artificially In response to the 2015 BVM ECS shipment data to estimate shipments of reduced DEC values in the CCMS and NOPR, NAMA and AMS commented new beverage vending machines ENERGY STAR databases and found that operators of vending machines between the years of 2005 and 2012 to that it did not have a significant impact typically do not pay the energy costs corroborate DOE’s historical shipments on the feasibility or cost-effectiveness of associated with the machine, which are estimates during this period. These the analyzed TSLs. instead borne by the business or historical shipment estimates were used For equipment that are not institution where the machine is to build up a stock of BVM equipment represented in DOE’s combined BVM installed. (NAMA, Public Meeting with a representative distribution of models database, the efficiency Transcript, No. 48 at p. 108; AMS, No. ages, and DOE estimated a stock of 3.1 distributions assumed in the final rule 57 at p. 6) DOE is aware of this ‘‘split million BVM units in the United States are estimated based on the ENERGY incentive’’ issue and its impact on the in 2006. 80 FR 50462, 50493 (Aug. 19, STAR and CCMS database, knowledge perceived cost-effectiveness of savings 2015). of the market, test data, and comments in the marketplace. However, as noted Between 2006 and 2014, DOE received from manufacturers. above, in this analysis DOE has assumed estimated that annual shipments Specifically, for Class A CO2 equipment BVM owners will seek to modify and Class A and Class B propane existing financial arrangements and declined linearly from 118,000 in 2006 equipment, these models were all contracts to pass on higher equipment to 45,000 in 2014, consistent with assumed to be designed based on a costs to the users who pay the energy comments from manufacturers received similar ENERGY STAR-compliant R– costs. Therefore, DOE’s LCC and PBP in during manufacturer interviews 134a design platform for the given or analysis uses the perspective that the conducted during the NOPR phase of similar equipment class. This analysis company or institution on whose this rulemaking (see section IV.J of this approach resulted in selection of the premises the beverage vending machine final rule). Based on these shipments, baseline efficiency level for Class A CO2 is located will be impacted by the the estimated stock in 2014 is equipment, EL1 for Class A propane higher equipment cost and receives the approximately 2.2 million units, equipment, and primarily EL2 for Class energy cost savings. In the MIA, DOE compared to a stock of approximately 3 B propane equipment.40 Chapter 8 of also accounts for the ability of million in 2006. In the 2015 BVM ECS this final rule TSD provides more detail manufacturers to pass on higher NOPR, DOE noted that if shipments about DOE’s approach to developing no- equipment costs to customers (see were maintained at 2014 levels of new-standards case efficiency section IV.J). around 45,000 units per year over the distributions. 30-year analysis period, this would G. Shipments Analysis result in an 80-percent reduction in 7. Split Incentives DOE uses forecasts of annual overall stock of beverage vending DOE understands that in most cases equipment shipments to calculate the machines in the United States and the purchasers of beverage vending national impacts of standards (NES and would reflect many current BVM machines (a bottler or a vending NPV) and to calculate the future cash owners removing BVM units from the services company) do not pay the flows of manufacturers.41 For beverage marketplace permanently. Lacking any energy costs for operation and thus will vending machines, DOE developed data indicating or supporting a not directly reap any energy cost savings shipments forecasts based on an significant reduction in availability or from more-efficient equipment. analysis of key market drivers and deployment of beverage vending However, DOE believes that BVM industry trends for this equipment. In machines, DOE assumed that shipments owners will seek to pass on higher DOE’s shipments model, shipments of would recover over time to maintain equipment costs to the users who pay equipment are driven by stock reasonably constant stocks of beverage the energy costs, if possible. DOE replacements assuming that the overall vending machines into the future. Id. understands that the BVM owner population of beverage vending In both the BVM ECS NOPR analysis typically has a financial arrangement machines will slightly decrease over the with the company or institution on and this final rule analysis, DOE next several decades. modeled future shipments of new whose premises the beverage vending In the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR analysis, beverage vending machines from 2014 machine is located, in which the latter DOE estimated historical shipments through 2048 based on data from may pay a fee or receive a share of the between the years of 1998 and 2006 Vending Times Census of the Industry revenue from the beverage vending based on the 2009 BVM final rule 2014 42 that reported BVM stock trends machine. Thus, DOE expects that BVM shipments model, increased by 18 in the commercial and industrial owners could modify the arrangement to percent to reflect the fact that the 2009 building sectors, as well as specific effectively pass on higher equipment BVM final rule shipments model commercial and industrial building costs. Therefore, DOE’s LCC and PBP addresses only Class A and Class B sectors where beverage vending analysis uses the perspective that the equipment, not Combination A or company or institution on whose Combination B equipment. 74 FR 44914, machines are commonly deployed. For premises the beverage vending machine 44928 (Aug. 31, 2009) DOE estimates each commercial and industrial is located pays the higher equipment that combination machines represent 18 building sector, DOE modeled an cost and receives the energy cost percent of total BVM shipments, as average annual percentage reduction in savings. discussed further in section IV.G.1. DOE stock, as shown in Table IV.5, based on also referenced the ENERGY STAR an assumed percentage reduction in 40 DOE assumed that 85 percent of the market BVM units for different commercial would enter at the ENERGY STAR level (EL2), with building uses. The number of buildings the remaining 15 percent distributed between the 41 DOE uses all available data on manufacturer lower ELs (EL1 and EL0), to reflect the fact that model availability, shipments, or national sales to for each sector was also evaluated based some manufacturers may elect to trade off the develop estimates of the number of BVM units of on data available from the 2012 increased efficiency of propane equipment with each equipment class sold in each year of the Commercial Building Energy other more efficient design options to reduce cost. analysis period. In general one would expect a close This assumption for Class B equipment also reflects correspondence between shipments and sales and the larger spread in efficiency currently observed in a reasonable correlation between model availability 42 Vending Times Census of the Industry 2014. the market, as compared to Class A equipment. and sales. Available at www.vendingtimes.com.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1066 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

Consumption Survey (CBECS),43 and an percent decrease from the 2.2 million of 1.8 million in 2048, which resulted average increase in number of buildings estimated in 2014. To estimate the in a growth rate of 3.7 percent annually was calculated by comparing 2012 shipments of new beverage vending throughout the analysis period. Id at CBECS data to historical 2003 CBECS machines based on these stock 50494. data. The estimated stock in 2048 based projections, DOE assumed the minimum on this method was 1.8 million, a 20- growth rate necessary to result in a stock

TABLE IV.5—AVERAGE ANNUAL PERCENT REDUCTION IN BVM STOCK AND GROWTH IN NUMBER OF BUILDINGS FOR EACH INDUSTRIAL SECTOR AND THE INDUSTRY OVERALL

Annual growth Average in number annual % of buildings Commercial and industrial building sector * reduction in (Est. from BVM stock CBECS data) * (%)

Plants, Factories ...... 0.29 3.01 Schools & Colleges and Universities ...... 0.74 0.09 Public Locations ...... 0.38 ¥0.80 Government and Military ...... 0.29 2.03 Offices, Office Complexes ...... 0.74 2.54 Hospitals, Nursing Homes ...... 1.47 2.41 Other Locations ...... 0.45 1.27

Total ...... 0.55 1.78 * Note that the commercial and industrial building sectors assumed in this analysis correspond to those referenced in the 2013 Vending Times Census of the Industry. DOE mapped the CBECS building types to these commercial and industrial building sectors and provides a description of that mapping in chapter 9 of the final rule TSD.

At the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR stage, estimate of 45,000 is likely too low, DOE influence an overall reduction in BVM DOE requested comment on the several has updated the shipments in 2014 to be stock. assumptions regarding historical consistent with the shipments of In response to these requests, DOE shipments between 1998 and 2014 and ENERGY STAR-qualified units reported received several comments regarded also requested data from manufacturers by ENERGY STAR (54,000 units), but future shipments. In the BVM ECS on historical shipments, by equipment scaled this number to reflect the NOPR public meeting and in written class, size, and efficiency level, for as shipments of combination equipment comments, NAMA expressed concern many years as possible, ideally and non-ENERGY STAR-qualified Class regarding DOE’s assumed reduction in beginning in 1998 until the present. A and Class B equipment. Specifically, shipments due to health initiatives and In response, AMS offered that it DOE increased the 54,000 estimate by stated that the industry is moving manufactures only Class A and 18 percent to account for shipments of towards healthier options. NAMA Combination A machines and that its combination equipment and by 11 additionally stated that the ability to shipment volumes are split roughly 50– percent to represent the shipments of place whatever the operator wants in a 50 between the two (AMS, No. 57 at p. non-ENERGY-STAR-qualified units,44 given machine would negate the need to 3). AMS also commented that DOE’s resulting 71,443 units shipped in 2014. remove the machine itself due to a soda shipments assumption contradict a 2014 DOE agrees with SVA’s comment ban. NAMA referenced an industry ENERGY STAR publication which regarding the consistent downward census study by Technomic, Inc. reports 54,000 shipments for that year. trend of shipments between 1198 and projecting growth in future revenues AMS noted that this does not include 2014 and notes that DOE’s shipments and asked DOE to re-evaluate combination machines, and claimed model reflects this industry trend. DOE assumptions regarding shipments. that even the estimated 54,000 value is believes the referenced ENERGY STAR (NAMA, No. 50 at p. 9; NAMA, Public likely underestimated. (AMS, No. 57 at reports represent the best available data Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. 129) p. 7) SVA commented that historical to estimate historical BVM shipments. Reinforcing that comment, the EEA Joint shipments between 1998 and 2014 had At the NOPR stage DOE also Commenters argued that DOE may be a downward trend. (SVA, No. 53 at p. requested comment on its assumptions underestimating total number of 8) Regarding existing BVM stock regarding future shipments. shipments over time because an assumptions, NAMA provided an Specifically, DOE requested comment increase in healthy options that are average estimate of 2.5 machines on the stock of BVM units likely to be being offered in vending machines may installed per ‘‘customer location.’’ available in the United States and in actually cause shipments to increase (NAMA, No. 50 at p. 11) particular commercial and industrial over time, but did not provide In response to these comments building sectors over time. DOE also supporting data. (EEA Joint submitted by interested parties, DOE requested comment on its assumptions Commenters, No. 56 at p. 4) revised the historical shipments model regarding the likely reduction in stock In written comments, NAMA to reference the most current ENERGY in different commercial and industrial commented that it is not aware of any STAR market penetration reports, building sectors in which beverage situations that would result in further including the 2014 report cited by AMS. vending machines are typically installed reduction to BVM stock other than As AMS noted that the previous and on any other factors that might micromarket expansion. However,

43 www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/ 44 DOE estimates that in 2014 89 percent of Class based on the relative number of models available reports/2012/preliminary/index.cfm. A and B equipment were ENERGY STAR-qualified in the CCMS and ENERGY STAR databases in 2014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1067

NAMA expressed its belief that this would decrease new machine purchases parties expressing their concern and trend may not be as significant as once in favor of refurbishments. (Royal belief that added machine costs due to thought, or as DOE suggested in the Vendors, No. 54 at p. 8; AMS, No. 57 at alternative refrigerants as a result of 2015 BVM ECS NOPR. NAMA cited a 15 p. 3; NAMA, No. 50 at p. 8) Conversely, EPA SNAP combined with the increased percent growth in conversion from NEEA expressed the belief that EPA efficiency required by DOE’s proposed beverage vending machines to SNAP compliance would lead to an standards would decrease new machine micromarkets and estimated there to be increase in new shipments, as purchases in favor of refurbishments 10,000 micromarkets currently in refurbishment may not be practical after both regulations go into effect. existence in the United States. NAMA when switching refrigerants. (NEEA, However, between 2014 and 2019, DOE stated that it was unable to provide data Public Meeting Transcript, No. 48 at p. agrees with NEEA that EPA SNAP and as to how the increased presence of 135) Related to refurbishments, SVA the pending compliance date of DOE’s micromarkets would affect future stated in the BVM ECS NOPR public amended standards adopted herein may shipments. (NAMA, No. 50 at pp. 10– meeting that beverage vending machines actually act to increase shipments in the 11) can be refurbished from R–134a to CO2 near term, as BVM owners opt to replace Conversely, SVA stated that new but not to propane due to different aging equipment in advance of the technologies such as micromarkets are safety concerns for flammable required design changes that will occur resulting in the replacement of coin refrigerants. (SVA, Public Meeting in 2019. DOE expects that some operated vending machines with bottle Transcript, No. 48 at p. 136) customers may act in anticipation of the coolers. (SVA, Public Meeting In response to comments received likely increase in equipment prices that Transcript, No. 48 at p. 133) In written from interested parties, DOE revised may occur as a result of the design comments, SVA expressed the belief certain aspects of the shipments model changes necessary to comply with EPA that the current downward trend in in its final rule analysis. Primarily, DOE SNAP regulations and DOE’s new and beverage vending machine shipments in revised the shipments model to more amended energy conservation the United States will continue for the explicitly account for refurbished standards. foreseeable future and recommended beverage vending machines and their DOE also notes that many beverage that DOE work to improve its impact on overall shipments, as DOE vending machines that were refurbished understanding of equipment life, a understands this is an important factor beginning in 2009 to increase their life significant driver of projected shipment driving current and future shipments of will be 4.5 years older, the typical calculations. (SVA, No. 53 at p. 9) SVA beverage vending machines. average ‘‘refurbishment’’ cycle, and the stated that tightening equipment Specifically, DOE revised the BVM additional retirement of those older budgets and increasing prices would shipments model to calculate the stock refurbished machines may increase the result in increased equipment life, and of beverage vending machines that number of retirements beginning in if equipment life decreases, the stock of survive from 1 year to the next 2014 and thus, may also increase beverage vending machines in the according to the following Eq. IV.1: shipments from 2014 through 2024. United States would continue to SurvivingStock = SaU(t,a) + Unew(t) ¥ However, DOE also acknowledges that decrease. SVA cited a downward trend Uretirements (t) + Urefurbishments (t) BVM owners may also choose to in shipments between 1998 and 2014, [Eq.IV.1] refurbish existing equipment prior to and expressed strong disagreement with the EPA SNAP compliance date and DOE’s assumption that this trend would Where: assumes that a significant amount of reverse. SVA additionally stated that U(t,a) = total stock of age a in a given year refurbishments will occur through 2024. t, due to the limited time allowed to Unew(t) = new shipments of BVM units in Notably, DOE’s shipments model submit comments, it was not able to year t (units with age a = 0), assumes that greater than 50 percent of provide data on shipments by Uretirements(t) = retirements of BVM units in equipment that would otherwise reach equipment class. SVA stated its belief year t (units with various age a ≥ 13.4), the end of its life and be retired will that micromarkets will continue to Urefurbishments(t) = refurbishments of BVM instead be refurbished, delaying displace beverage vending machines units in year t (units with various age 30 purchases of new equipment, until after and have an increasingly negative ≥ a ≥ 1), 2024. DOE believes this assumption impact on shipments. (SVA, No. 53 at a = age of stock in years, and effectively captures the likely behavior t = year. pp. 7–8) of customers who may choose to DOE notes that changes in the DOE’s shipments model assumes as refurbish existing R–134a equipment in availability of new refrigerants and increasing trend in refurbishing existing anticipation of new R–134a equipment limitation of certain other refrigerants equipment beginning in 2009 and no longer being available following the for BVM applications may impact the continuing through 2024, after which compliance date of the EPA SNAP overall BVM market in the United States refurbishments return to pre-2009 regulations. and, specifically, the future shipments levels. DOE notes that the impact of this In 2019, when EPA’s SNAP of new beverage vending machines increased refurbishment rate serves only regulations are anticipated to take effect, through 2048. At the 2015 BVM ECS to delay shipments of new equipment, DOE estimated that shipments will NOPR stage, DOE requested comment rather than depress shipments decline dramatically to 2014 levels, on the impact of the EPA SNAP rules on permanently. which represents the lowest annual future shipments of beverage vending In addition, DOE revised its shipments in any year from 1998 machines, by equipment class, assumptions regarding the consistent through the end of the analysis period. refrigerant, and efficiency level. With growth of shipments beginning in 2014, In the succeeding three years, consistent respect to the impact of new refrigerants in light of the impact of the new EPA with manufacturer expectations, DOE on shipments, Royal Vendors, AMS, and SNAP regulations on the BVM market. believes that BVM shipments will NAMA all commented that added While DOE does not have data to stagnate while manufacturers, machine costs due to alternative suggest the impact of changes in customers, and the market respond and refrigerants as a result of EPA SNAP, refrigerant availability on future acclimate to the new EPA SNAP combined with the increased efficiency shipments, DOE acknowledges the regulations and their effect on required by DOE’s proposed standards, comments received from interested equipment availability and price. In

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1068 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

2022, DOE anticipates that shipments shipments of beverage vending of such micromarkets nearly doubled will increase, beginning to recover the machines. between 2012 and 2013 and anticipates aging and depleted BVM stock. DOE DOE believes it is reasonable to model similar growth between 2013 and notes that, based on DOE’s assumptions increasing shipments between 2022 and 2014.50 As such, DOE believes that its regarding the choice of customers to 2035 to recover BVM stock in the projected reductions in certain BVM refurbish or delay purchases of new United States, given the commitment by industry sectors to be reasonable, but BVM equipment in response to the major bottlers to alternative more likely driven by replacement by increased cost of BVM units that are refrigerants.46 DOE notes that major mircomarkets than any health food compliant with EPA SNAP and DOE’s bottlers represent approximately 90 trends or soda bans. In addition, DOE new and amended standards, the BVM percent of the BVM market 47 and, as notes that these industry-segment- shipments model estimates that the such, anticipates consistent or specific declines are primarily BVM stock in 2022 will have decreased increasing demand for alternative illustrative and serve only to support 46 percent compared to the existing refrigerant BVM units over time. DOE the overall 0.55 percent annual stock in 2014. DOE believes that, by this notes that increasing shipments to reduction in stock modeled for the time, customers and the marketplace maintain reasonable stock 48 and industry as a whole. DOE believes that will have adapted to the new alternative availability of BVM units in the this overall trend in BVM stock refrigerants and, thus, will begin to marketplace is also consistent with the continues to be valid, as supported by return to typical purchasing and opinions of NAMA and the EEA Joint comments from manufacturers refurbishment cycles. Therefore, to Commenters regarding the availability anticipating continuing declines in replace retiring units, DOE’s final rule of healthy options in BVM merchandise BVM stock and shipments. shipments model assumes increases in and, thus, continued relevance of For more information on DOE’s shipments through 2035, with the most beverage vending machines in all shipments estimates, the shipments significant growth occurring between industry sectors, including schools, analysis assumptions, and details on the 2022 and 2028. office buildings, and other public calculation methodology, refer to Beyond 2035, DOE estimates that locations. chapter 9 of the final rule TSD. growth in shipments will slowly decline In response to the specific comments 1. Market Share by Equipment Class as shipments return to a more received from NAMA and the EEA Joint Given a total volume of shipments, consistent, static-lifetime ‘‘replacement’’ Commenters, DOE has reviewed its DOE estimates the shipments of each scenario as older equipment assumptions regarding the rationale for equipment class based on the estimated permanently leaves the market. DOE certain reductions in different market market share of each equipment class. In estimates shipments will remain flat segments. DOE agrees with commenters the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE from 2045 through the end of the that the types of vended products assumed the market share assigned to analysis period at around 135,000 units available in beverage vending machines each of the equipment classes shown in per year, resulting in a final stock of 1.8 are not limited to soda or other sugary Table IV.6. million in 2048, as projected by DOE beverages and that sales of water, energy based on the Vending Times data. This drinks, and sports drinks have been TABLE IV.6—MARKET SHARE OF EACH represents a 20-percent decrease from increasing over the past several years.49 2014 levels, primarily due to However, DOE also acknowledges that EQUIPMENT CLASS ASSUMED IN replacement by bottle coolers and the increasing trend of micromarkets to NOPR ANALYSIS micromarkets,45 which is consistent replace beverage vending machines in with SVA’s comment that micromarkets NOPR market some applications and notes that Equipment class share will continue to displace beverage Vending Times reports that installations (%) vending machines and have an increasingly negative impact on 46 See e.g., R744, ‘‘Coca-Cola to approve 9 models Class A ...... 54.3 shipments. of CO2 vending machine—exclusive interview,’’ Class B ...... 27.7 DOE notes that it does not expect the Available online www.r744.com/news/view/3466; Combination A ...... 9.3 specific refrigerant used in a given The Coca-Cola Company (2014), ‘‘2013/2014 Global Combination B ...... 8.7 Reporting Initiative Report.’’ Available online beverage vending machine to impact http://assets.coca-colacompany.com/1a/e5/ demand for beverage vending machines 20840408404b9bc484ebc58d536c/2013-2014-coca- In the NOPR analysis, DOE assumed and overall equipment stocks over time. cola-sustainability-report-pdf.pdf; and PepsiCo that the market share for each As such, DOE maintains that the (2015). ‘‘Performance with Purpose.’’ 2015 equipment class was maintained over Atmosphere Conference. the 30-year analysis period and did not historical Vending Times data and 47 Northwest Power and Conservation Council stock-based analysis approach that DOE Regional Technical Forum. 2007. Characterization change as a function of standard level or employed to develop shipment of Energy Efficiency Opportunities in Vending as a function of changes in refrigerant assumptions for this final rule are Machines for the Northwestern US Market. availability resulting from the two Available at http://rtf.nwcouncil.org//meetings/ recent EPA SNAP rulemakings. 80 FR appropriate and represent the best 2007/08/RTF%20Vending%20Characterization%20 available information about future Study_Revised%20Report_072407.pdf. 19454, 19491 (April 10, 2015) and 80 FR 48 As noted in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE 42870, 42917–42920 (July 20, 2015). 45 The term bottle cooler refers to a specific type assumed an average 0.55-percent reduction in BVM That is, in 2048, Class A, Class B, of self-contained commercial refrigerator with stock overtime, based on projected data from Combination A, and Combination B transparent doors designed for pull-down Vending Times Census of the Industry 2014 and continued to represent 54.3, 27.7, 9.3, applications. Such equipment is specifically CBECS building growth trends. DOE believes that defined as a ‘‘commercial refrigerator designed for further reductions in BVM stock would represent a and 8.7 percent of the market, pull-down applications’’ at 10 CFR 431.62. dramatic shift in the availability of BVM units in respectively. DOE made this assumption Micromarkets are small, self-service, convenience the United States and, thus, purchasing trends of because it does not have data or store-like establishments and typically feature a consumers who currently purchase a variety of information to suggest that the relative bottle cooler for selling bottled and canned snacks and beverages from such vending machines. beverages, among other snacks, which are paid for See chapter 10 of the final rule TSD for more shipments of different equipment at a central payment kiosk. See www.vending.org/ information. images/pdfs/micro-market/ 49 Vending Times Census of the Industry 2013 50 Vending Times Census of the Industry 2014. Tech_W7_bulletin_Micro_Market_v4.0.pdf. and 2014. Available at www.vendingtimes.com. Available at www.vendingtimes.com.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1069

classes will change over time and, if so, similar, self-contained commercial refrigerant modeled in the NOPR with in what direction and on what basis. 80 refrigeration applications.51 Id. no modification. FR 50462, 50494–50495 (Aug. 19, 2015). In its written comments, SVA stated DOE’s shipments analysis and that the relative market share of each assumptions are discussed in more DOE did not receive any comments in refrigerant by equipment class detail in chapter 9 of the final rule TSD. response to the NOPR on these market depended heavily on the ability of distributions and, as such, is 3. High and Low Shipments manufacturers to develop economically Assumptions maintaining the market share sound equipment that meets UL distribution modeled in the NOPR in standards for flammable refrigerants. DOE recognizes that there is the shipments model for this final rule. (SVA, No. 53 at p. 9) In the BVM ECS considerable uncertainty in forecasting 2. Market Share by Refrigerant NOPR public meeting, Coca-Cola stated future shipments of beverage vending that its refrigerant preference for the machines. As such, in addition to the Once DOE has defined shipments by North American market is CO2 and primary shipments scenario presented equipment class, DOE also defined the noted that Japan (another large vending above, DOE estimated low and high shipments within each equipment class market) is already using CO2. Also in shipments scenarios as sensitivities on by refrigerant. In the 2015 BVM ECS the public meeting, SVA expressed the primary scenario. For the high and NOPR, DOE based its assumptions commitment to CO2 but also stated it low shipments scenarios, DOE assumed regarding the relative shipments of each was beginning to explore propane, and the market share by equipment class refrigerant based on recent regulatory Wittern stated that it was pursuing and refrigerant as in the default actions under EPA’s SNAP program, propane over CO2 due to the higher shipments scenario, while the which listed propane and certain other operating pressures of CO2 refrigeration magnitude of total shipments of new hydrocarbon refrigerants as acceptable systems, which labor the compressors beverage vending machines is varied for BVM applications (80 FR 19454, and decrease efficiency. (Coca-Cola, among the scenarios. DOE’s low 19491 (April 10, 2015)) and changed the SVA, and Wittern, Public Meeting shipments scenario modeled lower status of the industry-standard Transcript, No. 48 at pp. 48–55) shipments from 2014 through 2019 than refrigerant R–134a to unacceptable In response to comments submitted DOE estimated in the NOPR to reflect beginning on January 1, 2019 (80 FR by interested parties, DOE reviewed its comments that the increased cost of equipment (due to both EPA SNAP 42870, 42917–42920 (July 20, 2015)). assumptions regarding the relative requirements and DOE’s proposed Specifically, in the NOPR, DOE distribution of shipments of CO2 and standards) would cause a decrease in modeled a shipments scenario assuming propane BVM equipment. DOE believes new machine purchases in favor of that all shipments of new BVM that its 2015 BVM ECS NOPR refurbishments. In 2019, when EPA’s equipment will use CO or propane as assumptions regarding the increased 2 SNAP regulations will take effect, DOE a refrigerant beginning on January 1, market share of CO2 equipment relative estimated that shipments would return 2019, the effective date of the status to propane equipment are consistent to 2014 levels, before beginning to change of R–134a as required by Final with the statements made by recover in 2022 at the reduced growth Rule 20. 80 FR 50462, 50495 (Aug. 19, commenters regarding the existing use rate, reflecting the potential increased 2015). and preference for CO2 equipment, as well as the additional safety refurbishment cycles and commensurate Given the greater market experience certifications that will be necessary for increased lifetime for existing BVM with CO2, DOE assumed that CO2 will propane equipment. Specifically, DOE equipment. DOE also assumed that BVM represent 60 percent of the market and accounted for the fact that beverage shipments recover only to propane will represent 40 percent of the vending machines with propane approximately 100,000 shipments per market for all equipment classes refrigerant must meet all requirements year and result in a stock of 1.3 million beginning in 2019 and continuing of Supplement SA to the 7th edition of at the end of the analysis period, a 40- through the end of the analysis period UL Standard 541, ‘‘Refrigerated Vending percent reduction in units installed in (2048). Specifically, due to the listing of Machines,’’ dated December 30, 201, the United States. DOE notes that this CO2 as an acceptable refrigerant for which specifically addresses flammable stock reduction is consistent with the BVM applications several years ago by refrigerants in vending machines, as projected stock based on the Vending EPA SNAP, as well as a commitment by required by EPA SNAP’s Rule 19 final Times data of a 2 percent annual Coca-Cola (the largest equipment rule. 80 FR 19454, 19460 (April 10, reduction over the analysis period,52 purchaser) to move away from HFC 2015). However, consistent with without adjusting for the growth in refrigerants in the near future, the Wittern’s observation regarding the buildings over the analysis period market has already seen evolution relative efficiency of propane as a calculated based on CBECS. towards the widespread use of CO2. Id. refrigerant compared to CO2, DOE Conversely, the high shipments However, DOE acknowledges that believes it is reasonable to assume that scenario assumes the same overall propane-based BVM models have only propane will gain a significant market decline in stock assumed in the primary very recently become authorized under share by 2019 as some manufacturers shipment case; that is, a stock of 1.8 million BVM units in 2048. However, SNAP and that there is much more elect to take advantage of propane’s the high shipments scenario assumes limited industry experience with this increased efficiency as a refrigerant in that shipments recover more quickly refrigerant. DOE has based this final rule BVM applications. In summary, DOE than in the primary shipments case. The analysis on the use of propane as an appreciates comments from interested high shipments scenario assumes alternative refrigerant, in addition to parties and believes they are generally shipments of new beverage vending CO , and assumed that propane-based consistent with DOE’s assumptions in 2 machines increase in advance of SNAP, BVM models will represent 40 percent the NOPR. As such, DOE is maintaining consistent with the default shipments of shipments by 2019. As mentioned in the distribution of shipments by scenario, as BVM customers act the engineering analysis, DOE believes 51 this assumption is reasonable based on See e.g., Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 0198, The Environmental Investigation Agency, No. 52 Vending Times Census of the Industry 2013 use of propane as a refrigerant in other, 0134. and 2014. Available at www.vendingtimes.com.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1070 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

preemptively to purchase remaining R– cost data from the energy use and LCC review DOE’s analyses by changing 134a equipment before it is no longer analyses.54 For the present analysis, various input quantities within the allowed beginning in 2019. Then, DOE projected the energy savings, spreadsheet. The NIA spreadsheet following 2019, the high shipments operating cost savings, equipment costs, model uses average values as inputs scenario assumes that shipments and NPV of customer benefits for (rather than probability distributions of stagnate before growing rapidly again equipment sold from 2019 through 2048 key input parameters as used in the beginning in 2022 to recover over the (the expected year in which the last LCC). To assess the effect of input next 5 years. DOE believes this scenario standards-compliant equipment is uncertainty on NES and NPV results, represents the case where shipments of shipped during the 30-year analysis). DOE developed its spreadsheet model to BVM units increase over time based on DOE evaluates the impacts of new and conduct sensitivity analyses by running the increased offerings of healthy amended standards by comparing a no- scenarios on specific input variables. options in beverage vending machines new-standards case projections with the and demand from bottlers for such standards case projections. The no-new- For the current analysis, the NIA used alternative refrigerant BVM units, standards case characterizes energy use projections of energy price trends from consistent with comments by NAMA and customer costs for each equipment the AEO2015 Reference case. In and Coca-Cola, respectively. These two class in the absence of new or amended addition, DOE analyzed scenarios that sensitivity scenarios are discussed in energy conservation standards. For this used inputs from the AEO2015 Low more detail in chapter 9 of the final rule projection, DOE considered historical Economic Growth and High Economic TSD. trends in efficiency and various forces Growth cases. These cases have lower that are likely to affect the mix of and higher energy price trends, H. National Impact Analysis efficiencies over time. DOE compared respectively, compared to the reference The NIA assesses the NES and the the no-new-standards case with case. NIA results based on these cases national NPV from a perspective of total projections characterizing the market for are presented in appendix 10E of the customer costs and savings that would each equipment class if DOE adopted final rule TSD. be expected to result from new or new or amended standards at specific A detailed description of the amended standards at specific efficiency energy efficiency levels (i.e., the TSLs or procedure to calculate NES and NPV levels (i.e., TSL) for each equipment standards cases) for that class. For the and inputs for this analysis are provided class of beverage vending machines.53 standards cases, DOE considers how a in chapter 10 of the final rule TSD. (‘‘Customer’’ in this context refers to given standard would likely affect the customers of the equipment being market shares of equipment with Table IV.7 summarizes the inputs and regulated, in this case the purchaser of efficiencies less than the standard. methods DOE used for the NIA analysis the BVM) DOE calculated the NES and DOE used a spreadsheet model to for the final rule. Discussion of these NPV based on projections of annual calculate the energy savings and the inputs and methods appears following shipments, along with the annual national customer costs and savings Table IV.7. See chapter 10 of the final energy consumption and total installed from each TSL. Interested parties can rule TSD for further details.

TABLE IV.7—SUMMARY OF INPUTS AND METHODS FOR THE NATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

Inputs Method

Shipments ...... Annual shipments from shipments model. Compliance Date of Standard ...... 2019. Efficiency Trends ...... No-new-standards case: Standards cases: Annual Energy Consumption per Unit ...... Annual weighted-average values are a function of energy use at each TSL. Total Cost per Unit ...... Annual weighted-average values are a function of cost at each TSL. Incorporates projection of future equipment prices based on historical data. Annual Energy Cost per Unit ...... Annual weighted-average values as a function of the annual energy consumption per unit and energy prices. Repair and Maintenance Cost per Unit ...... Repair cost and maintenance costs provided from LCC analysis. Energy Prices ...... AEO2015 forecasts (to 2040) and extrapolation through 2078. Energy Site-to-Primary and FFC Conversion ...... A time-series conversion factor based on AEO2015. Discount Rate ...... 3% and 7%. Present Year ...... 2015. Price Learning ...... Projection of future price trends for BVM equipment. Lifetime ...... Weibull distribution for equipment lifetime.

1. Equipment Efficiency Trends case (which yields a shipment-weighted available to suggest a different trend, average efficiency) for each of the DOE assumed that the efficiency A key component of the NIA is the considered equipment classes for the distribution in the no-new-standards trend in energy efficiency projected for first year of the forecast period. case will remain the same in future the no-new-standards case and each of DOE developed a distribution of years. In each standards case, a ‘‘roll- the standards cases. Section IV.F.6 of efficiencies in the no-new-standards up’’ scenario approach was applied to this final rule describes how DOE case for the compliance year of new establish the efficiency distribution for developed an energy efficiency standards for each BVM equipment the compliance year. Under the ‘‘roll- distribution for the no-new-standards class. Because no information was up’’ scenario, DOE assumed: (1)

53 The NIA accounts for impacts in the 50 states 54 For the NIA, DOE adjusts the installed cost data and U.S. territories. from the LCC analysis to exclude sales tax, which is a transfer.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1071

Equipment efficiencies in the no-new- DOE uses a multiplicative factor applied, are described in appendix 10D standards case that do not meet the called ‘‘site-to-source conversion factor’’ of the TSD. NES results are presented in standard level under consideration will to convert site energy consumption (at terms of both primary and FFC savings; ‘‘roll-up’’ to meet the new standard the commercial building) into primary the savings by TSL are summarized in level; and (2) equipment efficiencies or source energy consumption (the terms of FFC savings in section I.C of above the standard level under energy input at the energy generation this final rule. consideration will not be affected. The station required to convert and deliver 3. Net Present Value Analysis ‘‘roll-up’’ was a more conservative the energy required at the site of approach over the ‘‘market shift’’ consumption). These site-to-source The inputs for determining NPV are: approach. In a market shift approach it conversion factors account for the (1) Total annual equipment cost, (2) is assumed that a given number of energy used at power plants to generate total annual savings in operating costs, customers will prefer to buy equipment electricity and for the losses in (3) a discount factor to calculate the above the baseline. Therefore, in a transmission and distribution, as well as present value of costs and savings, (4) standards case scenario customers will for natural gas losses from pipeline present value of costs, and (5) present continue to purchase above the new leakage and energy used for pumping. value of savings. DOE calculated the net baseline by shifting to an efficiency For electricity, the conversion factors savings for each year as the difference level that keeps their purchase the same vary over time due to projected changes between the no-new-standards case and number of efficiency levels above the in generation sources (that is, the power each standards case in terms of total new baseline until they no longer can plant types projected to provide savings in operating costs versus total do so because the market becomes electricity to the country). The factors increases in equipment costs. DOE compressed by the maximum available that DOE developed are marginal calculated savings over the lifetime of efficiency level. values, which represent the response of equipment shipped in the forecast DOE also recognizes that recent the system to an incremental decrease in period. DOE calculated NPV as the changes in refrigerant availability consumption associated with amended difference between the present value of resulting from the two recent EPA SNAP energy conservation standards. operating cost savings and the present rulemakings may have an impact on For this final rule, DOE used value of total equipment costs. forecasted efficiency distributions under conversion factors based on the U.S. For the NPV analysis, DOE calculates the no-new-standards case. 80 FR energy sector modeling using the increases in total equipment costs as the 19454, 19491 (April 10, 2015) and 80 FR National Energy Modeling System difference in total equipment cost 42870, 42917–42920 (July 20, 2015). (NEMS) Building Technologies (NEMS– between the no-new-standards case and However, DOE did not account for such BT) version that corresponds to standards case (i.e., once the standards potential impacts on efficiency AEO2015 and which provides national take effect). Because the more-efficient distributions in this final rule analysis, energy forecasts through 2040. Within equipment bought in the standards case the results of NEMS–BT model runs as DOE does not have data or usually costs more than equipment performed by DOE, a site-to-source ratio information to suggest how efficiency bought in the no-new-standards case, for commercial refrigeration was distributions of different equipment cost increases appear as negative values developed. The site-to-source ratio was classes or refrigerants will change over in calculating the NPV. held constant beyond 2040 through the time and, if so, in what direction and on DOE expresses savings in operating what basis as a result of potential end of the analysis period (30 years from the compliance year plus the life costs as decreases associated with the changes. of equipment). lower energy consumption of equipment 2. National Energy Savings bought in the standards case compared a. Full-Fuel-Cycle Analysis to the no-new-standards case. Total The inputs for determining the NES DOE has historically presented NES savings in operating costs are the are (1) annual energy consumption per in terms of primary energy savings. On product of savings per unit and the unit, (2) shipments, (3) equipment stock, August 18, 2011, DOE published a final number of units of each vintage that (4) national energy consumption, and statement of policy in the Federal survive in a given year. (5) site-to-source conversion factors. As Register announcing its intention to use DOE multiplied monetary values in discussed in the energy use analysis, FFC measures of energy use and future years by the discount factor to DOE calculated the national energy greenhouse gas and other emissions in determine the present value of costs and consumption by multiplying the the NIA and emissions analyses savings. DOE estimates the NPV of number of units (stock) of each type of included in future energy conservation customer benefits using both a 3-percent equipment (by vintage or age) by the standards rulemakings. 76 FR 51281. and a 7-percent real discount rate as the unit energy consumption (also by While DOE stated in that document that average real rate of return on private vintage). Vintage represents the age of it intended to use the Greenhouse Gases, investment in the U.S. economy. DOE the equipment. Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in used these discount rates in accordance DOE calculated annual NES based on Transportation (GREET) model to with guidance provided by the U.S. the difference in national energy conduct the analysis, it also said it Office of Management and Budget consumption for the no-new-standards would review alternative methods, (OMB) to Federal agencies on the case (without new efficiency standards) including the use of NEMS. After development of regulatory analysis. and for each higher efficiency evaluating both models and the (OMB Circular A–4 (Sept. 17, 2003), 55 standard. Cumulative energy savings approaches discussed in the August 18, section E, ‘‘Identifying and Measuring are the sum of the annual NES over the 2011 document, DOE published an Benefits and Costs’’) The 7-percent real period in which equipment shipped in amended statement of policy, value is an estimate of the average 2019–2048 are in operation. articulating its determination that before-tax rate of return to private NEMS is a more appropriate tool for this capital in the U.S. economy. The 3- 55 The no-new-standards case represents a mix of efficiencies above the minimum efficiency level (EL purpose. 77 FR 49701 (August 17, 2012). percent real value represents the 0). Please see section IV.F.6 for a more detail The approach used for this final rule, ‘‘societal rate of time preference,’’ which description of associated assumptions. and the FFC multipliers that were is the rate at which society discounts

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1072 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

future consumption flows to their this final rule and described in detail in Hoover’s reports,58 to develop the present. chapter 12 of the final rule TSD. industry profile. In Phase 2 of the MIA, DOE prepared I. Customer Subgroup Analysis J. Manufacturer Impact Analysis an industry cash-flow analysis to In analyzing the impact of new or 1. Overview quantify the potential impacts of an amended standards on commercial DOE performed a MIA to determine amended energy conservation standard customers, DOE evaluated the impact on the financial impact of amended energy on manufacturers of beverage vending identifiable groups (i.e., subgroups) of conservation standards on machines. In general, energy customers, such as different types of manufacturers of beverage vending conservation standards can affect businesses that may be machines, and to estimate the potential manufacturer cash flow in three distinct disproportionately affected by a national impact of such standards on ways: (1) Create a need for increased standard. The purpose of the subgroup employment and manufacturing investment; (2) raise production costs analysis is to determine the extent of capacity. The MIA has both quantitative per unit; and (3) alter revenue due to this disproportional impact. In and qualitative aspects. The quantitative higher per-unit prices and possible comparing potential impacts on the part of the MIA primarily relies on the changes in sales volumes. To quantify different customer subgroups, DOE may Government Regulatory Impact Model these impacts, DOE used the GRIM to evaluate variations in regional (GRIM), an industry cash-flow model perform a cash-flow analysis for the electricity prices, energy use profiles, with inputs specific to this rulemaking. BVM industry using financial values and purchase prices that might affect The key GRIM inputs are data on the derived during Phase 1. the LCC of an energy conservation In Phase 3 of the MIA, DOE evaluated industry cost structure, equipment standard to certain customer subgroups. subgroups of manufacturers that may be costs, shipments, and assumptions For this rulemaking, DOE identified disproportionately impacted by about markups and conversion manufacturing and/or industrial amended energy conservation standards expenditures. The key output is the facilities that purchase their own or that may not be represented INPV. Different sets of assumptions (i.e., beverage vending machines as a relevant accurately by the average cost markup and shipments scenarios) will subgroup. These facilities typically have assumptions used to develop the produce different results. The higher discount rates and lower industry cash-flow analysis. For qualitative part of the MIA addresses electricity prices than the general example, small manufacturers, niche factors such as equipment population of BVM customers. These players, or manufacturers exhibiting a characteristics, impacts on particular two conditions make it likely that this cost structure that largely differs from subgroups of firms, and important subgroup will have the lowest LCC the industry average could be more market and equipment trends. The savings of any major customer negatively affected. DOE identified one complete MIA is outlined in chapter 12 subgroup. subgroup for a separate impact analysis, Two stakeholders commented on the of the final rule TSD. DOE conducted the MIA for this small businesses. 2015 BVM ECS NOPR subgroup DOE identified eight companies that rulemaking in three phases. In Phase 1 analysis. AMS commented that because of the MIA, DOE conducted structured, sell BVM equipment in the United those who purchase the machines do detailed interviews with manufacturers States. For the small businesses not usually pay for electricity, PBP and prepared a profile of the BVM subgroup analysis, DOE applied the numbers for subgroup ‘‘do not really industry. During manufacturer small business size standards published exist’’ (i.e., energy savings are only interviews, DOE discussed engineering, by the Small Business Administration realized by site owners). (AMS, No. 57 manufacturing, procurement, and (SBA) to determine whether a company at Page 6) NAMA suggested that financial topics to identify concerns and is considered a small business. 65 FR subgroups might include vending to inform and validate assumptions 30836, 30848 (May 15, 2000), as machine operating companies because used in the GRIM. See appendix 12A of amended at 65 FR 53533, 53544 (Sept. ‘‘most corporate and manufacturing the TSD for a copy of the interview 5, 2000) and codified at 13 CFR part facilities provide vending machines to guide. 121. To be categorized as a small their employees through vending DOE used information obtained business under North American machine companies.’’ (NAMA, No. 50 at during these interviews to prepare a Industry Classification System (NAICS) p. 12) profile of the BVM industry. Drawing on code 333318, ‘‘Other Commercial and In response to the comment from financial analysis performed as part of Service Industry Machinery AMS, DOE notes that the money saved the 2009 energy conservation standard Manufacturing,’’ a BVM manufacturer by more efficient equipment through for beverage vending machines, as well and its affiliates may employ a lower operating costs is accounted for in as feedback obtained from maximum of 1,000 employees. The the split incentives approach. DOE manufacturers, DOE derived financial 1,000-employee threshold includes all believes that the subgroup to which inputs for the GRIM (e.g., sales, general, employees in a business’s parent NAMA refers can be represented by the and administration (SG&A) expenses; company and any other subsidiaries. manufacturing and/or industrial research and development (R&D) Based on this classification, of the eight facilities that purchase their own expenses; and tax rates). DOE also used companies selling beverage vending beverage vending machines because public sources of information, including machines in the United States, DOE each group would likely have lower company SEC 10–K filings,56 corporate identified five manufacturers that electricity prices and higher discount annual reports, the U.S. Census qualify as small businesses, one of rates than the typical customer. Bureau’s Economic Census,57 and which is a foreign manufacturer with DOE determined the impact on this domestic-sited subsidiary that serves as BVM customer subgroup using the LCC 56 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. its marketing arm in the United States. spreadsheet model. DOE conducted the Annual 10–K Reports. Various Years. http://sec.gov. The BVM small manufacturer subgroup LCC and PBP analysis for customers 57 U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of is discussed in chapter 12 of the final represented by the subgroup. The Manufacturers: General Statistics: Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries. http://factfinder2. results of DOE’s LCC subgroup analysis census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/ 58 Hoovers Inc. Company Profiles. Various are summarized in section V.B.1.b of searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t. Companies. www.hoovers.com.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1073

rule TSD and in section IV.J of this final due to the use of more complex expenditures that will be needed to rule. components, which are typically more comply with each considered efficiency Additionally, in Phase 3 of the MIA, costly than baseline components. The level in each equipment class. For the DOE evaluated impacts of amended changes in the MPCs of the analyzed MIA, DOE classified these conversion energy conservation standards on equipment can affect the revenues, gross costs into two major groups: (1) Product manufacturing capacity and direct margins, and cash flow of the industry, conversion costs and (2) capital employment. DOE also evaluated making these equipment cost data key conversion costs. Product conversion cumulative regulatory burdens affecting GRIM inputs for DOE’s analysis. costs are one-time investments in the BVM industry. In the MIA, DOE used the MPCs for research, development, testing, each considered efficiency level 2. Government Regulatory Impact Model marketing, and other non-capitalized calculated in the engineering analysis, costs necessary to make product designs DOE uses the GRIM to quantify the as described in section IV.C of this final comply with the amended energy changes in cash flow due to new rule and further detailed in chapter 5 of conservation standard. Capital standards that result in a higher or the final rule TSD. In addition, DOE conversion costs are one-time lower industry value. The GRIM used information from its teardown investments in property, plant, and analysis uses a standard, annual cash- analysis, described in chapter 5 of the equipment necessary to adapt or change flow analysis that incorporates TSD, to disaggregate the MPCs into existing production facilities such that manufacturer costs, markups, material, labor, and overhead costs. To new compliant equipment designs can shipments, and industry financial calculate the MPCs for equipment above be fabricated and assembled. information as inputs. The GRIM the baseline, DOE added the models changes in costs, distribution of incremental material, labor, and Industry investments related to shipments, investments, and overhead costs from the engineering compliance with EPA Rule 20 are manufacturer margins that could result cost-efficiency curves to the baseline detailed in the next section (‘‘One-Time from an amended energy conservation MPCs. These cost breakdowns and Investments Associated with EPA SNAP standard. The GRIM spreadsheet uses equipment markups were validated and Rule 20’’) and are separate from the the inputs to arrive at a series of annual revised with manufacturers during conversion costs manufacturers are cash flows, beginning in 2015 (the manufacturer interviews. DOE notes estimated to incur to comply with reference year of the analysis) and that, since all BVM equipment will be amended energy conservation continuing to 2048. DOE calculated required to be compliant with EPA’s standards. INPVs by summing the stream of annual new Rule 20 regulations prohibiting the To evaluate the level of capital discounted cash flows during this use of R–134a after January 1, 2019 (80 conversion expenditures manufacturers period. For BVM manufacturers, DOE FR 42870, 42917–42920 (July 20, 2015)), will likely incur to comply with used a real discount rate of 8.5 percent, the MPCs modeled in the GRIM amended energy conservation which was derived from industry represent equipment that is compliant standards, DOE used manufacturer financials and then modified according with Rule 20 (i.e., uses only CO2 and interview feedback to determine an to feedback received during propane refrigerants), as well as any average per-manufacturer capital manufacturer interviews. existing energy conservation standards conversion cost for each design option The GRIM calculates cash flows using for such equipment. and equipment class. DOE scaled the standard accounting principles and per-manufacturer capital conversion Shipments Forecasts compares changes in INPV between a costs to the industry level using a count no-new-standards case and each The GRIM estimates manufacturer of manufacturers producing the given standards case. The difference in INPV revenues based on total unit shipment equipment type (i.e., Class A, Class B, between the no-new-standards case and forecasts by equipment class and the Combination A, Combination B). a standards case represents the financial distribution of these values by efficiency As detailed in section IV.G of this impact of the amended energy level. Changes in sales volumes and final rule, shipments of BVM units with conservation standard on efficiency mix over time can HFC refrigerants are forecasted to fall to manufacturers. As discussed previously, significantly affect manufacturer zero by 2019 as a result of the EPA DOE collected this information on the finances. For this analysis, the GRIM SNAP Rule 20 compliance date of 2019. critical GRIM inputs from a number of uses the NIA’s annual shipment Therefore, DOE estimates no conversion sources, including publicly available forecasts derived from the shipments costs associated with the remaining data and interviews with a number of analysis. See section IV.H of this final shipments of BVM units with HFC manufacturers. The GRIM results are rule and chapter 10 of the final rule TSD refrigerants that are forecasted to occur shown in section IV.J.2.b of this final for additional details. rule. Additional details about the GRIM, during the conversion period (the 3 the discount rate, and other financial Product and Capital Conversion Costs years leading up to the amended energy parameters can be found in chapter 12 Associated With Energy Conservation conservation standard year of 2019). of the final rule TSD. Standards for Beverage Vending Table IV.8 contains the per- Machines a. Government Regulatory Impact Model manufacturer capital conversion costs Key Inputs An amended energy conservation associated with key design options for standard will cause manufacturers to each equipment class. DOE assumes that Manufacturer Production Costs incur one-time conversion costs to bring all Combination A units share a Manufacturing more efficient their production facilities and product common cabinet and glass pack design equipment is typically more expensive designs into compliance. DOE evaluated with a Class A unit, and will not carry than manufacturing baseline equipment the level of conversion-related any additional capital conversion costs.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1074 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE IV.8—PER-MANUFACTURER CAPITAL CONVERSION COSTS FOR KEY DESIGN OPTIONS [million 2014$]

Capital conversion costs Design (million 2014$) option Class A Class B Combination A Combination B

Evaporator Fan Controls ...... * N/A 0.04 0 0.04 1.125 Inch Thick Insulation ...... 0.07 0.09 0 0.09 Enhanced Glass Pack ...... 0.06 * N/A 0 * N/A Vacuum Insulated Panels ...... 0.14 0.17 0 0.18 * N/A = Not Applicable.

DOE used a top-down approach that option and equipment type. DOE then product conversion costs to estimate relied on manufacturer feedback from used the platform counts to scale the Combination A product conversion interviews to assess product conversion average per platform product conversion costs and DOE scaled Class B product costs for the BVM industry. Using the to the industry level. DOE received conversion costs to scale Combination B DOE’s CCMS 59 and ENERGY STAR 60 insufficient feedback from industry to product conversion costs. This scaling databases, along with manufacturer Web estimate representative product was based on the ratio of Combination sites, DOE determined the number of conversion costs for Combination A and A to Class A platforms in the industry platforms that are currently available for Combination B equipment. As a result, and the ratio of Combination B to Class each equipment type (i.e., Class A, Class because of the inherent commonalities B platforms, respectively. B, Combination A, Combination B). DOE of design and manufacture between Table IV.9 contains the per-platform used manufacturer feedback to Class A and Combination A equipment product conversion costs associated determine an average per platform and between Class B and Combination with key design options for each product conversion cost by design B equipment, DOE scaled Class A equipment class.

TABLE IV.9—PER-PLATFORM PRODUCT CONVERSION COSTS FOR KEY DESIGN OPTIONS [million 2014$]

Product conversion costs Design option (million 2014$) Class A Class B Combination A Combination B

Evaporator Fan Controls ...... * N/A 0.02 0.004 0.02 Enhanced Evaporator Coil ...... 0.02 0.01 * N/A 0.01 Enhanced Glass Pack ...... 0.06 * N/A 0.004 * N/A 1.125 Inch Thick Insulation ...... 0.02 0.02 0.004 0.02 Vacuum Insulated Panels ...... 0.06 0.06 0.004 0.06 * N/A = Not Applicable.

DOE assumes that all energy result of the amended DOE energy range of potential costs because there conservation standards-related conservation standards, DOE reflects the are manufacturers that already have conversion costs occur between the year impact of this investment in both the SNAP-compliant equipment on the of publication of the final rule and the no-new-standards and standards cases. market today, and those manufacturers year by which manufacturers must EPA Rule 20 did not provide an will not need to make the same level of comply with the new standard. The estimate of the upfront investments investment ahead of the 2019 effective conversion cost figures used in the associated with a R–134a refrigerant date. For integration into the GRIM, GRIM can be found in section IV.J.2.a of phase-out for BVM manufacturers. DOE assumed that this one-time cost this final rule. For additional Based on feedback in interviews, DOE will occur in 2018 because the EPA’s information on the estimated product estimated an upfront cost to the Rule 20 requires a phaseout of R–134a and capital conversion costs, see industry to comply with Rule 20 using by 2019. This cost is independent of chapter 12 of the final rule TSD. refrigerants CO2 and propane. DOE conversion costs that industry will need One-Time Investments Associated With estimated that each BVM manufacturer to make as a result of amended energy EPA SNAP Rule 20 will need to invest $750,000 to update conservation standards (discussed in the their equipment to comply with Rule 20 previous section). Unlike product and As a result of EPA Rule 20, the if they have no compliant equipment capital conversion costs necessitated by industry will be required to make an today. DOE assumed this one-time DOE energy conservation standards, upfront investment in order to transition investment applied to all eight DOE includes this one-time Rule 20 from the use of R–134a to CO2 or manufacturers, resulting in an industry investment in the GRIM in both the no- propane. Although this industry cost of $6 million.61 DOE believes that new-standards case and the standards investment (detailed below) is not a this estimate falls on the high end of the case. Accordingly, the costs related to

59 ‘‘CCMS.’’ CCMS. January 19, 2015. Accessed 60 ENERGY STAR Certified Vending Machines. 61 In the GRIM, the $6 million one-time SNAP January 19, 2015. www.regulations.doe.gov/ June 6, 2013. Accessed January 19, 2015. investment would affect the industry in the no-new- certification-data/. www.energystar.gov/products/certified-products. standards case as well as at each TSL.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1075

complying with EPA Rule 20 have been TABLE IV.10—BASELINE MANUFAC- based on manufacturer feedback on incorporated into the baseline to which TURER MARKUPS—Continued costs associated with individual design DOE analyzed these adopted standards. options, which are common to both CO2 As such, all the costs to industry that Equipment class Markup and propane machines. These occur in the standards case relate to the individual design option costs were impact of the adopted energy Combination B ...... 1.36 scaled to reflect industry conversion conservations standards. costs per design option and equipment Because this manufacturer markup type (ie., Class A, Class B, Combination b. Government Regulatory Impact Model scenario assumes that manufacturers A, Combination B) using the count of Scenarios will be able to maintain their gross manufacturers currently producing Manufacturer Markup Scenarios margin percentage markups as beverage vending machines of each production costs increase in response to equipment type and the count of current MSPs include direct manufacturing an amended energy conservation platforms of each equipment type. production costs (i.e., labor, materials, standard, it represents a high bound to These industry conversion cost and overhead estimated in DOE’s MPCs) industry profitability. estimates were then allocated by and all non-production costs (i.e., In the preservation of per-unit refrigerant using assumptions developed SG&A, R&D, and interest), along with operating profits scenario, manufacturer in the Shipments Analysis related to the profit. To calculate the MSPs in the markups are calibrated such that the distribution of refrigerants in the BVM GRIM, DOE applied manufacturer per-unit operating profit in the year after industry by 2019 (see section IV.G.2 for markups to the MPCs estimated in the the compliance date of the amended a description of DOE’s methodology for engineering analysis for each equipment energy conservation standard is the forecasting future BVM shipments by class and efficiency level. Modifying same as in the no-new-standards case refrigerant type). As DOE’s shipments these manufacturer markups in the for each equipment class. Under this forecasts by refrigerant assume a standards case yields different sets of scenario, as the cost of production goes significant market share for both CO2 impacts on manufacturers. For the MIA, up, manufacturers are generally and propane equipment, DOE accounts DOE modeled two standards case required to reduce the markups on their for manufacturers’ decisions to produce manufacturer markup scenarios to minimally compliant equipment to beverage vending machines using both represent the uncertainty regarding the maintain a cost-competitive offering. CO2 and propane in its estimates of potential impacts on prices and The implicit assumption behind this industry conversion costs. profitability for manufacturers following scenario is that the industry can only In response to the 2015 BVM ECS the implementation of amended energy maintain operating profits after NOPR, AMS expressed concern relating conservation standards: (1) A compliance with the amended standard to the fact that EPA’s enforcement of preservation of gross margin percentage is required. Therefore, gross margin (as SNAP includes remanufactured markup scenario and (2) a preservation a percentage) is reduced between the equipment, in addition to new of per-unit operating profit markup no-new-standards case and the refrigerated beverage vending machines, scenario. These scenarios lead to standards case. This manufacturer while DOE energy conservation different manufacturer markup values markup scenario represents a low bound standards apply only to new machines. that, when applied to the inputted to industry profitability under an AMS believes this inconsistency will MPCs, result in varying revenue and amended energy conservation standard. contribute to the cumulative regulatory cash flow impacts. burdens faced by BVM manufacturers. 3. Discussion of Comments Under the preservation of gross (AMS, No.48 at p. 137) Additionally, margin percentage scenario, DOE During the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR NAMA stated that compliance with both applied a single uniform ‘‘gross margin public meeting and in public comments EPA SNAP rule 20 and proposed rule percentage’’ markup across all efficiency submitted in response to the 2015 BVM would be very costly to the industry. levels (for a given equipment class), ECS NOPR, manufacturers, trade (NAMA, No. 50 at p. 13) The Form which assumes that manufacturers will organizations, and SBA Advocacy Letter Writers stated the standards were be able to maintain the same amount of provided several comments on the not technologically feasible or profit as a percentage of revenues at all potential impact of amended energy economically justified because of the efficiency levels within an equipment conservation standards on burden on small businesses who also class. As production costs increase with manufacturers. These comments are have to meet new EPA mandates as well efficiency, this scenario implies that the outlined below. DOE notes that these as new DOE testing procedures (The absolute dollar markup will increase as comments helped to update the analysis Form Letter Writers, No. 64 and 65 at p. well. Based on publicly available reflected in this final rule. 1) financial information for manufacturers Relating to DOE’s 2015 BVM ECS DOE recognizes that EPA regulations of beverage vending machines as well as NOPR estimates of industry conversion that restrict the use of HFC refrigerants comments from manufacturer costs associated with compliance with will lead to changes in production costs interviews, DOE assumed the average amended energy conservation for BVM manufacturers, necessitate manufacturer markups to vary by standards, Seaga commented that DOE investments, and will, accordingly, equipment class as shown in Table is underestimating industry conversion contribute to the cumulative regulatory IV.10. costs because different bottlers may burdens incurred by manufacturers as a want different refrigerants. (Seaga, No. result of amended DOE energy TABLE IV.10—BASELINE 48 at p. 177) conservation standards. DOE notes that As part of the manufacturer impact although EPA SNAP Rule 20 lists MANUFACTURER MARKUPS analysis, DOE evaluated the level of certain refrigerants as unacceptable in energy conservation standards-related Equipment class Markup refurbished machines as of July 20, expenditures that will be needed to 2016, R–134a is not among the Class A ...... 1.22 comply with each considered efficiency unacceptable refrigerants. Therefore, Class B ...... 1.17 level in each equipment class. DOE because manufacturers are currently Combination A ...... 1.36 notes that these conversion costs are capable of producing beverage vending

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1076 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

machines with R–134a, DOE believes development to meet DOE’s proposed Finally, SBA commented that DOE set that the cumulative regulatory burdens standard may require it to abandon the the baseline for Combination A and associated with EPA’s enforcement of vending machine market. (AMS, No. 57 Combination B equipment classes as the SNAP on refurbished beverage vending at p. 10) Additionally, SBA Advocacy’s least efficient combination of machines will be minimal, on both large conversations with small businesses on technologies analyzed in the and small manufacturers. Moreover, their projected compliance costs engineering analysis. As a result, SBA DOE’s statutory authority to prescribe [associated with the standard levels Advocacy believes DOE could be new and amended energy conservation proposed in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR] overstating benefits at higher TSLs standards only applies to the point of yielded estimates exceeding $1,000,000 because the baseline represents manufacture, and as such, DOE does not per small manufacturer. (SBA equipment that is less efficient than have the authority to extend such Advocacy, No. 61 at p. 2) SBA actual equipment on the market and standards to refurbished equipment. Advocacy stated further that, to ensure may not represent a reasonable DOE accounted for the forthcoming that the cost implications of complying combination of technologies. (SBA R–134a phase out by estimating with the SNAP rule are considered in Advocacy, No. 61 at p. 2) refrigerant-specific design pathways, DOE’s analysis, it recommends that a Since there are currently no energy- cost efficiency curves and the upfront sensitivity analysis be done. (SBA related regulatory standards for investments needed to adapt equipment, Advocacy, No. 61 at p. 3) Combination A and Combination B production lines, and facilities to the DOE recognizes that small beverage vending machines, the use of propane and CO2. DOE used a manufacturers may be baseline for these equipment classes is value of $750,000 per manufacturer to disproportionately impacted by energy defined as the level of efficiency account for capital expenditures as well conservation standards relative to other representing the least-efficient as non-equipment costs such R&D, manufacturers in the industry. Again, technology currently found in the BVM testing, and marketing material changes DOE notes that, in response to market for each design option analyzed. to bring BVM equipment using propane stakeholder feedback relating to the Starting with the least efficient or CO2 to market. DOE integrated this 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, it has updated its technology results in an analysis where cost into both the no-new-standards and engineering analysis and standard manufacturers must incorporate more standards case estimates of INPV. See efficiency levels for this final rule, design options and accrue greater section IV.J.2.a for further detail on one- resulting in less burdensome standard conversion costs to reach an amended time costs associated with SNAP Rule levels for all equipment classes of standard. This approach results in 20 compliance. Furthermore, DOE beverage vending machines relative to estimates of manufacturer conversion includes the EPA’s SNAP Rule 20 in its the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR proposal. costs related to ECS compliance which list of cumulative regulatory burdens in DOE believes that the $1,000,000 per fall in the high end of the range of section V.B.2.e of this final rule. DOE small manufacturer compliance cost potential costs. also independently analyzed the impact estimate cited by SBA Advocacy is DOE notes that, in written comments of the adopted new and amended inclusive of the both ECS-related in response to the 2015 BVM ECS standards on small business in the conversion costs and SNAP-related NOPR, AMS commented that the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, upfront investments. DOE accounted for baseline level calculated for presented in section VI.B. the forthcoming R–134a phaseout Combination A beverage vending Also relating to cumulative regulatory required by EPA SNAP by estimating machines is far more efficient than the burdens, Royal Vendors commented refrigerant-specific design pathways, performance of actual machines in use that the vending industry has cost efficiency curves and the upfront today (see section IV.C.1 the full experienced numerous regulatory and investments needed to adapt equipment, discussion of this comment). In the final economic challenges in the past 5–10 production lines, and facilities to the rule analysis, DOE made additional years and that DOE’s proposed use of propane and CO2 (see section analytical adjustments to the standards would cause undue hardship IV.C.2 for information relating to engineering analysis, and as such, the on the vending industry. (Royal refrigerant-specific design pathways and baseline performance of the Vendors, No. 54 at p. 2) cost efficiency curves). DOE estimated combination equipment showed better In response to stakeholder feedback an upfront cost of $750,000 per agreement with the figure suggested by relating to the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, manufacturer to comply with Rule 20 AMS. DOE has updated its engineering using refrigerants propane and CO 2 K. Emissions Analysis analysis and standard efficiency levels refrigerants (this cost is independent of for this final rule, resulting in less product and capital conversion costs The emissions analysis consists of burdensome standard levels for all associated with DOE standards two components. The first component product classes of beverage vending compliance), and incorporated this cost estimates the effect of potential energy machines relative to the 2015 BVM ECS in the GRIM in both the no-new- conservation standards on power sector NOPR proposal. DOE investigates standards case and the standards case. and site (where applicable) combustion cumulative regulatory burden impacts This allowed DOE to isolate the emissions of CO2, NOX, SO2, and Hg. associated with this rulemaking in more incremental impact of amended energy The second component estimates the detail in section V.B.2.e of this notice, conservation standards on BVM impacts of potential standards on and in chapter 12 of the final TSD. manufacturers, while still accounting emissions of two additional greenhouse Regarding the impacts of the standard for the impact of the 2019 R–134a gases, CH4 and N2O, as well as the levels proposed in the 2015 BVM ECS phaseout on the industry. See section reductions to emissions of all species NOPR on small domestic BVM IV.J.2 for further details on DOE’s due to ‘‘upstream’’ activities in the fuel manufacturers, Seaga noted that the modeling of ECS-related conversion production chain. These upstream proposed standards would make it costs and SNAP-related upfront activities comprise extraction, difficult for small manufacturers to investments. Additionally, DOE’s processing, and transporting fuels to the remain in the industry. (Seaga, No. 48 analysis of the impacts of the final rule site of combustion. The associated at p. 177) Similarly, AMS commented standard levels on small manufacturers emissions are referred to as upstream that the investments in engineering and is detailed in sections V.B.2 and VI.B. emissions.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1077

The analysis of power sector Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). 70 FR Beginning in 2016, however, SO2 emissions uses marginal emissions 25162 (May 12, 2005). CAIR created an emissions will fall as a result of the factors that were derived from data in allowance-based trading program that Mercury and Air Toxics Standards AEO2015. The methodology is operates along with the Title IV (MATS) for power plants. 77 FR 9304 described in chapters 13 and 15 of the program. In 2008, CAIR was remanded (Feb. 16, 2012). In the MATS rule, EPA final rule TSD. to EPA by the U.S. Court of Appeals for established a standard for hydrogen Combustion emissions of CH4 and the District of Columbia Circuit, but it chloride as a surrogate for acid gas N2O are estimated using emissions remained in effect.64 In 2011, EPA hazardous air pollutants (HAP), and also intensity factors published by the EPA, issued a replacement for CAIR, the established a standard for SO2 (a non- 62 GHG Emissions Factors Hub. The FFC Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). HAP acid gas) as an alternative upstream emissions are estimated based 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). On equivalent surrogate standard for acid on the methodology described in August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit issued gas HAP. The same controls are used to 65 chapter 15 of the final rule TSD. The a decision to vacate CSAPR, and the reduce HAP and non-HAP acid gas; upstream emissions include both court ordered EPA to continue thus, SO emissions will be reduced as emissions from fuel combustion during 2 administering CAIR. On April 29, 2014, a result of the control technologies extraction, processing, and the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the installed on coal-fired power plants to transportation of fuel, and ‘‘fugitive’’ judgment of the D.C. Circuit and comply with the MATS requirements emissions (direct leakage to the remanded the case for further for acid gas. AEO2015 assumes that, in atmosphere) of CH4 and CO2. proceedings consistent with the order to continue operating, coal plants The emissions intensity factors are Supreme Court’s opinion.66 On October expressed in terms of physical units per 23, 2014, the D.C. Circuit lifted the stay must have either flue gas MWh or MMBtu of site energy savings. of CSAPR.67 Pursuant to this action, desulfurization or dry sorbent injection Total emissions reductions are CSAPR went into effect (and CAIR systems installed by 2016. Both estimated using the energy savings ceased to be in effect) as of January 1, technologies, which are used to reduce calculated in the national impact 2015. acid gas emissions, also reduce SO2 analysis. EIA was not able to incorporate emissions. Under the MATS, emissions For CH4 and N2O, DOE calculated CSAPR into AEO2015, so it assumes will be far below the cap established by emissions reduction in tons and in implementation of CAIR. Although CAIR, so it is unlikely that excess SO2 terms of units of carbon dioxide DOE’s analysis used emissions factors emissions allowances resulting from the equivalent (CO2eq). Gases are converted that assume that CAIR, not CSAPR, is lower electricity demand would be to CO2eq by multiplying each ton of gas the regulation in force, the difference needed or used to permit offsetting by the gas’ global warming potential between CAIR and CSAPR is not increases in SO2 emissions by any (GWP) over a 100-year time horizon. relevant for the purpose of DOE’s regulated EGU.68 Therefore, DOE Based on the Fifth Assessment Report of analysis of emissions impacts from believes that energy conservation the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate energy conservation standards. standards will generally reduce SO2 Change,63 DOE used GWP values of 28 The attainment of emissions caps is emissions in 2016 and beyond. for CH4 and 265 for N2O. typically flexible among EGUs and is CAIR established a cap on NO The AEO incorporates the projected X enforced through the use of emissions emissions in 28 eastern States and the impacts of existing air quality allowances and tradable permits. Under 69 regulations on emissions. AEO2015 District of Columbia. Energy existing EPA regulations, any excess conservation standards are expected to generally represents current legislation SO 2 emissions allowances resulting have little effect on NO emissions in and environmental regulations, from the lower electricity demand X those States covered by CAIR because including recent government actions, for caused by the adoption of an efficiency excess NO emissions allowances which implementing regulations were standard could be used to permit X resulting from the lower electricity available as of October 31, 2014. DOE’s offsetting increases in SO emissions by 2 demand could be used to permit estimation of impacts accounts for the any regulated EGU. In past rulemakings, presence of the emissions control DOE recognized that there was offsetting increases in NOX emissions programs discussed in the following uncertainty about the effects of from other facilities. However, standards would be expected to reduce paragraphs. efficiency standards on SO2 emissions SO2 emissions from affected electric covered by the existing cap-and-trade NOX emissions in the States not affected generating units (EGUs) are subject to system, but it concluded that negligible by the caps, so DOE estimated NOX nationwide and regional emissions cap- reductions in power sector SO2 and-trade programs. Title IV of the emissions will occur as a result of 68 DOE notes that the Supreme Court recently Clean Air Act sets an annual emissions remanded EPA’s 2012 rule regarding national standards. emission standards for hazardous air pollutants cap on SO2 for affected EGUs in the 48 from certain electric utility steam generating units. contiguous States and the District of 64 See North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. See Michigan v. EPA (Case No. 14–46, 2015). DOE Columbia (D.C.). (42 U.S.C. 7651 et seq.) Cir. 2008); North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 has determined that the remand of the MATS rule (D.C. Cir. 2008). does not change the assumptions regarding the SO2 emissions from 28 eastern States 65 See EME Homer City Generation, LP v. EPA, impact of energy efficiency standards on SO2 and D.C. were also limited under the 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012), cert. granted, 81 emissions. Further, while the remand of the MATS U.S.L.W. 3567, 81 U.S.L.W. 3696, 81 U.S.L.W. 3702 rule may have an impact on the overall amount of 62 Available at www.epa.gov/climateleadership/ (U.S. June 24, 2013) (No. 12–1182). mercury emitted by power plants, it does not inventory/ghg-emissions.html. 66 See EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, 134 change the impact of the energy efficiency 63 IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Physical S.Ct. 1584, 1610 (U.S. 2014). The Supreme Court standards on mercury emissions. DOE will continue Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to held in part that EPA’s methodology for quantifying to monitor developments related to this case and the Fifth Assessment Report of the emissions that must be eliminated in certain States respond to them as appropriate. 69 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change due to their impacts in other downwind States was CSAPR also applies to NOX and it would [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, based on a permissible, workable, and equitable supersede the regulation of NOX under CAIR. As S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex interpretation of the Clean Air Act provision that stated previously, the current analysis assumes that and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University provides statutory authority for CSAPR. CAIR, not CSAPR, is the regulation in force. The Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, 67 See Georgia v. EPA, Order (D.C. Cir. filed difference between CAIR and CSAPR with regard to NY, USA. Chapter 8. October 23, 2014) (No. 11–1302). DOE’s analysis of NOX emissions is slight.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1078 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

emissions reductions from the standards to include (but is not limited to) on the climate system; (3) the impact of in this final rule for these States. climate-change-related changes in net changes in climate on the physical and The MATS limit mercury emissions agricultural productivity, human health, biological environment; and (4) the from power plants, but they do not property damages from increased flood translation of these environmental include emissions caps and, as such, risk, and the value of ecosystem impacts into economic damages. As a DOE’s energy conservation standards services. Estimates of the SCC are result, any effort to quantify and would likely reduce Hg emissions. DOE provided in dollars per metric ton of monetize the harms associated with estimated mercury emissions reduction CO2. A domestic SCC value is meant to climate change will raise questions of using emissions factors based on reflect the value of damages in the science, economics, and ethics and AEO2015, which incorporates the United States resulting from a unit should be viewed as provisional. MATS. change in CO2 emissions, while a global In response to the 2015 BVM ECS SCC value is meant to reflect the value Despite the limits of both NOPR, CoilPod commented that DOE’s of damages worldwide. quantification and monetization, SCC estimate of emissions reduction is Under section 1(b)(6) of Executive estimates can be useful in estimating the overstated as it does not take into Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and social benefits of reducing CO2 account coil degradation that occurs in Review,’’ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), emissions. The agency can estimate the real-world use. They additionally cited agencies must, to the extent permitted benefits from reduced (or costs from a government report finding that bottlers by law, ‘‘assess both the costs and the increased) emissions in any future year have no incentive to clean the coils on benefits of the intended regulation and, by multiplying the change in emissions their vending machines because the recognizing that some costs and benefits in that year by the SCC values establishments in which they are are difficult to quantify, propose or appropriate for that year. The NPV of installed pay the electricity costs. adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned the benefits can then be calculated by (CoilPod, Public Meeting Transcript, determination that the benefits of the multiplying each of these future benefits No. 48 at pp. 53–55) intended regulation justify its costs.’’ by an appropriate discount factor and DOE’s calculation of emissions The purpose of the SCC estimates summing across all affected years. savings is based on the amount of presented here is to allow agencies to It is important to emphasize that the energy saved. Coil degradation has little incorporate the monetized social interagency process is committed to impact on emissions savings because it benefits of reducing CO2 emissions into updating these estimates as the science is based on incremental savings. Both cost-benefit analyses of regulatory and economic understanding of climate baseline and more efficient equipment actions. The estimates are presented change and its impacts on society will be impacted by coil fouling, and the with an acknowledgement of the many improves over time. In the meantime, energy savings differential between the uncertainties involved and with a clear no-new-standards case and the the interagency group will continue to understanding that they should be explore the issues raised by this analysis standards case would largely remain the updated over time to reflect increasing same. and consider public comments as part of knowledge of the science and the ongoing interagency process. L. Monetizing Carbon Dioxide and Other economics of climate impacts. Emissions Impacts As part of the interagency process that b. Development of Social Cost of Carbon developed these SCC estimates, Values As part of the development of this technical experts from numerous rule, DOE considered the estimated agencies met on a regular basis to In 2009, an interagency process was monetary benefits from the reduced consider public comments, explore the initiated to offer a preliminary emissions of CO and NO that are 2 X technical literature in relevant fields, assessment of how best to quantify the expected to result from each of the TSLs and discuss key model inputs and benefits from reducing CO2 emissions. considered. In order to make this assumptions. The main objective of this To ensure consistency in how benefits calculation analogous to the calculation process was to develop a range of SCC are evaluated across Federal agencies, of the NPV of customer benefit, DOE values using a defensible set of input the Administration sought to develop a considered the reduced emissions assumptions grounded in the existing transparent and defensible method, expected to result over the lifetime of scientific and economic literatures. In specifically designed for the rulemaking equipment shipped in the forecast this way, key uncertainties and model process, to quantify avoided climate period for each TSL. This section differences transparently and change damages from reduced CO2 summarizes the basis for the monetary consistently inform the range of SCC emissions. The interagency group did values used for of CO and NO 2 X estimates used in the rulemaking not undertake any original analysis. emissions and presents the values process. Instead, it combined SCC estimates from considered in this final rule. the existing literature to use as interim For this final rule, DOE relied on a set a. Monetizing Carbon Dioxide Emissions values until a more comprehensive of values for the social cost of carbon When attempting to assess the (SCC) that was developed by a Federal analysis could be conducted. The incremental economic impacts of CO interagency process. The basis for these 2 outcome of the preliminary assessment emissions, the analyst faces a number of values is summarized in the next by the interagency group was a set of challenges. A report from the National section, and a more detailed description five interim values: global SCC Research Council 70 points out that any of the methodologies used is provided estimates for 2007 (in 2006$) of $55, assessment will suffer from uncertainty, as an appendix to chapter 14 of the final $33, $19, $10, and $5 per metric ton of speculation, and lack of information rule TSD. CO2. These interim values represented about: (1) Future emissions of GHGs; (2) the first sustained interagency effort 1. Social Cost of Carbon the effects of past and future emissions within the U.S. government to develop The SCC is an estimate of the an SCC for use in regulatory analysis. 70 National Research Council. Hidden Costs of The results of this preliminary effort monetized damages associated with an Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy incremental increase in carbon Production and Use. 2009. National Academies were presented in several proposed and emissions in a given year. It is intended Press: Washington, DC. final rules.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1079

c. Current Approach and Key damages. A key objective of the in regulatory analyses. Three sets of Assumptions interagency process was to enable a values are based on the average SCC consistent exploration of the three from the three integrated assessment After the release of the interim values, models, while respecting the different models, at discount rates of 2.5, 3, and the interagency group reconvened on a approaches to quantifying damages 5 percent. The fourth set, which regular basis to generate improved SCC taken by the key modelers in the field. represents the 95th percentile SCC estimates. Specially, the group An extensive review of the literature estimate across all three models at a 3- considered public comments and was conducted to select three sets of percent discount rate, was included to further explored the technical literature input parameters for these models: represent higher-than-expected impacts in relevant fields. The interagency group climate sensitivity, socio-economic and from climate change further out in the relied on three integrated assessment emissions trajectories, and discount tails of the SCC distribution. The values models commonly used to estimate the rates. A probability distribution for grow in real terms over time. SCC: The FUND, DICE, and PAGE climate sensitivity was specified as an Additionally, the interagency group models. These models are frequently input into all three models. In addition, determined that a range of values from cited in the peer-reviewed literature and the interagency group used a range of 7 percent to 23 percent should be used were used in the last assessment of the scenarios for the socio-economic to adjust the global SCC to calculate Intergovernmental Panel on Climate parameters and a range of values for the domestic effects,71 although preference Change (IPCC). Each model was given discount rate. All other model features is given to consideration of the global equal weight in the SCC values that were left unchanged, relying on the benefits of reducing CO2 emissions. were developed. model developers’ best estimates and Table IV.11 presents the values in the Each model takes a slightly different judgments. 2010 interagency group report,72 which approach to model how changes in In 2010, the interagency group is reproduced in appendix 14A of the emissions result in changes in economic selected four sets of SCC values for use final rule TSD.

TABLE IV.11—ANNUAL SCC VALUES FROM 2010 INTERAGENCY REPORT, 2010–2050

[2007$ per metric ton CO2]

Discount rate

Year 5% 3% 2.5% 3% 95th Average Average Average percentile

2010 ...... 4.7 21.4 35.1 64.9 2015 ...... 5.7 23.8 38.4 72.8 2020 ...... 6.8 26.3 41.7 80.7 2025 ...... 8.2 29.6 45.9 90.4 2030 ...... 9.7 32.8 50.0 100.0 2035 ...... 11.2 36.0 54.2 109.7 2040 ...... 12.7 39.2 58.4 119.3 2045 ...... 14.2 42.1 61.7 127.8 2050 ...... 15.7 44.9 65.0 136.2

The SCC values used for this group (revised July 2015).73 Table IV.12 value that emerges is the average SCC document were generated using the shows the updated sets of SCC estimates across models at the 3-percent discount most recent versions of the three from the latest interagency update in 5- rate. However, for purposes of capturing integrated assessment models that have year increments from 2010 to 2050. The the uncertainties involved in regulatory been published in the peer-reviewed full set of annual SCC estimates between impact analysis, the interagency group literature, as described in the 2013 2010 and 2050 is reported in appendix emphasizes the importance of including update from the interagency working 14B of the final rule TSD. The central all four sets of SCC values.

TABLE IV.12—ANNUAL SCC VALUES FROM 2013 INTERAGENCY UPDATE (REVISED JULY 2015), 2010–2050

[2007$ per metric ton CO2]

Discount rate

Year 5% 3% 2.5% 3% 95th Average Average Average percentile

2010 ...... 10 31 50 86

71 It is recognized that this calculation for Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon, United Order 12866. Interagency Working Group on Social domestic values is approximate, provisional, and States Government (February 2010) (Available at: Cost of Carbon, United States Government (May highly speculative. There is no a priori reason why www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/ 2013; revised July 2015) Available at domestic benefits should be a constant fraction of inforeg/for-agencies/Social-Cost-of-Carbon-for- www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/ net global damages over time. RIA.pdf). inforeg/scc-tsd-final-july-2015.pdf. 72 Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact 73 Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon Analysis Under Executive Order 12866. Interagency for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1080 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE IV.12—ANNUAL SCC VALUES FROM 2013 INTERAGENCY UPDATE (REVISED JULY 2015), 2010–2050—Continued

[2007$ per metric ton CO2]

Discount rate

Year 5% 3% 2.5% 3% 95th Average Average Average percentile

2015 ...... 11 36 56 105 2020 ...... 12 42 62 123 2025 ...... 14 46 68 138 2030 ...... 16 50 73 152 2035 ...... 18 55 78 168 2040 ...... 21 60 84 183 2045 ...... 23 64 89 197 2050 ...... 26 69 95 212

It is important to recognize that a 2014$). DOE derived values after 2050 revision of the SCC estimates as number of key uncertainties remain, and using the relevant growth rates for the appropriate. that current SCC estimates should be 2040–2050 period in the interagency 2. Social Cost of Other Air Pollutants treated as provisional and revisable update. As noted previously, DOE has because they will evolve with improved DOE multiplied the CO2 emissions scientific and economic understanding. reduction estimated for each year by the estimated how the considered energy The interagency group also recognizes SCC value for that year in each of the conservation standards would reduce that the existing models are imperfect four cases. To calculate a present value site NOX emissions nationwide and and incomplete. The National Research of the stream of monetary values, DOE decrease power sector NOX emissions in Council report mentioned previously discounted the values in each of the those 22 States not affected by the CAIR. points out that there is tension between four cases using the specific discount DOE estimated the monetized value of the goal of producing quantified rate that had been used to obtain the NOX emissions reductions using benefit estimates of the economic damages from SCC values in each case. per ton estimates from the ‘‘Regulatory an incremental ton of carbon and the Impact Analysis for the Proposed A number of stakeholders represented limits of existing efforts to model these Carbon Pollution Guidelines for Existing by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce effects. There are a number of analytical Power Plants and Emission Standards stated that DOE should not use SCC challenges that are being addressed by for Modified and Reconstructed Power values to establish monetary figures for the research community, including Plants,’’ published in June 2014 by emissions reductions until the SCC research programs housed in many of EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning undergoes a more rigorous notice, the Federal agencies participating in the and Standards.75 The report includes review, and comment process. (The interagency process to estimate the SCC. high and low values for NOX (as PM2.5) Associations, No. 62 at p. 4) The interagency group intends to for 2020, 2025, and 2030 discounted at periodically review and reconsider In conducting the interagency process 3 percent and 7 percent,76 which are those estimates to reflect increasing that developed the SCC values, presented in chapter 14 of the final rule knowledge of the science and technical experts from numerous TSD. DOE assigned values for 2021– economics of climate impacts, as well as agencies met on a regular basis to 2024 and 2026–2029 using, respectively, improvements in modeling.74 consider public comments, explore the the values for 2020 and 2025. DOE In summary, in considering the technical literature in relevant fields, assigned values after 2030 using the potential global benefits resulting from and discuss key model inputs and value for 2030. reduced CO2 emissions, DOE used the assumptions. Key uncertainties and DOE multiplied the emissions values from the 2013 interagency report model differences transparently and reduction (tons) in each year by the (revised July 2015), adjusted to 2014$ consistently inform the range of SCC associated $/ton values and then using the implicit price deflator for estimates. These uncertainties and discounted each series using discount gross domestic product (GDP) from the model differences are discussed in the rates of 3 percent and 7 percent as Bureau of Economic Analysis. For each interagency working group’s reports, appropriate. of the four sets of SCC cases specified, which are reproduced in appendix 14A the values for emissions in 2015 were and 14B of the final rule TSD, as are the 75 http://www3.epa.gov/ttnecas1/regdata/RIAs/ $12.2, $40.0, $62.3, and $117 per metric major assumptions. The 2010 SCC 111dproposalRIAfinal0602.pdf. See Tables 4–7, 4– values have been used in a number of 8, and 4–9 in the report. ton avoided (values expressed in 76 Federal rulemakings upon which the For the monetized NOX benefits associated with PM2.5, the related benefits (derived from 74 In November 2013, OMB announced a new public had opportunity to comment. In benefit-per-ton values) are primarily based on an opportunity for public comment on the interagency November 2013, OMB announced a new estimate of premature mortality derived from the technical support document underlying the revised opportunity for public comment on the ACS study (Krewski et al., 2009), which is the lower SCC estimates. 78 FR 70586 (Nov. 26, 2013). In July of the two EPA central tendencies. Using the lower 2015 OMB published a detailed summary and TSD underlying the revised SCC value is more conservative when making the policy formal response to the many comments that were estimates. See 78 FR 70586 (Nov. 26, decision concerning whether a particular standard received. www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/07/02/ 2013). OMB issued a revision to the level is economically justified. If the benefit-per-ton estimating-benefits-carbon-dioxide-emissions- 2013 SCC estimates in July of 2015. DOE estimates were based on the Six Cities study reductions. It also stated its intention to seek (Lepuele et al., 2012), the values would be nearly independent expert advice on opportunities to stands ready to work with OMB and the two-and-a-half times larger. (See chapter 14 of the improve the estimates, including many of the other members of the interagency final rule TSD for further description of the studies approaches suggested by commenters. working group on further review and mentioned above.)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1081

DOE is evaluating appropriate other than in the manufacturing sector employment and income effects of monetization of avoided SO2 and Hg being regulated, caused by: (1) Reduced energy-saving technologies. The ImSET emissions in energy conservation spending by end users on energy; (2) software includes a computer-based I–O standards rulemakings. DOE has not reduced spending on new energy supply model having structural coefficients that included monetization of those by the utility industry; (3) increased characterize economic flows among 187 emissions in the current analysis. customer spending on new equipment sectors most relevant to industrial, M. Utility Impact Analysis to which the new standards apply; and commercial, and residential building (4) the effects of those three factors energy use. The utility impact analysis estimates throughout the economy. DOE notes that ImSET is not a general several effects on the electric power One method for assessing the possible equilibrium-forecasting model, and industry that would result from the effects on the demand for labor of such understands the uncertainties involved adoption of new or amended energy shifts in economic activity is to compare in projecting employment impacts, conservation standards. The utility sector employment statistics developed especially changes in the later years of impact analysis estimates the changes in by the Labor Department’s Bureau of the analysis. Because ImSET does not installed electrical capacity and Labor Statistics (BLS).77 BLS regularly incorporate price changes, the generation that would result for each publishes its estimates of the number of employment effects predicted by ImSET TSL. The analysis is based on published jobs per million dollars of economic may over-estimate actual job impacts output from the NEMS associated with activity in different sectors of the over the long run for this rule. AEO2015. NEMS produces the AEO economy, as well as the jobs created Therefore, DOE generated results for Reference case, as well as a number of elsewhere in the economy by this same near-term timeframes (2020 and 2025), side cases that estimate the economy- economic activity. Data from BLS where these uncertainties are reduced. wide impacts of changes to energy indicate that expenditures in the utility For more details on the employment supply and demand. DOE uses sector generally create fewer jobs (both impact analysis, see chapter 16 of the published side cases to estimate the directly and indirectly) than final rule TSD. marginal impacts of reduced energy expenditures in other sectors of the demand on the utility sector. These DOE reiterates that the indirect economy.78 There are many reasons for employment impacts estimated with marginal factors are estimated based on these differences, including wage the changes to electricity sector ImSET for the entire economy differ differences and the fact that the utility from the direct employment impacts in generation, installed capacity, fuel sector is more capital-intensive and less consumption and emissions in the AEO the BVM manufacturing sector labor-intensive than other sectors. estimated using the GRIM in the MIA, Reference case and various side cases. Energy conservation standards have the Details of the methodology are provided as described at the beginning of this effect of reducing customer utility bills. section. The methodologies used and in the appendices to chapters 13 and 15 Because reduced customer expenditures of the final rule TSD. the sectors analyzed in the ImSET and for energy likely lead to increased GRIM models are different. The output of this analysis is a set of expenditures in other sectors of the time-dependent coefficients that capture economy, the general effect of efficiency O. Description of Materials Incorporated the change in electricity generation, standards is to shift economic activity by Reference primary fuel consumption, installed from a less labor-intensive sector (i.e., In this final rule DOE is incorporating capacity and power sector emissions the utility sector) to more labor- due to a unit reduction in demand for by reference ASTM Standard E 1084–86 intensive sectors (e.g., the retail and (Reapproved 2009), ‘‘Standard Test a given end use. These coefficients are service sectors). Thus, based on the BLS multiplied by the stream of electricity Method for Solar Transmittance data alone, DOE believes net national (Terrestrial) of Sheet Materials Using savings calculated in the NIA to provide employment may increase due to shifts estimates of selected utility impacts of Sunlight,’’ to determine whether a in economic activity resulting from material is transparent when assessing new or amended energy conservation energy conservation standards. standards. whether a beverage vending machine DOE estimated indirect national has a transparent front and meets the N. Employment Impact Analysis employment impacts for the standard adopted Class A definition. Copies of DOE considers employment impacts level adopted in this final rule using an ASTM standards may be purchased in the domestic economy as one factor input/output model of the U.S. economy from ASTM International, 100 Barr called Impact of Sector Energy Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West in selecting a standard. Employment 79 impacts from new or amended energy Technologies version 4.0 (ImSET). Conshohocken, PA 19428, (877) 909– conservation standards include both ImSET is a special-purpose version of 2786, or at www.astm.org. the ‘‘U.S. Benchmark National Input- direct and indirect impacts. Direct V. Analytical Results and Conclusions employment impacts are changes in the Output’’ (I–O) model, which was number of employees at the plants that designed to estimate the national The following section addresses the produce the covered equipment, along results of DOE’s analyses with respect to 77 Data on industry employment, hours, labor with affiliated distribution and service compensation, value of production, and the implicit the considered energy conservation companies. The MIA addresses those price deflator for output for these industries are standards for beverage vending impacts. available upon request by calling the Division of machines. It addresses the TSLs Indirect employment impacts are Industry Productivity Studies (202–691–5618) or by examined by DOE, the projected changes in national employment that sending a request by email to [email protected]. impacts of each of these levels if 78 See Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional occur due to the shift in expenditures Multipliers: A User Handbook for the Regional adopted as energy conservation and capital investment caused by the Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II), U.S. standards for beverage vending purchase and operation of more- Department of Commerce (1992). machines, and the standards levels that efficient appliances. Indirect 79 Livingston OV, SR Bender, MJ Scott, and RW DOE is adopting in this final rule. Schultz. ImSET 4.0: Impact of Sector Energy employment impacts from standards Technologies Model Description and User’s Guide. Additional details regarding DOE’s consist of the net jobs created or 2015. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, analyses are contained in the final rule eliminated in the national economy, Richland, WA. Report No. PNNL–24563. TSD supporting this notice.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1082 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

A. Trial Standard Levels improvement over TSL 1), and EL 3 for lower ELs for all equipment classes than DOE analyzed 8 ELs for Class A Combination A and Combination B (10- in the NOPR, DOE revised TSL 3 to equipment, 12 ELs for Class B percent improvement over TSL 1). represent the TSL with maximum NPV equipment, 15 ELs for Combination A (3) TSL 3 represents the EL with the at a 7-percent discount rate instead of equipment, and 13 ELs for Combination maximum NPV at a 7-percent discount TSL 4, as proposed in the 2015 BVM B equipment in the LCC and NIA rate. This level also corresponds to the ECS NOPR. Therefore, DOE has defined analyses, where each EL represents a 5- maximum LCC savings for most TSL 4 as an interim analysis point percent improvement in efficiency from equipment classes. In addition, the EL consisting of the EL halfway between baseline efficiency (EL 0) to up to max corresponding to a 3-year payback, zero TSL 3 and TSL 5 for all equipment tech. Of the ELs analyzed for each class customers with net cost, and maximum classes. While, in the final rule analysis, DOE selected five TSLs based on the NPV at a 3-percent discount rate were TSL 3 and TSL 4 consist of lower ELs following criteria: the same or within one EL from the than DOE’s proposed TSL 4 presented (1) TSL 1 is equivalent to the current selected EL. in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE notes ENERGY STAR criterion for all (4) TSL 4 was selected to be an that the TSL 4 analysis point now equipment that is eligible for ENERGY interim analysis point corresponding to reflects an interim analysis point STAR qualification. This corresponded the EL halfway between TSL 3 and 5 between the TSL with maximum NPV at to EL 2 for Class B equipment and EL (rounding up when between ELs). a 7-percent discount rate and max tech, 1 for Class A. Combination equipment is (5) TSL 5 corresponds to the max tech as requested by the commenters. DOE currently not eligible for ENERGY STAR EL. also notes that, based on the revised qualification and, as such, DOE selected In response to DOE’s TSL selection final rule analyses, ELs beyond TSL 3 presented in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, TSL 1 as equivalent to EL 1, since EL for equipment Class A result in the CA IOUs commented in their 1 was the first EL analyzed above the increased LCC compared to baseline written submission that DOE should baseline (EL 0). equipment and a negative NPV. (2) TSL 2 was selected to be the EL consider an intermediate efficiency tier that is hypothetically representative of between TSL 4 and TSL 5 for Class A Table V.1 shows the TSL levels DOE the next version of ENERGY STAR. That and Combination A and supported TSL selected for the equipment classes is, for the given equipment class, DOE 4 for Class B and Combination B analyzed. Note that DOE performed its selected the EL comprising TSL 2 to be equipment. (CA IOUs, No. 58 at p. 5) In analyses for a ‘‘representative size’’ 5 or 10 percent better than TSL 1, response to CA IOUs suggestion, DOE beverage vending machine and defined depending on the improvement notes that DOE has revised the TSL refrigerant-neutral ELs such that the potential in different equipment classes. selection criteria for this final rule. selected ELs could be met by any That is, TSL 2 represents EL 2 for Class Specifically, because the final rule refrigerant. Similarly, the defined TSLs A (5-percent improvement over TSL 1), analysis resulted in the maximum NVP share this approach and can be met by EL 4 for Class B (10-percent at a 7-percent discount rate occurring at either refrigerant.

TABLE V.1—TRIAL STANDARD LEVELS FOR A REPRESENTATIVE SIZE BVM MODEL EXPRESSED IN TERMS OF DAILY ENERGY CONSUMPTION [kWh/day]

Representative Equipment class volume TSL Base-line TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 (ft3)

Class A...... 30.0 EL...... 0 1 2 *1 4 8 DEC ...... 4.21 4.00 3.79 4.00 3.37 2.60 Class B...... 23.4 EL...... 0 2 4 6 9 12 DEC ...... 4.87 4.38 3.90 3.41 2.68 1.94 Combination A ...... 10.3 EL ...... 0 1 3 11 13 15 DEC ...... 7.89 7.49 6.70 3.55 2.76 2.10 Combination B...... 4.3 EL...... 0 1 3 9 11 13 DEC ...... 4.58 4.35 3.89 2.52 2.06 1.46 * DOE notes that the EL selected for TSL 3 for Class A equipment is EL 1, which is the same EL selected for TSL1 for Class A equipment.

In this final rule, DOE elected to V is the representative value of refrigerated consumption values of the small, maintain the energy conservation volume (ft3) calculated for the medium, and large or medium and large standard structure established in the equipment, and size BVM units for Class A and Class B B is an offset factor expressed in kWh/day. 2009 BVM final rule, which establishes or Combination A and Combination B the MDEC of covered BVM models in Coefficients A and B are uniquely beverage vending machines, terms of a linear equation of the derived for each equipment class based respectively. Table V.2 depicts the TSL following form: on a linear equation passing between equations for each analyzed TSL and × MDEC = A V + B the daily energy consumption values for equipment class. The methodology used Where: equipment of different refrigerated to establish the TSL equations and more A is expressed in terms of kWh/(day·ft3) of volumes. For the A and B coefficients, detailed results is described in more measured refrigerated volume, DOE used the unique energy detail in appendix 10B of the TSD.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1083

TABLE V.2—TRIAL STANDARD LEVELS MAXIMUM DAILY ENERGY CONSUMPTION (kWh/day) EXPRESSED IN TERMS OF EQUATIONS AND COEFFICIENTS FOR BVM EQUIPMENT

TSL Class A Class B Combination A Combination B

Baseline ...... 0.055 × V + 2.56 ...... 0.074 × V + 3.15 ...... 0.192 × V + 5.91 ...... 0.202 × V + 3.71 1 ...... 0.052 × V + 2.43 ...... 0.066 × V + 2.83 ...... 0.182 × V + 5.62 ...... 0.192 × V + 3.52 2 ...... 0.050 × V + 2.30 ...... 0.059 × V + 2.52 ...... 0.163 × V + 5.03 ...... 0.172 × V + 3.15 3 ...... 0.052 × V + 2.43 ...... 0.052 × V + 2.20 ...... 0.086 × V + 2.66 ...... 0.111 × V + 2.04 4 ...... 0.044 × V + 2.05 ...... 0.041 × V + 1.73 ...... 0.067 × V + 2.07 ...... 0.091 × V + 1.67 5 ...... 0.034 × V + 1.58 ...... 0.029 × V + 1.25 ...... 0.051 × V + 1.58 ...... 0.064 × V + 1.18

In Table V.2, ‘‘V’’ is the representative manufacturers, is valid, DOE will use value. DOE presents the mean or value of refrigerated volume (ft3) of the the certified value to determine the median values, as appropriate, BVM model, as measured in accordance MDEC for that model; or calculated from the distributions of with the method for determining (2) If the representative value of results. The LCC analysis also provides refrigerated volume adopted in the refrigerated volume is invalid, DOE will information on the percentage of recently amended DOE test procedure use its results from the tested unit or customers for whom an increase in the for beverage vending machines and units as the basis for calculating the minimum efficiency standard would appropriate sampling plan MDEC for that BVM model. have a negative impact (net cost). requirements. 80 FR 45758 (July 31, Additionally, DOE notes that these DOE also performed a PBP analysis as 2015). In the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, sampling and enforcement provisions part of the LCC analysis. The PBP is the DOE proposed a calculation method to are effective March 8, 2016, as such, number of years it takes for a customer be adopted at 10 CFR 429.52(a)(3) for applicable to both the existing to recover the increased costs of higher determining the representative value of standards, as well as any new and refrigerated volume for each BVM efficiency equipment as a result of amended standards adopted as a result operating cost savings. The PBP is an model. 80 FR 50507–50508 (Aug. 19, of this final rule. 2015). In response to DOE’s proposal, economic benefit-cost measure that uses SVA expressed support for DOE’s B. Economic Justification and Energy benefits and costs without discounting. proposal to clarify the calculation of Savings Chapter 8 of the final rule TSD provides detailed information on the LCC and refrigerated volume. (SVA, No. 53 at p. 1. Economic Impacts on Individual PBP analysis. 10) DOE appreciates SVA’s support and, Customers in this final rule, is adopting provisions DOE used a ‘‘roll-up’’ scenario in this to specify that the representative value DOE analyzed the economic impacts rulemaking. Under the roll-up scenario, of refrigerated volume must be on BVM customers by looking at the DOE assumed that the market shares of determined as the mean of the measured effects that potential new and amended the efficiency levels (in the no-new- refrigerated volume of each tested unit. standards at each TSL would have on standards case) that do not meet the the LCC and PBP. DOE also examined Manufacturers must use this calculated standard level under consideration the impacts of potential standards on value for determining the appropriate would be ‘‘rolled up’’ into (meaning customer subgroups. These analyses are standard level for that model. ‘‘added to’’) the market share of the discussed in the following subsections. In addition, in the 2015 BVM ECS efficiency level at the standard level NOPR, DOE proposed provisions to a. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period under consideration, and the market assess whether the representative value Customers affected by new standards shares of efficiency levels that are above of refrigerated volume, as certified by the standard level under consideration manufacturers, is valid. 80 FR 50507– usually incur higher purchase prices and lower operating costs. DOE would remain unaffected. Customers in 50508 (Aug. 19, 2015). DOE did not the no-new-standards case scenario who receive any comments on this proposal evaluates these impacts on individual customers by calculating changes in buy the equipment at or above the TSL and, therefore, is adopting the proposal under consideration would be for determining if the certified value of LCC and the PBP associated with the TSLs. The results of the LCC analysis for unaffected if the standard were to be set refrigerated volume is valid as described at that TSL. Customers in the no-new- in the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR with no each TSL were obtained by comparing the installed and operating costs of the standards case scenario who buy modifications. equipment below the TSL under Under the adopted provisions, DOE equipment in the no-new-standards case consideration would be affected if the will compare the manufacturer’s scenario against the standards case standard were to be set at that TSL. certified rating with results from the scenarios at each TSL. Inputs used for Among these affected customers, some unit or units in DOE’s tested sample. If calculating the LCC include total may benefit from lower LCCs of the the results of the tested unit or units in installed costs (i.e., equipment price DOE’s sample are within 5 percent of plus installation costs), operating equipment and some may incur net cost the representative value of refrigerated expenses (i.e., annual energy savings, due to higher LCCs, depending on the volume certified by manufacturers, the energy prices, energy price trends, inputs to the LCC analysis, such as certified refrigerated volume value is repair costs, and maintenance costs), electricity prices, discount rates, and considered valid. Based on whether the equipment lifetime, and discount rates. installed costs. representative value of refrigerated The LCC analysis is carried out using DOE’s LCC and PBP analysis provided volume is valid, DOE will do one of the Monte Carlo simulations. Consequently, key outputs for each efficiency level following: the results of the LCC analysis are above the baseline. The results for all (1) If the representative value of distributions covering a range of values, equipment classes are displayed in refrigerated volume, as certified by as opposed to a single deterministic Table V.3 through Table V.18.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1084 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE V.3—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR CLASS A, CO2*

Average costs (2014$) Simple % of payback Average TSL EL baseline First year’s Lifetime period ** lifetime energy use Installed operating operating LCC (years) (years) cost cost cost

— ...... 0 100 2,817 487 4,991 7,807 ...... 13.5 1,3 ...... 1 95 2,832 480 4,910 7,742 2.0 13.5 2 ...... 2 90 2,867 505 5,157 8,025 N/A 13.5 — ...... 3 85 2,951 530 5,405 8,356 N/A 13.5 4 ...... 4 80 3,071 557 5,674 8,744 N/A 13.5 — ...... 5 75 3,232 549 5,593 8,825 N/A 13.5 — ...... 6 70 3,467 542 5,512 8,979 N/A 13.5 — ...... 7 65 3,701 534 5,431 9,132 N/A 13.5 5 ...... 8 62 3,853 529 5,379 9,232 N/A 13.5 * The results for each EL are calculated assuming that all customers use equipment at that efficiency level or higher. The PBP is measured rel- ative to the baseline equipment. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

TABLE V.4—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION

FOR CLASS A, CO2

Life-cycle cost savings % of baseline % of Average TSL EL energy use customers that life-cycle cost experience a savings * net cost (2014$)

— ...... 0 100 ...... 1,3 ...... 1 95 0 65 2 ...... 2 90 100 (217) — ...... 3 85 100 (549) 4 ...... 4 80 100 (937) — ...... 5 75 100 (1,018) — ...... 6 70 100 (1,171) — ...... 7 65 100 (1,325) 5 ...... 8 62 100 (1,424) * The calculation includes customers with zero LCC savings (no impact). Parentheses indicate negative values.

TABLE V.5—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR CLASS A, PROPANE *

Average costs (2014$) Simple % of payback Average TSL EL baseline First year’s Lifetime period ** lifetime energy use Installed operating operating LCC (years) (years) cost cost cost

— ...... 0 100 2,908 513 5,246 8,154 ...... 13.5 1,3 ...... 1 95 2,916 505 5,165 8,081 1.1 13.5 2 ...... 2 90 2,925 497 5,084 8,010 1.2 13.5 — ...... 3 85 2,937 464 4,748 7,686 0.6 13.5 4 ...... 4 80 2,960 457 4,668 7,627 0.9 13.5 — ...... 5 75 3,030 515 5,243 8,274 N/A 13.5 — ...... 6 70 3,215 507 5,162 8,377 N/A 13.5 — ...... 7 65 3,399 534 5,431 8,830 N/A 13.5 5 ...... 8 62 3,519 529 5,379 8,897 N/A 13.5 * The results for each EL are calculated assuming that all customers use equipment at that efficiency level or higher. The PBP is measured rel- ative to the baseline equipment. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1085

TABLE V.6—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR CLASS A, PROPANE

Life-cycle cost savings % of baseline % of Average TSL EL energy use customers that life-cycle cost experience a savings * net cost (2014$)

— ...... 0 100 ...... 1,3 ...... 1 95 0 0 2 ...... 2 90 0 71 — ...... 3 85 0 395 4 ...... 4 80 0 454 — ...... 5 75 94 (193) — ...... 6 70 96 (296) — ...... 7 65 100 (749) 5 ...... 8 62 100 (817) * The calculation includes customers with zero LCC savings (no impact). Parentheses indicate negative values.

TABLE V.7—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR CLASS B, CO2*

Average costs (2014$) Simple % of payback Average TSL EL baseline First year’s Lifetime period ** lifetime energy use Installed operating operating LCC (years) (years) cost cost cost

— ...... 0 100 2,320 522 5,354 7,674 ...... 13.5 — ...... 1 95 2,324 513 5,261 7,585 0.4 13.5 1 ...... 2 90 2,328 505 5,169 7,496 0.4 13.5 — ...... 3 85 2,332 496 5,076 7,408 0.4 13.5 2 ...... 4 80 2,336 507 5,181 7,517 1.0 13.5 — ...... 5 75 2,340 498 5,089 7,429 0.8 13.5 3 ...... 6 70 2,348 497 5,073 7,422 1.1 13.5 — ...... 7 65 2,362 488 4,981 7,343 1.3 13.5 — ...... 8 60 2,388 456 4,644 7,033 1.0 13.5 4 ...... 9 55 2,449 532 5,408 7,857 N/A 13.5 — ...... 10 50 2,665 523 5,315 7,980 N/A 13.5 — ...... 11 45 2,973 514 5,222 8,195 85.6 13.5 5 ...... 12 40 3,298 505 5,127 8,425 58.8 13.5 * The results for each EL are calculated assuming that all customers use equipment at that efficiency level or higher. The PBP is measured rel- ative to the baseline equipment. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

TABLE V.8—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR CLASS B, CO2

Life-cycle cost savings % of baseline % of Average TSL EL energy use customers that life-cycle cost experience a savings * net cost (2014$)

— ...... 0 100 ...... — ...... 1 95 0 0 1 ...... 2 90 0 0 — ...... 3 85 0 0 2 ...... 4 80 0 0 — ...... 5 75 0 38 3 ...... 6 70 8 42 — ...... 7 65 0 109 — ...... 8 60 0 375 4 ...... 9 55 99 (448) — ...... 10 50 99 (572) — ...... 11 45 99 (787) 5 ...... 12 40 100 (1,017) * The calculation includes customers with zero LCC savings (no impact). Parentheses indicate negative values.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1086 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE V.9—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR CLASS B, PROPANE *

Average costs (2014$) Simple % of payback Average TSL EL baseline First year’s Lifetime period lifetime energy use Installed operating operating LCC (years) (years) cost cost cost

— ...... 0 100 2,359 515 5,283 7,642 ...... 13.5 — ...... 1 95 2,363 506 5,191 7,553 0.4 13.5 1 ...... 2 90 2,366 505 5,169 7,535 0.7 13.5 — ...... 3 85 2,370 496 5,076 7,446 0.6 13.5 2 ...... 4 80 2,374 487 4,984 7,358 0.6 13.5 — ...... 5 75 2,379 479 4,891 7,270 0.5 13.5 3 ...... 6 70 2,384 470 4,798 7,182 0.5 13.5 — ...... 7 65 2,389 481 4,904 7,293 0.9 13.5 — ...... 8 60 2,397 480 4,888 7,285 1.1 13.5 4 ...... 9 55 2,414 471 4,796 7,210 1.3 13.5 — ...... 10 50 2,538 492 5,000 7,538 7.7 13.5 — ...... 11 45 2,752 514 5,222 7,974 632.2 13.5 5 ...... 12 40 2,982 505 5,127 8,109 64.7 13.5 * The results for each EL are calculated assuming that all customers use equipment at that efficiency level or higher. The PBP is measured rel- ative to the baseline equipment.

TABLE V.10—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR CLASS B, PROPANE

Life-cycle cost savings % of baseline % of Average TSL EL energy use customers that life-cycle cost experience a savings * net cost (2014$)

— ...... 0 100 ...... — ...... 1 95 0 5 1 ...... 2 90 3 8 — ...... 3 85 0 96 2 ...... 4 80 0 185 — ...... 5 75 0 273 3 ...... 6 70 0 361 — ...... 7 65 1 250 — ...... 8 60 3 257 4 ...... 9 55 1 333 — ...... 10 50 59 4 — ...... 11 45 91 (432) 5 ...... 12 40 93 (566) * The calculation includes customers with zero LCC savings (no impact). Parentheses indicate negative values.

TABLE V.11—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR COMBINATION A, CO2*

Average costs (2014$) Simple % of payback Average TSL EL baseline First year’s Lifetime period lifetime energy use Installed operating operating LCC (years) (years) cost cost cost

— ...... 0 100 2,768 561 5,771 8,539 ...... 13.5 1 ...... 1 95 2,771 550 5,654 8,424 0.2 13.5 — ...... 2 90 2,773 539 5,537 8,310 0.2 13.5 2 ...... 3 85 2,776 528 5,420 8,196 0.2 13.5 — ...... 4 80 2,781 517 5,303 8,084 0.3 13.5 — ...... 5 75 2,786 506 5,186 7,972 0.3 13.5 — ...... 6 70 2,791 495 5,069 7,860 0.3 13.5 — ...... 7 65 2,796 484 4,952 7,748 0.4 13.5 — ...... 8 60 2,801 504 5,148 7,949 0.6 13.5 — ...... 9 55 2,813 493 5,031 7,844 0.7 13.5 — ...... 10 50 2,832 466 4,753 7,586 0.7 13.5 3 ...... 11 45 2,856 455 4,636 7,492 0.8 13.5 — ...... 12 40 2,954 480 4,885 7,839 2.3 13.5 4 ...... 13 35 3,189 545 5,527 8,716 26.1 13.5 — ...... 14 30 3,717 534 5,410 9,127 35.0 13.5

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1087

TABLE V.11—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR COMBINATION A, CO2*—Continued

Average costs (2014$) Simple % of payback Average TSL EL baseline First year’s Lifetime period lifetime energy use Installed operating operating LCC (years) (years) cost cost cost

5 ...... 15 27 4,130 526 5,331 9,462 39.4 13.5 * The results for each EL are calculated assuming that all customers use equipment at that efficiency level or higher. The PBP is measured rel- ative to the baseline equipment.

TABLE V.12—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION

FOR COMBINATION A, CO2

Life-cycle cost savings % of baseline % of Average TSL EL energy use customers that life-cycle cost experience a savings * net cost (2014$)

— 0 100 ...... 1 ...... 1 95 0 57 — ...... 2 90 0 172 2 ...... 3 85 0 286 — ...... 4 80 0 398 — ...... 5 75 0 510 — ...... 6 70 0 622 — ...... 7 65 0 733 — ...... 8 60 0 533 — ...... 9 55 0 638 — ...... 10 50 0 896 3 ...... 11 45 0 990 — ...... 12 40 2 643 4 ...... 13 35 76 (234) — ...... 14 30 86 (645) 5 ...... 15 27 93 (980) * The calculation includes customers with zero LCC savings (no impact). Parentheses indicate negative values.

TABLE V.13—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR COMBINATION A, PROPANE *

Average costs (2014$) Simple % of payback Average TSL EL baseline First year’s Lifetime period lifetime energy use Installed operating operating LCC (years) (years) cost cost cost

— ...... 0 100 2,914 561 5,771 8,685 ...... 13.5 1 ...... 1 95 2,915 550 5,654 8,569 0.1 13.5 — ...... 2 90 2,916 539 5,537 8,453 0.1 13.5 2 ...... 3 85 2,917 528 5,420 8,337 0.1 13.5 — ...... 4 80 2,919 517 5,303 8,222 0.1 13.5 — ...... 5 75 2,923 506 5,186 8,109 0.2 13.5 — ...... 6 70 2,928 495 5,069 7,997 0.2 13.5 — ...... 7 65 2,932 484 4,952 7,884 0.2 13.5 — ...... 8 60 2,937 473 4,835 7,772 0.3 13.5 — ...... 9 55 2,943 484 4,939 7,882 0.4 13.5 — ...... 10 50 2,952 482 4,914 7,866 0.5 13.5 3 ...... 11 45 2,967 480 4,889 7,855 0.7 13.5 — ...... 12 40 2,988 444 4,519 7,508 0.6 13.5 4 ...... 13 35 3,066 469 4,768 7,834 1.7 13.5 — ...... 14 30 3,433 534 5,410 8,844 19.2 13.5 5 ...... 15 27 3,765 526 5,331 9,097 24.7 13.5 * The results for each EL are calculated assuming that all customers use equipment at that efficiency level or higher. The PBP is measured rel- ative to the baseline equipment.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1088 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE V.14—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR COMBINATION A, PROPANE

Life-cycle cost savings % of baseline % of Average TSL EL energy use customers that life-cycle cost experience a savings * net cost (2014$)

— ...... 0 100 ...... 1 ...... 1 95 0 58 — ...... 2 90 0 174 2 ...... 3 85 0 290 — ...... 4 80 0 405 — ...... 5 75 0 518 — ...... 6 70 0 630 — ...... 7 65 0 743 — ...... 8 60 0 855 — ...... 9 55 0 745 — ...... 10 50 0 761 3 ...... 11 45 0 772 — ...... 12 40 0 1,119 4 ...... 13 35 1 793 — ...... 14 30 74 (217) 5 ...... 15 27 82 (470) * The calculation includes customers with zero LCC savings (no impact). Parentheses indicate negative values.

TABLE V.15—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR COMBINATION B, CO2*

Average costs (2014$) Simple % of payback Average TSL EL baseline First year’s Lifetime period ** lifetime energy use Installed operating operating LCC (years) (years) cost cost cost

— ...... 0 100 2,418 511 5,239 7,657 ...... 13.5 1 ...... 1 95 2,419 502 5,149 7,568 0.1 13.5 — ...... 2 90 2,420 494 5,058 7,479 0.1 13.5 2 ...... 3 85 2,422 485 4,968 7,390 0.1 13.5 — ...... 4 80 2,423 477 4,878 7,301 0.1 13.5 — ...... 5 75 2,425 468 4,787 7,212 0.2 13.5 — ...... 6 70 2,429 460 4,697 7,126 0.2 13.5 — ...... 7 65 2,434 451 4,607 7,040 0.3 13.5 — ...... 8 60 2,441 452 4,608 7,049 0.4 13.5 3 ...... 9 55 2,454 444 4,517 6,971 0.5 13.5 — ...... 10 50 2,467 464 4,717 7,184 1.0 13.5 4 ...... 11 45 2,491 464 4,718 7,209 1.6 13.5 — ...... 12 40 2,538 526 5,336 7,874 N/A 13.5 5 ...... 13 32 3,250 512 5,188 8,438 N/A 13.5 * The results for each EL are calculated assuming that all customers use equipment at that efficiency level or higher. The PBP is measured rel- ative to the baseline equipment. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

TABLE V.16—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR COMBINATION B, CO2

Life-cycle cost savings % of baseline % of Average TSL EL energy use customers that life-cycle cost experience a savings * net cost (2014$)

— ...... 0 100 ...... 1 ...... 1 95 0 30 — ...... 2 90 0 89 2 ...... 3 85 0 179 — ...... 4 80 0 268 — ...... 5 75 0 356 — ...... 6 70 0 443 — ...... 7 65 0 528 — ...... 8 60 0 519

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1089

TABLE V.16—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION— Continued FOR COMBINATION B, CO2

Life-cycle cost savings % of baseline % of Average TSL EL energy use customers that life-cycle cost experience a savings * net cost (2014$)

3 ...... 9 55 0 597 — ...... 10 50 2 384 4 ...... 11 45 7 359 — ...... 12 40 83 (306) 5 ...... 13 32 97 (870) * The calculation includes customers with zero LCC savings (no impact). Parentheses indicate negative values.

TABLE V.17—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR COMBINATION B, PROPANE *

Average costs (2014$) Simple % of payback Average TSL EL baseline First year’s Lifetime period ** lifetime energy use Installed operating operating LCC (years) (years) cost cost cost

— ...... 0 100 2,538 511 5,239 7,777 ...... 13.5 1 ...... 1 95 2,539 502 5,149 7,688 0.1 13.5 — ...... 2 90 2,540 494 5,058 7,598 0.1 13.5 2 ...... 3 85 2,541 485 4,968 7,509 0.1 13.5 — ...... 4 80 2,542 477 4,878 7,420 0.1 13.5 — ...... 5 75 2,543 468 4,787 7,330 0.1 13.5 — ...... 6 70 2,544 460 4,697 7,241 0.1 13.5 — ...... 7 65 2,547 451 4,607 7,153 0.1 13.5 — ...... 8 60 2,552 443 4,516 7,068 0.2 13.5 3 ...... 9 55 2,561 444 4,517 7,078 0.3 13.5 — ...... 10 50 2,571 435 4,427 6,998 0.4 13.5 4 ...... 11 45 2,585 455 4,626 7,212 0.8 13.5 — ...... 12 40 2,613 456 4,628 7,240 1.4 13.5 5 ...... 13 32 2,933 512 5,188 8,121 N/A 13.5 * The results for each EL are calculated assuming that all customers use equipment at that efficiency level or higher. The PBP is measured rel- ative to the baseline equipment. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

TABLE V.18—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR COMBINATION B, PROPANE

Life-cycle cost savings

% of baseline % of Average TSL EL energy use customers that life-cycle cost experience a savings * net cost (2014$)

— ...... 0 100 ...... 1 ...... 1 95 0 30 — ...... 2 90 0 89 2 ...... 3 85 0 179 — ...... 4 80 0 268 — ...... 5 75 0 358 — ...... 6 70 0 447 — ...... 7 65 0 535 — ...... 8 60 0 620 3 ...... 9 55 0 610 — ...... 10 50 0 690 4 ...... 11 45 1 476 — ...... 12 40 3 447 5 ...... 13 32 86 (433) * The calculation includes customers with zero LCC savings (no impact). Parentheses indicate negative values.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1090 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

b. Customer Subgroup Analysis estimated the average LCC savings and At TSL 3, all but one equipment class simple PBP for this subgroup as shown have positive LCC savings for the Using the LCC spreadsheet model, in Table V.19 through Table V.26. subgroup (Class A, Propane has LCC DOE estimated the impacts of the TSLs The results of the customer subgroup savings of 0), although the savings are on manufacturing and/or industrial analysis indicate that the not as great in magnitude as for all facilities that purchase their own manufacturing/industrial subgroup fares customers. Chapter 11 of the final rule beverage vending machines. This slightly worse than the average TSD provides a more detailed subgroup typically has higher discount customer, with that subgroup showing discussion on the customer subgroup rates and lower electricity prices lower LCC savings and longer payback analysis and results. relative to the average customer. DOE periods than a typical customer shows.

TABLE V.19—COMPARISON OF IMPACTS FOR MANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL SUBGROUP RELATIVE TO ALL CUSTOMERS, CLASS A, CO2

LCC savings * Simple payback period ** (2014$) (years) TSL Manufacturing Manufacturing subgroup All customers subgroup All customers

1 ...... 47 65 2.6 2.0 2 ...... (245) (217) N/A N/A 3 ...... 47 65 2.6 2.0 4 ...... (982) (937) N/A N/A 5 ...... (1,535) (1,424) N/A N/A * Parentheses indicate negative values. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

TABLE V.20—COMPARISON OF IMPACTS FOR MANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL SUBGROUP RELATIVE TO ALL CUSTOMERS, CLASS A, PROPANE

LCC savings * Simple payback period ** (2014$) (years) TSL Manufacturing Manufacturing subgroup All customers subgroup All customers

1 ...... 0 0 1.3 1.1 2 ...... 53 71 1.4 1.2 3 ...... 0 0 1.3 1.1 4 ...... 391 454 1.0 0.9 5 ...... (917) (817) N/A N/A * Parentheses indicate negative values. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

TABLE V.21—COMPARISON OF IMPACTS FOR MANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL SUBGROUP RELATIVE TO ALL CUSTOMERS, CLASS B, CO2

LCC savings * Simple payback period ** (2014$) (years) TSL Manufacturing Manufacturing subgroup All customers subgroup All customers

1 ...... 0 0 0.5 0.4 2 ...... 0 0 2.0 1.0 3 ...... 22 42 2.0 1.1 4 ...... (506) (448) N/A N/A 5 ...... (1,138) (1,017) N/A 58.8 * Parentheses indicate negative values. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1091

TABLE V.22—COMPARISON OF IMPACTS FOR MANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL SUBGROUP RELATIVE TO ALL CUSTOMERS, CLASS B, PROPANE

LCC savings * Simple payback period ** (2014$) (years) TSL Manufacturing Manufacturing subgroup All customers subgroup All customers

1 ...... 3 8 1.1 0.7 2 ...... 138 185 0.7 0.6 3 ...... 272 361 0.7 0.5 4 ...... 188 333 2.0 1.3 5 ...... (756) (566) N/A 64.7 * Parentheses indicate negative values. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

TABLE V.23—COMPARISON OF IMPACTS FOR MANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL SUBGROUP RELATIVE TO ALL CUSTOMERS, COMBINATION A, CO2

LCC savings * Simple payback period ** (2014$) (years) TSL Manufacturing Manufacturing subgroup All customers subgroup All customers

1 ...... 44 57 0.3 0.2 2 ...... 220 286 0.3 0.2 3 ...... 716 990 1.1 0.8 4 ...... (529) (234) N/A 26.1 5 ...... (1,318) (980) 874.3 39.4 * Parentheses indicate negative values. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

TABLE V.24—COMPARISON OF IMPACTS FOR MANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL SUBGROUP RELATIVE TO ALL CUSTOMERS, COMBINATION A, PROPANE

LCC savings * Simple payback period ** (2014$) (years) TSL Manufacturing Manufacturing subgroup All customers subgroup All customers

1 ...... 45 58 0.1 0.1 2 ...... 224 290 0.1 0.1 3 ...... 505 772 0.9 0.7 4 ...... 476 793 2.4 1.7 5 ...... (808) (470) 546.6 24.7 * Parentheses indicate negative values.

TABLE V.25—COMPARISON OF IMPACTS FOR MANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL SUBGROUP RELATIVE TO ALL CUSTOMERS, COMBINATION B, CO2

LCC savings * Simple payback period ** (2014$) (years) TSL Manufacturing Manufacturing subgroup All customers subgroup All customers

1 ...... 23 30 0.2 0.1 2 ...... 138 179 0.2 0.1 3 ...... 436 597 0.7 0.5 4 ...... 168 359 2.7 1.6 5 ...... (1,094) (870) N/A N/A * Parentheses indicate negative values. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1092 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE V.26—COMPARISON OF IMPACTS FOR MANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL SUBGROUP RELATIVE TO ALL CUSTOMERS, COMBINATION B, PROPANE

LCC savings * Simple payback period ** (2014$) (years) TSL Manufacturing Manufacturing subgroup All customers subgroup All customers

1 ...... 23 30 0.1 0.1 2 ...... 138 179 0.1 0.1 3 ...... 448 610 0.4 0.3 4 ...... 282 476 1.3 0.8 5 ...... (658) (433) N/A N/A * Parentheses indicate negative values. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

c. Rebuttable Presumption Payback 6295(o)(1)(B)(iii)) DOE’s LCC and PBP environment, as required under 42 analyses generate values that calculate U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i). The results of As discussed in section III.F.2 of this the PBP for customers of potential new this analysis serve as the basis for DOE final rule, EPCA provides a rebuttable and amended energy conservation to definitively evaluate the economic presumption that an energy standards. These analyses include, but justification for a potential standard conservation standard is economically are not limited to, the 3-year PBP level, thereby supporting or rebutting justified if the additional cost to the contemplated under the rebuttable the results of any preliminary customer of the equipment that meets presumption test. However, DOE determination of economic justification. the new or amended standard level is routinely conducts a full economic Table V.27 shows the rebuttable less than three times the value of the analysis that considers the full range of presumption payback periods for TSL 3, first-year energy savings resulting from impacts, including those to the for all equipment classes and both CO2 the standard. (42 U.S.C. customer, manufacturer, nation, and and propane refrigerants.

TABLE V.27—REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION PAYBACK PERIODS AT TSL 3 FOR ALL REFRIGERANTS AND EQUIPMENT CLASSES

Rebuttable presumption payback period Refrigerant (years) Class A Class B Combination A Combination B

CO2 ...... 2.0 0.5 0.7 0.5 Propane ...... 1.1 0.5 0.4 0.3

2. Economic Impacts on Manufacturers preservation of gross margin percentage compliant equipment and incur higher markup scenario; and (2) the costs of goods sold, their percentage DOE performed an MIA to estimate preservation of per-unit operating profit markup decreases. Operating profit does the impact of new and amended energy markup scenario. conservation standards on not change in absolute dollars but To assess the less severe end of the decreases as a percentage of revenue. manufacturers of beverage vending range of potential impacts, DOE machines. The section below describes modeled a preservation of gross margin Each of the modeled scenarios results the expected impacts on manufacturers percentage markup scenario, in which a in a unique set of cash flows and at each TSL. Chapter 12 of the final rule uniform ‘‘gross margin percentage’’ corresponding industry values at each TSD explains the analysis in further markup is applied across all potential TSL. In the following discussion, the detail. efficiency levels. In this scenario, DOE INPV results refer to the difference in a. Industry Cash Flow Analysis Results assumed that a manufacturer’s absolute industry value between the no-new- dollar markup would increase as standards case and each standards case The following tables illustrate the production costs increase in the that result from the sum of discounted estimated financial impacts (represented standards case. cash flows from the reference year 2015 by changes in industry net present To assess the more severe end of the through 2048, the end of the analysis value, or INPV) of energy conservation range of potential impacts, DOE period. To provide perspective on the standards on manufacturers of beverage modeled the preservation of per unit short-run cash flow impact, DOE vending machines, as well as the operating profit markup scenario, which includes in the discussion of the results conversion costs that DOE expects reflects manufacturer concerns a comparison of free cash flow between manufacturers would incur for all surrounding their inability to maintain the no-new-standards case and the equipment classes at each TSL. margins as manufacturing production standards case at each TSL in the year As discussed in sections IV.J and costs increase to meet more stringent before amended standards would take V.B.2.b of this final rule, DOE modeled efficiency levels. In this scenario, as effect. This figure provides an two different markup scenarios to manufacturers make the necessary evaluate the range of cash flow impacts investments required to convert their understanding of the magnitude of the on the BVM industry: (1) The facilities to produce new standards- required conversion costs relative to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1093

cash flow generated by the industry in markup scenario and the preservation of presented. Estimated conversion costs the no-new-standards case. per-unit operating profit markup and free cash flow in the year prior to Table V.28 and Table V.29 present a scenario. As noted, the preservation of the effective date of amended standards range of results reflecting both the per-unit operating profit scenario do not vary with markup scenario. preservation of gross margin percentage accounts for the more severe impacts

TABLE V.28—MANUFACTURER IMPACT ANALYSIS UNDER THE PRESERVATION OF GROSS MARGIN PERCENTAGE MARKUP SCENARIO FOR ANALYSIS PERIOD [2015–2048]

No-new- Trial standard level Units standards case 1 2 3 4 5

INPV ...... 2014$M ...... 94.8 94.4 94.7 95.2 98.8 112.6 Change in INPV .... 2014$M * ...... (0.4) (0.1) 0.4 4.0 17.9 % Change * ...... (0.4) (0.1) 0.4 4.2 18.9 Product Conver- 2014$M ...... 0.58 0.58 0.58 1.19 3.27 sion Costs. Capital Conversion 2014$M ...... 0.30 0.30 0.30 1.14 4.29 Costs. Total Conversion 2014$M ...... 0.88 0.88 0.88 2.33 7.56 Costs. Free Cash Flow .... 2014$M ...... 10.4 10.1 10.1 10.1 9.5 7.4 % Change * ...... (3.1) (3.1) (3.1) (8.5) (28.4) * Parentheses indicate negative values.

TABLE V.29—MANUFACTURER IMPACT ANALYSIS UNDER THE PRESERVATION OF PER-UNIT OPERATING PROFIT MARKUP SCENARIO FOR ANALYSIS PERIOD [2015–2048]

No-new- Trial standard level Units standards case 1 2 3 4 5

INPV ...... 2014$M ...... 94.8 94.1 94.0 94.0 91.5 79.3 Change in INPV .... 2014$M * ...... (0.6) (0.8) (0.7) (3.2) (15.5) % Change * ...... (0.7) (0.8) (0.8) (3.4) (16.4) Product Conver- 2014$M ...... 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.2 3.3 sion Costs. Capital Conversion 2014$M ...... 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.1 4.3 Costs. Total Conversion 2014$M ...... 0.9 0.9 0.9 2.3 7.6 Costs. Free Cash Flow .... 2014$M ...... 10.4 10.1 10.1 10.1 9.5 7.4 % Change * ...... (3.1) (3.1) (3.1) (8.5) (28.4) * Parentheses indicate negative values.

At TSL 1, DOE estimates the impact associated with amended energy under the preservation of gross margin on INPV for manufacturers of beverage conservation standards compliance. percentage markup scenario and the vending machine to range from ¥$0.6 DOE’s engineering analysis indicates preservation of per-unit operating profit million to ¥$0.4 million, or a change in that the most cost-effective design markup scenario, respectively. At this INPV of ¥0.7 percent and ¥0.4 percent options to reach TSL 1 are component TSL, industry free cash flow is under the preservation of per-unit swaps and software modifications such estimated to decrease by approximately operating profit markup scenario and as automatic lighting controls, LED 3.1 percent to $10.1 million, compared preservation of gross margin percentage lighting, a refrigeration low power state to the no-new-standards case value of markup scenario, respectively. At this mode, evaporator fan controls, $10.4 million in the year before the TSL, industry free cash flow is incorporation of a permanent split compliance date (2018). estimated to decrease by approximately capacitor evaporator fan motor, or At TSL 2, the industry as a whole is 3.1 percent to $10.1 million, compared enhanced evaporator coils. expected to incur $0.6 million in to the no-new-standards case value of Manufacturer feedback indicated that product conversion costs and $0.3 in $10.4 million in the year before the such component swaps do not incur capital conversion costs to manufacturer compliance date (2018). large product or capital conversion equipment requiring platform redesigns. At TSL 1, the industry as a whole is costs. DOE’s engineering analysis indicates expected to incur $0.6 million in At TSL 2, DOE estimates the impact that the most cost-effective design product conversion costs and would be on INPV for manufacturers of beverage options to reach TSL 2 are component expected to incur $0.3 in capital vending machines to range from ¥$0.8 swaps and software modifications such conversion costs necessary to million to ¥$0.1 million, or a change in as incorporating an enhanced manufacture redesigned platforms INPV of ¥0.8 percent and ¥0.1 percent evaporator coil, automatic lighting

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1094 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

controls, LED lighting, improved single manufacturers will likely be required to and at each TSL from 2014 through speed reciprocating compressor, or a increase the thickness of their 2048. DOE used data from the U.S. low power state, incorporating a equipment’s insulation, switch to an Census Bureau’s 2013 Annual Survey of permanent split capacitor condenser fan electronically-commutated condenser Manufacturers,80 the results of the motor, electronically-commutated fan motor and incorporate vacuum engineering analysis, and interviews evaporator fan motor, enhanced insulated panels (VIPs). Additionally, with manufacturers to determine the condenser coil, or evaporator fan many manufacturers of Combination A inputs necessary to calculate industry- controls. Manufacturer feedback machines will most likely be required to wide labor expenditures and domestic indicated that such component swaps integrate enhanced glass packs or direct employment levels. Labor do not incur large product or capital double pane glass in order to achieve expenditures related to manufacturing conversion costs. the required efficiency. of beverage vending machines are a At TSL 3, DOE estimates the impact At TSL 5, DOE estimates the impact function of labor intensity, sales on INPV for manufacturers of beverage on INPV for manufacturers of beverage volume, and an assumption that wages vending machines to range from ¥$0.7 vending machines to range from ¥$15.5 remain fixed in real terms over time. million to $0.4 million, or a change in million to $17.9 million, or a change in The total labor expenditures in each INPV of ¥0.8 percent to 0.4 percent INPV of ¥16.4 percent to 18.9 percent year are calculated by multiplying the under the preservation of gross margin under the preservation of gross margin MPCs by the labor percentage of MPCs. percentage markup scenario and the percentage markup scenario and the DOE estimates that 90 percent of BVM preservation of per-unit operating profit preservation of per-unit operating profit units are produced domestically. markup scenario, respectively. At this markup scenario, respectively. At this The total labor expenditures in the TSL, industry free cash flow is TSL, industry free cash flow is GRIM were then converted to domestic estimated to decrease by approximately estimated to decrease by approximately production employment levels by 3.1 percent to $10.1 million, compared 28.4 percent to $7.4 million, compared dividing production labor expenditures to the no-new-standards case value of to the no-new-standards case value of by the annual payment per production $10.4 million in the year before the $10.4 million in the year before the worker (production worker hours times compliance date (2018). compliance date (2018). the labor rate found in the U.S. Census At TSL 3, the industry as a whole is At TSL 5, the industry as a whole is Bureau’s 2013 Annual Survey of expected to spend $0.6 million in expected to spend $3.3 million in Manufacturers). The production worker product conversion costs, as well as product conversion costs associated estimates in this section only cover $0.3 million in capital conversion costs with the research and development and workers up to the line-supervisor level to manufacture redesigned platforms. As testing and certification, as well as $4.3 who are directly involved in fabricating at TSLs 1 and 2, DOE’s engineering million in one-time investments in and assembling a piece of equipment analysis indicates that the most cost- PP&E for platform redesigns. The within an original equipment effective design options to reach TSL 3 conversion cost burden for manufacturer (OEM) facility. Workers are component swaps and software manufacturers of all equipment performing services that are closely modifications such as incorporating an increases substantially at TSL 5. At this associated with production operations, enhanced evaporator coil, automatic level, manufacturers will likely be such as materials handling tasks using lighting controls, LED lighting, required to integrate VIPs to achieve the forklifts, are also included as production improved single speed reciprocating required efficiency. VIPs are an labor. DOE’s estimates only account for compressor, or a low power state, unproven technology in the BVM production workers who manufacture incorporating a permanent split industry and would likely require the specific equipment covered by this capacitor condenser fan motor, substantial effort and cost to rulemaking. electronically-commutated evaporator incorporate. Because production employment fan motor, enhanced condenser coil, or At TSL 5, there is approximately a expenditures are assumed to be a fixed evaporator fan controls. Manufacturer 7-percent decrease in total industry percentage of cost of goods sold and the feedback indicated that such component shipments in 2019 relative to the no- MPCs typically increase with more swaps do not incur large product or new-standards case. Under the efficient equipment, labor tracks the capital conversion costs. preservation of gross margin percentage increased prices in the GRIM. As At TSL 4, DOE estimates the impact markup scenario, this decrease in efficiency of beverage vending machines on INPV for manufacturers of beverage shipments and increased conversion vending machines to range from ¥$3.2 increase, so does the complexity of the costs are outweighed by a relatively equipment, generally requiring more million to $4.0 million, or a change in larger increase in industry MPCs, INPV of ¥3.4 percent to 4.2 percent labor to produce. Based on industry resulting in a positive change in INPV. feedback, DOE believes that under the preservation of gross margin Under the preservation of per-unit percentage markup scenario and the manufacturers that use domestic operating profit markup scenario, the production currently will continue to preservation of per-unit operating profit increase in MPCs at TSL 5 is markup scenario, respectively. At this produce the same scope of covered outweighed by the decrease in equipment in domestic production TSL, industry free cash flow is shipments and the increase in industry estimated to decrease by approximately facilities. DOE does not expect conversion costs. This results in a production to shift to lower labor cost 8.5 percent to $9.5 million, compared to decrease in INPV. the no-new-standards case value of countries. To estimate a lower bound to $10.4 million in the year before the b. Impacts on Direct Employment employment, DOE assumed that compliance date (2018). To quantitatively assess the potential employment tracks closely with At TSL 4, the industry as a whole is impacts of amended energy industry shipments, and any percentage expected to spend $1.2 million in conservation standards on direct decrease in shipments will result in a product conversion costs, as well as employment, DOE used the GRIM to 80 U.S. Census Bureau. Annual Survey of $1.1 million in capital conversion costs estimate the domestic labor Manufacturers: General Statistics: Statistics for for platform redesigns. At TSL 4, expenditures and number of direct Industry Groups and Industries (2013). Available at depending on the equipment, some employees in the no-new-standards case www.census.gov/manufacturing/asm/index.html.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1095

commensurate percentage decrease in Using the GRIM, DOE estimates that units sold in the United States are employment. A complete description of in the absence of amended energy manufactured domestically. Table V.30 the assumptions used to generate these conservation standards, there would be shows the range of the impacts of upper and lower bounds can be found 653 domestic production workers in the potential amended energy conservation in chapter 12 of the final rule TSD. BVM industry. As noted previously, standards on U.S. production workers of DOE estimates that 90 percent of BVM beverage vending machines.

TABLE V.30—POTENTIAL CHANGES IN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINE PRODUCTION WORKERS IN 2019

No-new- Trial standard level standards case * 1 2 3 4 5

Potential Changes in Do- ...... 0 to 2 ...... 0 to 7 ...... 0 to 6 ...... (5) to 46 ...... (49) to 233. mestic Production Workers in 2019 **. * No-new-standards case estimates 653 domestic production workers in the BVM industry in 2019. ** Parentheses indicate negative values.

The upper end of the range estimates resulting in less burdensome standard structure substantially different from the the maximum increase in the number of levels for all equipment classes of industry average could be affected production workers in the BVM beverage vending machines relative to disproportionately. Using average cost industry after implementation of an the NOPR proposal. DOE believes that assumptions to develop an industry emended energy conservation standard. manufactures will be able to maintain cash-flow estimate is inadequate to It assumes that manufacturers would production capacity levels sufficient to assess differential impacts among continue to produce the same scope of meet market demand under the final manufacturer subgroups. covered equipment within the United rule standard levels. For BVM equipment, DOE identified States and would require some Additionally, manufacturers have and evaluated the impact of amended additional labor to produce more expressed concern regarding the energy conservation standards on one efficient equipment. potential strain on technical resources subgroup: Small manufacturers. The The lower end of the range represents associated with having to comply with SBA defines a ‘‘small business’’ as the maximum decrease in total number both DOE amended energy conservation having 1,000 employees or less for of U.S. production workers that could standards and the EPA’s R–134a NAICS 333318, ‘‘Other Commercial and result from an amended energy phaseout for beverage vending machines Service Industry Machinery conservation standard. During (see SNAP Final Rule 20 (80 FR 42870, Manufacturing.’’ Based on this interviews, manufacturers noted that, 42917–42920 (July 20, 2015))) by 2019. definition, DOE identified five due to the high shipping costs Few manufacturers have experience manufacturers in the BVM equipment associated with beverage vending with CO designs, and no beverage industry that are small businesses. 2 For a discussion of the impacts on the machines, they would be hesitant to vending machines in the domestic small manufacturer subgroup, see the move any major production operations market currently use propane. The outside the United States. Therefore, the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in switch to CO and propane will require lower bound of direct employment 2 section VI.B of this final rule and all manufacturers to redesign the impacts assumes domestic production chapter 12 of the final rule TSD. majority of their equipment. of beverage vending machines would Manufacturers are concerned they do e. Cumulative Regulatory Burden decrease by the same relative percentage not have the technical capacity to decrease in industry shipments as a While any one regulation may not redesign for new refrigerants and result of an amended energy impose a significant burden on amended energy conservation conservation standard. manufacturers, the combined effects of This conclusion is independent of any standards. DOE accounted for the several impending regulations may have conclusions regarding indirect forthcoming R–134a phaseout in its serious consequences for some employment impacts in the broader U.S. analysis by estimating CO2- and manufacturers, groups of manufacturers, economy, which are documented in propane-specific cost-efficiency curves or an entire industry. Assessing the chapter 16 of the TSD. and industry conversion costs related to impact of a single regulation may energy conservation standards overlook this cumulative regulatory c. Impacts on Manufacturing Capacity compliance, as well as a one-time burden. Multiple regulations affecting In reference to the amended standard investment required for the industry to the same manufacturer can strain profits levels proposed in the 2015 BVM ECS switch all BVM production to CO2- and and can lead companies to abandon NOPR, DOE received comments from propane. Cost-efficiency curves are product lines or markets with lower multiple small, domestic BVM presented in chapter 5 of the final rule expected future returns than competing manufacturers stating that the proposed TSD, and information regarding equipment. For these reasons, DOE standards could result in one or more conversion costs is contained in chapter conducts an analysis of cumulative small manufacturers exiting the BVM 12. regulatory burden as part of its market altogether. As detailed in section d. Impacts on Subgroups of rulemakings pertaining to appliance IV.J.3, DOE notes that, in response to Manufacturers efficiency. stakeholder feedback relating to the For the cumulative regulatory burden 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, it has updated its Small manufacturers, niche analysis, DOE considers other DOE engineering analysis and standard equipment manufacturers, and regulations that could affect BVM efficiency levels for this final rule, manufacturers exhibiting a cost manufacturers that will take effect

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1096 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

approximately 3 years before or after the compliance years and expected industry manufacturers are indicated in Table 2019 compliance date of amended conversion costs of energy conservation V.31. energy conservation standards. The standards that may also impact BVM

TABLE V.31—COMPLIANCE DATES AND EXPECTED CONVERSION EXPENSES OF FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS AFFECTING BVM MANUFACTURERS

Regulation Compliance date(s) Expected expenses/impacts

Commercial Refrigeration Equipment 79 FR 17725 (Mar. 28, 2014) ..... 3/27/2017 ...... $43.1 million.

Manufacturers cited ENERGY STAR manufacturer would need to invest energy savings for the beverage vending standards for beverage vending $750,000 to update their equipment to machines purchased during the 30-year machines as a source of regulatory comply with Rule 20. DOE assumed this 2019 through 2048 analysis period. burden. DOE notes that ENERGY STAR one-time SNAP investment would apply Energy impacts include the 30-year is a voluntary program that is not to all eight manufacturers in the year period, plus the life of equipment federally mandated. As such, DOE does leading up to the phaseout (i.e., 2018), purchased in the last year of the not consider the ENERGY STAR resulting in an additional burden to the analysis, or roughly 2019 through 2078. program in its analysis of cumulative industry of $6 million. This one-time The energy consumption calculated in regulatory burden. cost occurs in both the no-new- the NIA is FFC energy, which quantifies standards case and in the standards In interviews and in public comments savings beginning at the source of case. made in response to the 2015 BVM ECS energy production. DOE also reports NOPR, manufactures cited the EPA’s 3. National Impact Analysis primary or source energy that takes into SNAP Rule 20 phaseout of HFCs in account losses in the generation and beverage vending machines by 2019 (80 a. Significance of Energy Savings transmission of electricity. FFC and FR 42870 (July 20, 2015)) as a major DOE estimated the NES by calculating primary energy are discussed in section source of additional burden the difference in annual energy IV.H.2 of this final rule. accompanying potential amended consumption for the no-new-standards efficiency standards. As detailed in case scenario and standards case Table V.32 presents the source NES section IV.J, based on feedback in scenario at each TSL for each equipment for all equipment classes at each TSL interviews, DOE assumed that each class and summing up the annual and the sum total of NES for each TSL.

TABLE V.32—CUMULATIVE NATIONAL PRIMARY ENERGY SAVINGS FOR EQUIPMENT PURCHASED IN 2019–2048 [Quads]

Standard level Equipment class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

Class A...... 0.012 0.031 0.012 0.070 0.138 CO2 ...... 0.012 0.024 0.012 0.047 0.087 Propane ...... 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.024 0.051 Class B...... 0.001 0.010 0.026 0.059 0.091 CO2 ...... 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.026 0.045 Propane ...... 0.001 0.010 0.019 0.033 0.046 Combination A...... 0.002 0.012 0.051 0.061 0.067 CO2 ...... 0.001 0.007 0.031 0.036 0.040 Propane ...... 0.001 0.005 0.020 0.024 0.027 Combination B...... 0.001 0.007 0.028 0.035 0.044 CO2 ...... 0.001 0.004 0.017 0.021 0.026 Propane ...... 0.000 0.003 0.011 0.014 0.018

Total * ...... 0.016 0.061 0.117 0.225 0.340 * Numbers may not add to totals, due to rounding.

Table V.33 presents FFC energy quads at TSL 1 to 0.355 quads at TSL savings at each TSL for each equipment 5. class. The NES increases from 0.017

TABLE V.33—CUMULATIVE NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS INCLUDING FULL-FUEL-CYCLE FOR EQUIPMENT PURCHASED IN 2019–2048 [Quads]

Standard level Equipment class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

Class A...... 0.012 0.033 0.012 0.073 0.144 CO2 ...... 0.012 0.025 0.012 0.049 0.091

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1097

TABLE V.33—CUMULATIVE NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS INCLUDING FULL-FUEL-CYCLE FOR EQUIPMENT PURCHASED IN 2019–2048—Continued [Quads]

Standard level Equipment class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

Propane ...... 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.025 0.054 Class B...... 0.001 0.011 0.027 0.061 0.095 CO2 ...... 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.027 0.047 Propane ...... 0.001 0.011 0.020 0.035 0.048 Combination A...... 0.003 0.013 0.053 0.063 0.070 CO2 ...... 0.002 0.008 0.032 0.038 0.042 Propane ...... 0.001 0.005 0.021 0.025 0.028 Combination B...... 0.001 0.007 0.029 0.037 0.046 CO2 ...... 0.001 0.004 0.018 0.022 0.027 Propane ...... 0.000 0.003 0.012 0.015 0.019

Total * ...... 0.017 0.063 0.122 0.235 0.355 * Numbers may not add to totals, due to rounding.

OMB Circular A–4 81 requires equipment shipments. The choice of a Thus, this information is presented for agencies to present analytical results, 9-year period is a proxy for the timeline informational purposes only and is not including separate schedules of the in EPCA for the review of certain energy indicative of any change in DOE’s monetized benefits and costs that show conservation standards and potential analytical methodology. The NES the type and timing of benefits and revision of and compliance with such results based on a 9-year analysis period costs. Circular A–4 also directs agencies revised standards.82 DOE notes that the are presented in Table V.34. The to consider the variability of key review timeframe established in EPCA impacts are counted over the lifetime of elements underlying the estimates of generally does not overlap with the equipment purchased in 2019 through benefits and costs. For this rulemaking, equipment lifetime, equipment 2027. DOE undertook a sensitivity analysis manufacturing cycles or other factors using 9 rather than 30 years of specific to beverage vending machines.

TABLE V.34—NATIONAL FULL-FUEL-CYCLE ENERGY SAVINGS FOR 9 YEARS OF SHIPMENTS (2019–2027) [Quads]

Standard level Equipment class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

Class A...... 0.003 0.007 0.003 0.017 0.033 CO2 ...... 0.003 0.006 0.003 0.011 0.020 Propane ...... 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.006 0.012 Class B...... 0.000 0.002 0.006 0.014 0.021 CO2 ...... 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.006 0.010 Propane ...... 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.008 0.011 Combination A...... 0.001 0.003 0.012 0.014 0.016 CO2 ...... 0.000 0.002 0.007 0.009 0.009 Propane ...... 0.000 0.001 0.005 0.006 0.006 Combination B...... 0.000 0.002 0.007 0.008 0.010 CO2 ...... 0.000 0.001 0.004 0.005 0.006 Propane ...... 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.003 0.004

Total * ...... 0.004 0.014 0.028 0.054 0.080 * Numbers may not add to totals, due to rounding.

b. Net Present Value of Customer Costs potential standards at each TSL. In and a 3-percent real discount rate. The and Benefits accordance with OMB guidelines on 7-percent rate is an estimate of the regulatory analysis (OMB Circular A–4, average before-tax rate of return on DOE estimated the cumulative NPV to section E, September 17, 2003), DOE private capital in the U.S. economy, and the nation of the total savings for the calculated NPV using both a 7-percent reflects the returns on real estate and customers that would result from

81 U.S. Office of Management and Budget. promulgated before compliance is required, except period and that the 3-year compliance date may Circular A–4: Regulatory Analysis. September 17, that in no case may any new standards be required yield to the 6-year backstop. A 9-year analysis 2003. Available at www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ within 6 years of the compliance date of the period may not be appropriate given the variability _ _ circulars a004 a-4/. previous standards. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)) While that occurs in the timing of standards reviews and 82 EPCA requires DOE to review its standards at adding a 6-year review to the 3-year compliance the fact that for some consumer products, the least once every 6 years, and requires, for certain period adds up to 9 years, DOE notes that it may compliance period is 5 years rather than 3 years. products, a 3-year period after any new standard is undertake reviews at any time within the 6-year

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1098 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

small business capital, including rate of change in the CPI), which has consistent with the results of LCC corporate capital. DOE used this averaged about 3 percent on a pre-tax analysis results for TSL 5, which discount rate to approximate the basis for the last 30 years. showed significant increase in LCC and opportunity cost of capital in the private Table V.35 and Table V.36 show the significantly higher PBPs. Efficiency sector, because recent OMB analysis has customer NPV results for each of the levels for TSL 3 were chosen to found the average rate of return on TSLs DOE considered for beverage correspond to the highest NPV at a 7- capital to be near this rate. In addition, vending machines at both 7-percent and percent discount rate for all classes. DOE used the 3-percent rate to capture 3-percent discount rates. In each case, Consequently, the total NPV for the potential effects of amended the impacts cover the expected lifetime beverage vending machines was highest standards on private consumption. This of equipment purchased from 2019 for TSL 3, with a value of $0.207 billion rate represents the rate at which society through 2048. Detailed NPV results are (2014$) at a 7-percent discount rate. TSL discounts future consumption flows to presented in chapter 10 of the final rule 1 showed the second highest total NPV, their present value. It can be TSD. with a value of $0.030 billion (2014$) at approximated by the real rate of return The NPV results at a 7-percent a 7-percent discount rate. TSL 2, TSL 4 on long-term government debt (i.e., discount rate for TSL 5 were negative and TSL 5 have a total NPV lower than yield on Treasury notes minus annual for all equipment classes. This is TSL 1 or 3.

TABLE V.35—NET PRESENT VALUE AT A 7-PERCENT DISCOUNT RATE FOR EQUIPMENT PURCHASED IN 2019–2048 [billion 2014$]

Standard level * Equipment class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

Class A...... 0.021 (0.058) 0.021 (0.213) (0.645) CO2 ...... 0.021 (0.074) 0.021 (0.314) (0.464) Propane ...... 0.000 0.016 0.000 0.101 (0.181) Class B ...... 0.001 0.021 0.047 (0.041) (0.235) CO2 ...... 0.000 0.000 0.007 (0.078) (0.169) Propane ...... 0.001 0.021 0.041 0.037 (0.065) Combination A ...... 0.005 0.027 0.085 0.015 (0.075) CO2 ...... 0.003 0.016 0.056 (0.015) (0.056) Propane ...... 0.002 0.011 0.029 0.030 (0.019) Combination B ...... 0.003 0.016 0.053 0.035 (0.063) CO2 ...... 0.002 0.009 0.032 0.019 (0.047) Propane ...... 0.001 0.006 0.022 0.017 (0.016)

Total ...... 0.030 0.006 0.207 (0.204) (1.017) * Values in parentheses are negative numbers.

TABLE V.36—NET PRESENT VALUE AT A 3-PERCENT DISCOUNT RATE FOR EQUIPMENT PURCHASED IN 2019–2048 [billion 2014$]

Standard level * Equipment class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

Class A...... 0.054 (0.124) 0.054 (0.450) (1.281) CO2 ...... 0.054 (0.163) 0.054 (0.694) (0.923) Propane ...... 0.000 0.039 0.000 0.244 (0.358) Class B ...... 0.002 0.050 0.116 (0.079) (0.435) CO2 ...... 0.000 0.000 0.018 (0.172) (0.319) Propane ...... 0.002 0.050 0.098 0.093 (0.116) Combination A ...... 0.013 0.065 0.208 0.056 (0.117) CO2 ...... 0.008 0.039 0.137 (0.019) (0.091) Propane ...... 0.005 0.026 0.071 0.075 (0.026) Combination B ...... 0.006 0.038 0.129 0.089 (0.116) CO2 ...... 0.004 0.023 0.077 0.048 (0.086) Propane ...... 0.003 0.015 0.052 0.041 (0.029)

Total ...... 0.076 0.029 0.508 (0.0384) (1.949) * Values in parentheses are negative numbers.

The NPV results based on the lifetime of equipment purchased in informational purposes only and is not aforementioned 9-year analysis period 2019–2027. As mentioned previously in indicative of any change in DOE’s are presented in Table V.37 and Table section V.B.3.a of this final rule, this analytical methodology or decision V.38. The impacts are counted over the information is presented for criteria.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1099

TABLE V.37—NET PRESENT VALUE AT A 7-PERCENT DISCOUNT RATE FOR 9 YEARS OF SHIPMENTS (2019–2027) [billion 2014$]

Standard level * Equipment class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

Class A...... 0.009 (0.026) 0.009 (0.093) (0.279) CO2 ...... 0.009 (0.032) 0.009 (0.0135) (0.200) Propane ...... 0.000 0.006 0.000 0.041 (0.079) Class B ...... 0.000 0.008 0.019 (0.020) (0.104) CO2 ...... 0.000 0.000 0.003 (0.034) (0.074) Propane ...... 0.000 0.008 0.016 0.014 (0.030) Combination A ...... 0.002 0.011 0.034 0.004 (0.035) CO2 ...... 0.001 0.007 0.022 (0.008) (0.025) Propane ...... 0.001 0.004 0.011 0.012 (0.009) Combination B ...... 0.001 0.006 0.021 0.014 (0.029) CO2 ...... 0.001 0.004 0.013 0.007 (0.021) Propane ...... 0.000 0.003 0.009 0.006 (0.008)

Total ...... 0.012 (0.000) 0.083 (0.096) (0.446) * Values in parentheses are negative numbers

TABLE V.38—NET PRESENT VALUE AT A 3-PERCENT DISCOUNT RATE FOR 9 YEARS OF SHIPMENTS (2019–2027) [billion 2014$]

Standard level * Equipment class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

Class A...... 0.015 (0.041) 0.015 (0.144) (0.405) CO2 ...... 0.015 (0.052) 0.015 (0.216) (0.290) Propane ...... 0.000 0.011 0.000 0.072 (0.115) Class B ...... 0.001 0.014 0.033 (0.030) (0.142) CO2 ...... 0.000 0.000 0.005 (0.055) (0.102) Propane ...... 0.001 0.014 0.028 0.025 (0.040) Combination A ...... 0.004 0.019 0.059 0.011 (0.043) CO2 ...... 0.002 0.011 0.039 (0.009) (0.032) Propane ...... 0.002 0.008 0.020 0.021 (0.011) Combination B ...... 0.002 0.011 0.037 0.024 (0.040) CO2 ...... 0.001 0.007 0.022 0.013 (0.029) Propane ...... 0.001 0.004 0.015 0.011 (0.011)

Total ...... 0.022 0.003 0.144 (0.138) (0.630) * Values in parentheses are negative numbers.

c. Indirect Impacts on Employment DOE considered in this rulemaking (see impacts from a BVM amended standard DOE expects energy conservation chapter 16 of the final rule TSD for more are small relative to the national standards for beverage vending details). DOE understands that there are economy. machines to reduce energy costs for uncertainties involved in projecting equipment owners, with the resulting employment impacts, especially TABLE V.39—NET SHORT-TERM net savings being redirected to other changes in the later years of the CHANGE IN EMPLOYMENT forms of economic activity. Those shifts analysis. Therefore, DOE generated [Jobs] in spending and economic activity results for near-term time frames (2020– could affect the demand for labor. Thus, 2025), where these uncertainties are Trial standard level 2020 2025 indirect employment impacts may result reduced. from expenditures shifting between The results suggest that these adopted 1 ...... 2 7 goods (the substitution effect) and standards would be likely to have 2 ...... 22 85 changes in income and overall negligible impact on the net demand for 3 ...... 43 173 4 ...... 71 294 expenditure levels (the income effect) labor in the economy. All TSLs increase 5 ...... * (42) 24 that occur due to the imposition of new net demand for labor by fewer than 1000 and amended standards. These impacts jobs. The net change in jobs is so small * Values in parentheses are negative may affect a variety of businesses not that it would be imperceptible in numbers. directly involved in the decision to national labor statistics and might be 4. Impact on Utility or Performance of make, operate, or pay the utility bills for offset by other, unanticipated effects on Equipment beverage vending machines. As employment. Chapter 16 of the final described in section IV.N of this final rule TSD presents more detailed results In its analyses, DOE has considered rule, DOE used an input/output model about anticipated indirect employment potential impacts of amended standards, of the U.S. economy to estimate indirect impacts. As shown in Table V.39, DOE including the use of design options employment impacts of the TSLs that estimates that net indirect employment considered in the engineering analysis,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1100 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

on the performance and utility of BVM the Attorney General in making such reduced demand, chapter 15 in the final equipment. This includes the ability to determination, DOE provided the rule TSD presents the estimated achieve and maintain the necessary Department of Justice (DOJ) with copies reduction in generating capacity, vending temperatures, the ability to of the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR and the relative to the no-new-standards case, display and vend product upon receipt TSD for review. In its assessment letter for the TSLs that DOE considered in this of payment, and other factors core to the responding to DOE, DOJ concluded that rulemaking. utility of vending machine operation. the proposed energy conservation DOE has concluded that the new and standards for beverage vending Energy conservation resulting from amended standards in this final rule machines are unlikely to have a new and amended standards for the will not lessen the utility or significant adverse impact on BVM equipment classes covered in this performance of beverage vending competition. The Attorney General’s final rule will also produce machines. assessment is published as an appendix environmental benefits in the form of at the end of this final rule. reduced emissions of air pollutants and 5. Impact of Any Lessening of greenhouse gases associated with Competition 6. Need of the Nation To Conserve electricity production. Table V.40 Energy As discussed in section III.F.1.e, the provides DOE’s estimate of cumulative Attorney General of the United States Enhanced energy efficiency, where emissions reductions to result from the (Attorney General) determines the economically justified, improves the TSLs considered in this rulemaking. impact, if any, of any lessening of Nation’s energy security, strengthens the The table includes both power sector competition likely to result from an economy, and reduces the emissions and upstream emissions. The adopted standard and transmits such environmental impacts (costs) of energy upstream emissions were calculated determination in writing to the production. Reduced electricity demand using the multipliers discussed in Secretary within 60 days of the due to energy conservation standards is section IV.K of this final rule. DOE publication of a proposed rule, together also likely to reduce the cost of with an analysis of the nature and maintaining the reliability of the reports annual CO2, NOX, and Hg extent of the impact. (42 U.S.C. electricity system, particularly during emissions reductions for each TSL in 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) and (B)(ii)) To assist peak-load periods. As a measure of this chapter 13 of the final rule TSD.

TABLE V.40—CUMULATIVE EMISSIONS REDUCTION FOR POTENTIAL STANDARDS FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES

TSL 1 2 3 4 5

Power Sector and Site Emissions

CO2 (million metric tons) ...... 0.97 3.61 6.98 13.39 20.23 NOX (thousand tons) ...... 1.06 3.97 7.66 14.70 22.22 Hg (tons) ...... 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05 N2O (thousand tons) ...... 0.01 0.04 0.09 0.16 0.25 CH4 (thousand tons) ...... 0.08 0.31 0.60 1.16 1.75 SO2 (thousand tons) ...... 0.59 2.18 4.22 8.09 12.22

Upstream Emissions

CO2 (million metric tons) ...... 0.05 0.20 0.39 0.75 1.13 NOX (thousand tons) ...... 0.78 2.90 5.60 10.74 16.24 Hg (tons) ...... 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N2O (thousand tons) ...... 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 CH4 (thousand tons) ...... 4.30 16.01 30.92 59.34 89.70 SO2 (thousand tons) ...... 0.01 0.04 0.07 0.14 0.21

Total Emissions

CO2 (million metric tons) ...... 1.02 3.81 7.37 14.14 21.36 NOX (thousand tons) ...... 1.84 6.86 13.26 25.44 38.45 Hg (tons) ...... 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05 N2O (thousand tons) ...... 0.01 0.05 0.09 0.17 0.26 CH4 (thousand tons) ...... 4.38 16.32 31.52 60.50 91.45 SO2 (thousand tons) ...... 0.60 2.22 4.29 8.23 12.43

As part of the analysis for this final four sets of SCC values for use in from temperature change further out in rule, DOE estimated monetary benefits regulatory analyses. Three sets are based the tails of the SCC distribution. The likely to result from the reduced on the average SCC from three four SCC values for CO2 emissions emissions of CO2 and NOX estimated for integrated assessment models, at reductions in 2015, expressed in 2014$, each of the TSLs considered for discount rates of 2.5 percent, 3 percent, are $12.2 per metric ton, $40.0 per beverage vending machines. As and 5 percent. The fourth set, which metric ton, $62.3 per metric ton, and discussed in section IV.L of this final represents the 95th percentile SCC $117 per metric ton for discount rates of rule, for CO2, DOE used values for the estimate across all three models at a 3- 2.5 percent, 3 percent, 5 percent, and 3 SCC developed by an interagency percent discount rate, is included to percent respectively. The values for process. The interagency group selected represent higher-than-expected impacts later years are higher due to increasing

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1101

emissions-related costs as the Table V.41 presents the global value the global values, and these results are magnitude of projected climate change of CO2 emissions reductions at each presented in chapter 14 of the final rule increases. TSL. DOE calculated domestic values as TSD. a range from 7 percent to 23 percent of

TABLE V.41—GLOBAL PRESENT VALUE OF CO2 EMISSIONS REDUCTION FOR POTENTIAL STANDARDS FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES

SCC case * (million 2014$) TSL 5% discount rate, 3% discount rate, 2.5% discount 3% discount rate, average * average * rate, average * 95th percentile *

Primary Energy Emissions

1 ...... 7 30 48 92 2 ...... 24 113 180 344 3 ...... 47 218 347 664 4 ...... 90 418 666 1,275 5 ...... 136 631 1,005 1,925

Upstream Emissions

1 ...... 0 2 3 5 2 ...... 1 6 10 19 3 ...... 3 12 19 37 4 ...... 5 23 37 71 5 ...... 7 35 56 107

Total Emissions

1 ...... 7 32 51 97 2 ...... 26 119 190 363 3 ...... 49 230 366 701 4 ...... 95 441 703 1,345 5 ...... 143 666 1,061 2,031 * For each of the four cases, the corresponding SCC value for emissions in 2015 is $12.2, $40.0, $62.3, and $117 per metric ton (2014$), respectively.

DOE is aware that scientific and BVM equipment that is the subject of TABLE V.42—PRESENT VALUE OF economic knowledge about the this final rule. The dollar-per-ton values NOX EMISSIONS REDUCTION FOR contribution of CO2 and other GHG that DOE used are discussed in section POTENTIAL STANDARDS FOR BEV- emissions to changes in the future IV.L of this final rule. Table V.42 ERAGE VENDING MACHINES *—Con- global climate and the potential presents the present value of cumulative tinued resulting damages to the world economy NOX emissions reductions for each TSL continues to evolve rapidly. Thus, any calculated using the average dollar-per- (Million 2014$) value placed in this rulemaking on ton values and 7-percent and 3-percent TSL reducing CO2 emissions is subject to discount rates. This table presents 3% discount 7% discount rate rate change. DOE, together with other values that use the low dollar-per-ton Federal agencies, will continue to values, which reflect DOE’s primary 5 ...... 70 27 review various methodologies for estimate. Results that reflect the range of estimating the monetary value of NO dollar-per-ton values are presented Upstream Emissions reductions in CO and other GHG X 2 in Table V.44 emissions. This review considered the 1 ...... 2 1 comments on this subject that are part TABLE V.42—PRESENT VALUE OF 2 ...... 9 3 of the public record for this and other 3 ...... 17 7 NO EMISSIONS REDUCTION FOR rulemakings, as well as other X 4 ...... 33 13 methodological assumptions and issues. POTENTIAL STANDARDS FOR BEV- 5 ...... 51 19 However, consistent with DOE’s legal ERAGE VENDING MACHINES * obligations, and taking into account the Total Emissions uncertainty involved with this (Million 2014$) particular issue, DOE included in this TSL 1 ...... 6 2 3% discount 7% discount 2 ...... 22 8 final rule the most recent values and rate rate analyses resulting from the interagency 3 ...... 42 16 review process. Power Sector Emissions 4 ...... 80 31 DOE also estimated a range for the 5 ...... 121 46 cumulative monetary value of the 1 ...... 3 1 * Results are based on the low benefit-per- economic benefits associated with NOX 2 ...... 13 5 ton values. emissions reductions anticipated to 3 ...... 24 9 result from amended standards for the 4 ...... 47 18

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1102 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

7. Other Factors 8. Summary of National Economic estimates of the potential economic Impacts benefits resulting from reduced CO2 and The Secretary of Energy, in NOX emissions in each of four valuation determining whether a standard is The NPV of the monetized benefits scenarios to the NPV of customer economically justified, may consider associated with emissions reductions savings calculated for each TSL any other factors that the Secretary can be viewed as a complement to the considered in this rulemaking, at both a deems to be relevant. (42 U.S.C. NPV of the customer savings calculated 7-percent and 3-percent discount rate. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(VII)) No other factors for each TSL considered in this The CO2 values used in the columns of were considered in this analysis. rulemaking. Table V.43 presents the each table correspond to the four sets of NPV values that result from adding the SCC values discussed above.

TABLE V.43—NET PRESENT VALUE OF CUSTOMER SAVINGS COMBINED WITH PRESENT VALUE OF MONETIZED BENEFITS FROM CO2 AND NOX EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS

≤Customer NPV at 3% discount rate added with (billion 2014$ *): TSL SCC case $12.2/ SCC Case $40.0/ SCC case $62.3/ SCC case $117/ metric ton and 3% metric ton and 3% metric ton and 3% metric ton and 3% low NOX value low NOX value low NOX value low NOX value

1 ...... 0.088 0.114 0.132 0.179 2 ...... 0.077 0.170 0.241 0.414 3 ...... 0.599 0.780 0.916 1.251 4 ...... (0.209) 0.137 0.398 1.041 5 ...... (1.685) (1.162) (0.767) 0.203

Customer NPV at 7% discount rate added with (billion 2014$ *):

TSL SCC case $12.2/ SCC case $40.0/ SCC case $62.3/ SCC case $117/ metric ton and 7% metric ton and 7% metric ton and 7% metric ton and 7% low NOX value low NOX value low NOX value low NOX value

1 ...... 0.039 0.065 0.083 0.130 2 ...... 0.040 0.133 0.204 0.377 3 ...... 0.272 0.453 0.589 0.924 4 ...... (0.078) 0.268 0.530 1.173 5 ...... (0.827) (0.305) 0.090 1.061 * Parentheses indicate negative values. Note: The SCC case values represent the global SCC in 2015, in 2014$, for each case.

In considering the above results, two designed to achieve the maximum To aid the reader in understanding issues are relevant. First, the national improvement in energy efficiency that the benefits and/or burdens of each TSL, operating cost savings are domestic U.S. the Secretary determines is tables in this section summarize the monetary savings that occur as a result technologically feasible and quantitative analytical results for each of market transactions, while the value economically justified. (42 U.S.C. TSL, based on the assumptions and of CO2 reductions is based on a global 6295(o)(2)(A)) In determining whether a methodology discussed herein. The value. Second, the assessments of standard is economically justified, the efficiency levels contained in each TSL operating cost savings and the SCC are Secretary must determine whether the are described in section V.A of this final performed with different methods that benefits of the standard exceed its rule. In addition to the quantitative use different time frames for analysis. burdens by, to the greatest extent results presented in the tables, DOE also The national operating cost savings is practicable, considering the seven considers other burdens and benefits measured for the lifetime of equipment statutory factors discussed previously. that affect economic justification. These shipped in 2019 to 2048. Because CO (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)). The new or 2 include the impacts on identifiable emissions have a very long residence amended standard must also result in subgroups of customers who may be time in the atmosphere,83 the SCC significant conservation of energy. (42 values in future years reflect future U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) disproportionately affected by a national standard, impacts on employment, climate-related impacts that continue In this final rule, DOE considered the beyond 2100. technological feasibility, manufacturer impacts of the standards for beverage costs, and impacts on competition may vending machines at each TSL, C. Conclusion affect the economic results presented. beginning with the maximum Section V.B.1.b of this final rule When considering standards, the new technologically feasible level, to or amended energy conservation determine whether that level was presents the estimated impacts of each standards that DOE adopts for any type economically justified. Where the max- TSL for these subgroups. DOE discusses (or class) of covered equipment must be tech level was not justified, DOE then the impacts on direct employment in considered the next-most-efficient level BVM manufacturing in section V.B.2 of 83 this final rule, and discusses the The atmospheric lifetime of CO2 is estimated of and undertook the same evaluation until the order of 30–95 years. Jacobson, MZ. ‘‘Correction it reached the highest efficiency level indirect employment impacts in section to ‘Control of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon V.B.3.c of this final rule. and organic matter, possibly the most effective that is both technologically feasible and method of slowing global warming.’ ’’ J. Geophys. economically justified and saves a Res. 110. pp. D14105 (2005). significant amount of energy.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1103

1. Benefits and Burdens of TSLs impacts estimated for each TSL for begins in the year of compliance with Considered for BVM Standards beverage vending machines. The amended standards (2019–2048). The national impacts are measured over the energy savings, emissions reductions, Table V.44, Table V.45, and Table lifetime of beverage vending machines and value of emissions reductions refer V.46 summarize the quantitative purchased in the 30-year period that to FFC results.

TABLE V.44—SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES: NATIONAL IMPACTS

Category TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

National FFC Energy Savings (quads) ...... 0.02 0.06 0.12 0.24 0.36 NPV of Customer Benefits (2014$ billion): 3% Discount Rate ...... 0.08 0.03 0.51 (0.38) (1.95) 7% Discount Rate ...... 0.03 0.01 0.21 (0.20) (1.02) Cumulative Emissions Reduction (Total FFC Emissions): CO2 (MMt) ...... 1.02 3.81 7.37 14.14 21.36 NOX (kt) ...... 1.84 6.86 13.26 25.44 38.45 Hg (t) ...... 0.002 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05 N2O (kt) ...... 0.01 0.05 0.09 0.17 0.26 N2O (kt CO2eq) ...... 3.28 12.23 23.63 45.34 68.47 CH4 (kt) ...... 4.38 16.32 31.52 60.50 91.45 CH4 (kt CO2eq) ...... 122.70 457.00 882.67 1,693.88 2,560.72 SO2 (kt) ...... 0.60 2.22 4.29 8.23 12.43 Value of Cumulative Emissions Reduction (Total FFC Emissions): CO2 (2014$ million) ** ...... 7 to 97 26 to 363 49 to 701 95 to 1,345 143 to 2,031 NOX—3% Discount Rate (2014$ million) ...... 6 to 13 22 to 48 42 to 92 80 to 177 121 to 267 NOX—7% Discount Rate (2014$ million) ...... 2 to 5 8 to 19 16 to 36 31 to 69 46 to 104

* MMT is million metric ton. kt is thousand tons. t is ton. CO2eq is the quantity of CO2 that would have the same global warming potential (GWP). ** Range of the economic value of CO2 reductions is based on estimates of the global benefit of reduced CO2 emissions.

TABLE V.45—NPV OF CUSTOMER BENEFITS BY EQUIPMENT CLASS

Trial standard level * (billion 2014$) Equipment class Discount rate (%) 1 2 3 4 5

Class A...... 3 0.054 (0.124) 0.054 (0.450) (1.281) 7 0.021 (0.058) 0.021 (0.213) (0.645) Class B ...... 3 0.002 0.050 0.116 (0.079) (0.435) 7 0.001 0.021 0.047 (0.041 (0.235) Combination A...... 3 0.013 0.065 0.208 0.056 (0.117) 7 0.005 0.027 0.085 0.015 (0.075) Combination B...... 3 0.006 0.038 0.129 0.089 (0.116) 7 0.003 0.016 0.053 0.035 (0.063)

Total—All Classes...... 3 0.076 0.029 0.508 (0.384) (1.949) 7 0.030 0.006 0.207 (0.204) (1.017) * Parentheses indicate negative values.

TABLE V.46—SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES: MANUFACTURER AND CUSTOMER IMPACTS

TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

Manufacturer Impacts: Industry NPV relative to a case without standards value of 94.8 (million 2014$) ...... 94.1 to 94.4 94.0 to 94.7 94.0 to 95.2 91.5 to 98.8 79.3 to 112.6 Industry NPV (% Change) ...... ¥0.7 to ¥0.4 ¥0.8 to ¥0.1 ¥0.8 to 0.4 ¥3.4 to 4.2 ¥16.4 to 18.9 Customer Mean LCC Savings* (2014$): Class A CO2 ...... 65 (217) 65 (937) (1,424) Class A Propane ...... 0 71 0 454 (817) Class B CO2 ...... 0 0 42 (448) (1,017) Class B Propane ...... 8 185 361 333 (566) Combination A CO2 ...... 57 286 990 (234) (980) Combination A Propane ...... 58 290 772 793 (470) Combination B CO2 ...... 30 179 597 359 (870) Combination B Propane ...... 30 179 610 476 (433) Customer Simple PBP** (years): Class A CO2 ...... 2.0 N/A 2.0 N/A N/A Class A Propane ...... 1.1 1.2 1.1 0.9 N/A Class B CO2 ...... 0.4 1.0 1.1 N/A 58.8

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1104 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE V.46—SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES: MANUFACTURER AND CUSTOMER IMPACTS—Continued

TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

Class B Propane ...... 0.7 0.6 0.5 1.3 64.7 Combination A CO2 ...... 0.2 0.2 0.8 26.1 39.4 Combination A Propane ...... 0.1 0.1 0.7 1.7 24.7 Combination B CO2 ...... 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.6 N/A Combination B Propane ...... 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.8 N/A Distribution of Customer LCC Impacts— Net Cost (%): Class A CO2 ...... 0 100 0 100 100 Class A Propane ...... 0 0 0 0 100 Class B CO2 ...... 0 0 8 99 100 Class B Propane ...... 3 0 0 1 93 Combination A CO2 ...... 0 0 0 76 93 Combination A Propane ...... 0 0 0 1 82 Combination B CO2 ...... 0 0 0 7 97 Combination B Propane ...... 0 0 0 1 86 * Parentheses indicate negative values. ** Values of N/A indicate paybacks that are not possible, given that more efficient equipment is not only more expensive to purchase, but also costs more to operate.

DOE also notes that the economic amended energy conservation discount rate, and negative $1.949 literature provides a wide-ranging standards, DOE is committed to billion using a 3-percent discount rate. discussion of how customers trade-off developing a framework that can The cumulative emissions reductions upfront costs and energy savings in the support empirical quantitative tools for at TSL 5 are 21.4 million metric tons of absence of government intervention. improved assessment of the customer CO2, 12.4 thousand tons of SO2, 38.5 Much of this literature attempts to welfare impacts of appliance standards. thousand tons of NOX, 0.05 tons of Hg, explain why customers appear to DOE posted a paper that discusses the 91.5 thousand tons of CH4, and 0.3 undervalue energy efficiency issue of customer welfare impacts of thousand tons of N2O. The estimated improvements. There is evidence that appliance energy efficiency standards, monetary value of the CO2 emissions customers undervalue future energy and potential enhancements to the reductions at TSL 5 ranges from $143 savings as a result of (1) a lack of methodology by which these impacts million to $2,031 million. information; (2) a lack of sufficient are defined and estimated in the At TSL 5, the average LCC savings salience of the long-term or aggregate regulatory process.84 range from negative $1,424 to negative $433, depending on equipment class. benefits; (3) a lack of sufficient savings As mentioned previously, in this final to warrant delaying or altering The fraction of customers incurring a rule, DOE considered the impacts of the purchases (e.g., an inefficient net cost range from 82 percent for standards for beverage vending ventilation fan in a new building or the Combination A machines with propane machines at each TSL, beginning with delayed replacement of a water pump); refrigerant to 100 percent for all Class A the maximum technologically feasible (4) excessive focus on the short term, in machines and Class B machines with level, to determine whether that level the form of inconsistent weighting of CO2 refrigerant. Accordingly, was economically justified. Where the future energy cost savings relative to approximately 90 percent of customers max-tech level was not justified, DOE available returns on other investments; purchasing Class B propane equipment, then considered the next-most-efficient (5) computational or other difficulties Combination A CO2 equipment, level and undertook the same evaluation associated with the evaluation of Combination B CO2, and Combination B until it reached the highest efficiency relevant tradeoffs; and (6) a divergence propane equipment would incur next level that is both technologically in incentives (e.g., renter versus cost, or 93, 93, 97, and 86 percent of feasible and economically justified and building owner, builder versus home customers, respectively. saves a significant amount of energy. buyer). Other literature indicates that At TSL 5, the projected change in with less than perfect foresight and a Accordingly, DOE first considered INPV ranges from a decrease of $15.5 high degree of uncertainty about the TSL 5, which corresponds to the max- million to an increase of $17.9 million. future, customers may trade off these tech level for all the equipment classes If the lower bound of the range of types of investments at a higher-than- and offers the potential for the highest impacts is reached, TSL 5 could result expected rate between current cumulative energy savings through the in a net loss of up to 16.4 percent in consumption and uncertain future analysis period from 2019 to 2048. The INPV for manufacturers. energy cost savings. This estimated energy savings from TSL 5 are Based on these results, the Secretary undervaluation suggests that regulation 0.36 quads of energy, an amount DOE concludes that at TSL 5 for beverage that promotes energy efficiency can considers significant. TSL 5 has an vending machines, the benefits of produce significant net private gains (as estimated NPV of customer benefit of energy savings, emission reductions, well as producing social gains by, for negative $1.017 billion using a 7-percent and the estimated monetary value of the example, reducing pollution). CO2 emissions reductions would be While DOE is not prepared at present 84 Sanstad, A. Notes on the Economics of outweighed by the negative NPV, to provide a fuller quantifiable Household Energy Consumption and Technology negative LCC savings, and the negative Choice. 2010. Lawrence Berkeley National framework for estimating the benefits Laboratory, Berkeley, CA. https://www1.eere. INPV on manufacturers. Consequently, and costs of changes in customer energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/ DOE has concluded that TSL 5 is not purchase decisions due to new and consumer_ee_theory.pdf. economically justified.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1105

Next DOE considered TSL 4, which thousand tons of NOX, 0.02 tons of Hg, TABLE V.47—ADOPTED ENERGY CON- saves an estimated total of 0.24 quads of 31.5 thousand tons of CH4, and 0.09 SERVATION STANDARDS FOR BEV- energy, an amount DOE considers thousand tons of N2O. The estimated ERAGE VENDING MACHINES—Con- significant. TSL 4 has an estimated NPV monetary value of the CO2 emissions tinued of customer benefit of negative $0.20 reductions at TSL 3 ranges from $49 billion using a 7-percent discount rate, million to $701 million. Adopted energy and negative $0.38 billion using a 3- At TSL 3, the average LCC savings conservation percent discount rate. ranges from $0 to $990, depending on standards ** The cumulative emissions reductions maximum equipment class. There are no Equipment class * daily energy at TSL 4 are 14.1 million metric tons of customers incurring a net cost for consumption CO2, 8.2 thousand tons of SO2, 25.4 almost all equipment classes, except for (MDEC) thousand tons of NOX, 0.03 tons of Hg, kWh/day † Class B equipment with CO2 refrigerant 60.5 thousand tons of CH4, and 0.2 for which 8 percent of customers Combination B ...... 0.111 × V + 2.04 ‡ thousand tons of N2O. The estimated experience a net cost. monetary value of the CO2 emissions * See section IV.A.1 of the final rule for a reductions at TSL 4 ranges from $95 At TSL 3, the projected change in discussion of equipment classes. million to $1,345 million. INPV ranges from a decrease of $0.7 ** ‘‘V’’ is the representative value of refrig- At TSL 4, the average LCC savings million to an increase of $0.4 million. If erated volume (ft3) of the BVM model, as the lower bound of the range of impacts measured in accordance with the method for ranges from negative $937 to positive determining refrigerated volume adopted in the $793, depending on equipment class. is reached, as DOE expects, TSL 3 could recently amended DOE test procedure for The fraction of customers incurring a result in a net loss of up to 0.8 percent beverage vending machines and appropriate net cost range from 0 percent, for Class in INPV for manufacturers. sampling plan requirements. 80 FR 45758 (July 31, 2015). See section III.B and V.A for A propane equipment, to 100 percent, After carefully considering the more details. for Class A CO2 equipment, depending analysis results and weighing the † kilowatt hours per day. on equipment class. As shown in Table benefits and burdens of TSL 3, DOE ‡ Trial Standard Level (TSL) 3. V.46, a large percentage of Class B and believes that setting the standards for 2. Summary of Annualized Benefits and Combination A CO equipment incur a beverage vending machines at TSL 3 2 Costs of the Adopted Standards net cost, and overall, a majority of represents the maximum improvement customers (53.8 percent) would in energy efficiency that is The benefits and costs of the adopted experience a net cost at TSL 4. technologically feasible and standards can also be expressed in terms Regarding impacts on manufacturers, economically justified. TSL 3 is of annualized values. The annualized at TSL 4, the projected change in INPV technologically feasible because the net benefit is the sum of: (1) The ranges from a decrease of $3.2 million technologies required to achieve these annualized national economic value to an increase of $4.0 million. At TSL levels already exist in the current (expressed in 2014$) of the benefits 4, DOE recognizes the risk of negative market and are available from multiple from operating equipment that meet the impacts if manufacturers’ expectations manufacturers. TSL 3 is economically adopted standards (consisting primarily concerning reduced profit margins are justified because the benefits to the of operating cost savings from using less realized. If the lower bound of the range nation in the form of energy savings, energy, minus increases in equipment of impacts is reached, as DOE expects, customer NPV at both a 3-percent and purchase costs, and (2) the annualized TSL 4 could result in a net loss of up 7-percent discount rate, and emissions monetary value of the benefits of CO2 85 to 3.4 percent in INPV for reductions outweigh the costs and NOX emission reductions. manufacturers. associated with reduced INPV and Table V.48 shows the annualized Based on these results, the Secretary potential effects of reduced values for beverage vending machines concludes that at TSL 4 for beverage manufacturing capacity. under TSL 3, expressed in 2014$. The vending machines, the benefits of results under the primary estimate are Therefore, DOE is adopting new and energy savings, emission reductions, as follows. Using a 7-percent discount amended energy conservation standards and the estimated monetary value of the rate for benefits and costs other than for beverage vending machines at TSL 3 CO emissions reductions would be CO2 reductions (for which DOE used a 2 as indicated in Table V.47. outweighed by the negative NPV, 3-percent discount rate along with the negative LCC savings, and the negative average SCC series corresponding to a TABLE V.47—ADOPTED ENERGY CON- INPV on manufacturers. Consequently, value of $40.0 per metric ton in 2015 DOE has concluded that TSL 4 is not SERVATION STANDARDS FOR BEV- (2014$)), the estimated cost of the economically justified. ERAGE VENDING MACHINES adopted standards for BVM equipment Next DOE considered TSL 3, which is $1.8 million per year in increased saves an estimated total of 0.12 quads of Adopted energy equipment costs, while the estimated conservation energy, an amount DOE considers standards ** benefits are $22.2 million per year in significant. TSL 3 has an estimated NPV reduced equipment operating costs, Equipment class * maximum of customer benefit of $0.20 billion daily energy $12.8 million per year in CO2 using a 7-percent discount rate, and consumption reductions, and $1.6 million per year in (MDEC) $0.51 billion using a 3-percent discount kWh/day † reduced NOX emissions. In this case, the rate. net benefit amounts to $35 million per The cumulative emissions reductions A ...... 0.052 × V + 2.43 ‡ year. at TSL 3 are 7.4 million metric tons of B ...... 0.052 × V + 2.20 ‡ Using a 3-percent discount rate for all CO2, 4.3 thousand tons of SO2, 13.3 Combination A ...... 0.086 × V + 2.66 ‡ benefits and costs and the average SCC

85 To convert the time-series of costs and benefits with each year’s shipments in the year in which the value of CO2 reductions, for which DOE used case- into annualized values, DOE calculated a present shipments occur (2020, 2030, etc.), and then specific discount rates. Using the present value, value in 2015, the year used for discounting the discounted the present value from each year to DOE then calculated the fixed annual payment over NPV of total consumer costs and savings. For the 2015. The calculation uses discount rates of 3 and a 30-year period, starting in the compliance year benefits, DOE calculated a present value associated 7 percent for all costs and benefits except for the that yields the same present value.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1106 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

series corresponding to a value of $40.0 million per year in increased equipment reductions, and $2.3 million in reduced per metric ton in 2015 (in 2014$), the costs, while the estimated annual NOX emissions. In this case, the net estimated cost of the adopted standards benefits are $30.2 million in reduced benefit amounts to $43 million per year. for beverage vending machines is $1.9 operating costs, $12.8 million in CO2

TABLE V.48—ANNUALIZED BENEFITS AND COSTS OF ADOPTED STANDARDS (TSL 3) FOR BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES

(Million 2014$/year) Discount rate Primary esti- Low net benefits High net benefits mate * estimate * estimate *

Benefits

Customer Operating Cost Savings ...... 7% ...... 22 ...... 14 ...... 27 3% ...... 30 ...... 18 ...... 36 CO2 Reduction Value ($12.2/metric ton) ** ...... 5% ...... 4 ...... 2 ...... 4 CO2 Reduction Value ($40.0/metric ton) ** ...... 3% ...... 13 ...... 8 ...... 14 CO2 Reduction Value ($62.3/metric ton) ** ...... 2.5% ...... 19 ...... 12 ...... 21 CO2 Reduction Value ($117/metric ton) ** ...... 3% ...... 39 ...... 26 ...... 44 NOX Reduction Value † ...... 7% ...... 2 ...... 1 ...... 4 3% ...... 2 ...... 2 ...... 6 Total Benefits ‡ ...... 7% range ...... 28 to 63 ...... 17 to 41 ...... 36 to 75 7% ...... 37 ...... 23 ...... 46 3% range ...... 36 to 72 ...... 22 to 46 ...... 46 to 86 3% ...... 45 ...... 28 ...... 56

Costs

Customer Incremental Equipment Costs ...... 7% ...... 1.79 ...... 0.98 ...... 2.10 3% ...... 1.89 ...... 1.01 ...... 2.13

Net Benefits

Total ‡ ...... 7% range ...... 26 to 61 ...... 16 to 40 ...... 34 to 73 7% ...... 35 ...... 22 ...... 44 3% range ...... 34 to 70 ...... 21 to 45 ...... 44 to 84 3% ...... 43 ...... 27 ...... 54 * This table presents the annualized costs and benefits associated with beverage vending machines shipped in 2019–2048. These results in- clude benefits to customers that accrue after the last year of analyzed shipments (2048) from the equipment purchased in during the 30-year analysis period. The results account for the incremental variable and fixed costs incurred by manufacturers due to the standard, some of which may be incurred in preparation for the rule. The primary, low benefits, and high benefits estimates utilize projections of energy prices from the AEO2015 Reference case, Low Economic Growth case, and High Economic Growth case, respectively as well as the default shipments scenario along with the low and high shipments scenarios. In addition, incremental equipment costs reflect a medium decline rate for projected equipment price trends in the primary estimate, a low decline rate for projected equipment price trends in the low benefits estimate, and a high decline rate for projected equipment price trends in the high benefits estimate. The methods used to derive projected price trends are explained in appendix 8C of the technical support document. ** The CO2 values represent global monetized SCC values, in 2014$, in 2015 under several scenarios. The first three cases use the averages of SCC distributions calculated using 5-percent, 3-percent, and 2.5-percent discount rates, respectively. The fourth case represents the 95th per- centile of the SCC distribution calculated using a 3-percent discount rate. The SCC time series incorporates an escalation factor. † The $/ton values used for NOX are described in section IV.L.2. The Primary and Low Benefits Estimates used the values at the low end of the ranges estimated by EPA, while the High Benefits Estimate uses the values at the high end of the ranges. ‡ Total benefits for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are derived using the series corresponding to the average SCC with a 3-percent discount rate ($40.0/metric ton case). In the rows labeled ‘‘7% plus CO2 range’’ and ‘‘3% plus CO2 range,’’ the operating cost and NOX benefits are calculated using the labeled discount rate, and those values are added to the full range of CO2 values.

VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory (1) Insufficient information and the equipment. These benefits include Review high costs of gathering and analyzing externalities related to public health, relevant information leads some environmental protection and national A. Review Under Executive Orders customers to miss opportunities to make energy security that are not reflected in 12866 and 13563 cost-effective investments in energy energy prices, such as reduced Section 1(b)(1) of Executive Order efficiency. emissions of air pollutants and 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and (2) In some cases the benefits of more greenhouse gases that impact human Review,’’ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), efficient equipment are not realized due health and global warming. DOE requires each agency to identify the to misaligned incentives between attempts to qualify some of the external problem that it intends to address, purchasers and users. An example of benefits through use of social cost of including, where applicable, the failures such a case is when the equipment carbon values. of private markets or public institutions purchase decision is made by a building The Administrator of the Office of that warrant new agency action, as well contractor or building owner who does Information and Regulatory Affairs as to assess the significance of that not pay the energy costs. (OIRA) in the OMB has determined that problem. The problems that the adopted (3) There are external benefits this regulatory action is not a significant standards for beverage vending resulting from improved energy regulatory action under section (3)(f) of machines are intended to address are as efficiency of equipment that is not Executive Order 12866. Section follows: captured by the users of such 6(a)(3)(A) of the Executive Order states

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1107

that absent a material change in the B. Review Under the Regulatory manufacturers. DOE reviewed publicly development of the planned regulatory Flexibility Act available data and contacted select action, regulatory action not designated The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 companies on its list, as necessary, to as significant will not be subject to U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation determine whether they met the SBA’s review under section 6(a)(3) unless, of a final regulatory flexibility analysis definition of a small business within 10 working days of receipt of (FRFA) for any final rule. As required by manufacturer of covered BVM DOE’s list of planned regulatory actions, Executive Order 13272, ‘‘Proper equipment. DOE screened out the Administrator of OIRA notifies the Consideration of Small Entities in companies that do not offer equipment agency that OIRA has determined that a Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 covered by this rulemaking, do not meet planned regulation is a significant (August 16, 2002), DOE published the definition of a ‘‘small business,’’ or regulatory action within the meaning of procedures and policies on February 19, are foreign-owned. the Executive order. 2003, to ensure that the potential DOE identified eight companies DOE has also reviewed this regulation impacts of its rules on small entities are selling BVM equipment in the United pursuant to Executive Order 13563, properly considered during the States. Four are small domestic issued on January 18, 2011. 76 FR 3281 rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE manufacturers and one is a small foreign (Jan. 21, 2011). EO 13563 is has made its procedures and policies manufacturer with domestic-sited supplemental to and explicitly reaffirms available on the Office of the General subsidiary that serves as its marketing the principles, structures, and Counsel’s Web site (http://energy.gov/ arm in the United States. DOE contacted definitions governing regulatory review gc/office-general-counsel). DOE has all identified BVM manufacturers for established in Executive Order 12866. prepared the following FRFRA for the interviews. Ultimately, DOE To the extent permitted by law, agencies equipment that are the subject of this interviewed manufacturers representing are required by Executive Order 13563 rulemaking. approximately 78 percent of BVM to: (1) Propose or adopt a regulation For manufacturers of BVM equipment industry shipments and only upon a reasoned determination equipment, the SBA has set a size approximately 50 percent of the small that its benefits justify its costs threshold, which defines those entities business shipments. (recognizing that some benefits and classified as ‘‘small businesses’’ for the 2. Description and Estimate of costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor purposes of the statute. DOE used the Compliance Requirements regulations to impose the least burden SBA’s small business size standards to on society, consistent with obtaining determine whether any small entities The four small domestic BVM regulatory objectives, taking into would be subject to the requirements of manufacturers account for account, among other things, and to the the rule. See 13 CFR part 121. The size approximately 15–20 percent of BVM extent practicable, the costs of standards are listed by North American equipment shipments. The small cumulative regulations; (3) select, in Industry Classification System (NAICS) domestic manufacturers are Automated choosing among alternative regulatory code and industry description and are Merchandising Systems, Multi-Max approaches, those approaches that available at www.sba.gov/content/table- Systems, Seaga, and Wittern. maximize net benefits (including small-business-size-standards. BVM In general, the small manufacturers potential economic, environmental, equipment manufacturing is classified focus on the Combination A and public health and safety, and other under NAICS 333318, ‘‘Other Combination B market segments. advantages; distributive impacts; and Commercial and Service Industry Together, the four domestic and one equity); (4) to the extent feasible, specify Machinery Manufacturing.’’ The SBA foreign small manufacturer account for performance objectives, rather than sets a threshold of 1,000 employees or 74 percent of Combination A and specifying the behavior or manner of less for an entity to be considered as a Combination B sales. Based on the compliance that regulated entities must small business for this category. shipments analysis, Combination A and adopt; and (5) identify and assess Combination B shipments account for available alternatives to direct 1. Description of Estimated Number of roughly 18 percent of the total BVM regulation, including providing Small Entities Regulated market. The market share estimates are economic incentives to encourage the During its market survey, DOE used based on aggregate information desired behavior, such as user fees or available public information to identify compiled through manufacturer marketable permits, or providing potential small manufacturers. DOE’s interviews. The interview process is information upon which choices can be research involved public databases (e.g., described in section IV.J.1 of this notice made by the public. DOE’s Compliance Certification and chapter 12 of the TSD. The DOE emphasizes as well that Management System (CCMS),86 and interview guide used for interviews was Executive Order 13563 requires agencies ENERGY STAR 87 databases), individual published as Appendix 12B of the to use the best available techniques to company Web sites, and market NOPR TSD. The shipments percentages quantify anticipated present and future research tools (e.g., Hoovers reports 88) are from shipments analysis, which is benefits and costs as accurately as to create a list of companies that explained in section IV.G of this notice. possible. In its guidance, OIRA has manufacture or sell equipment covered The remaining 82 percent of BVM emphasized that such techniques may by this rulemaking. DOE also asked shipments are Class A and Class B units. include identifying changing future stakeholders and industry Based on data obtained during compliance costs that might result from representatives during manufacturer manufacturer interviews, DOE estimated technological innovation or anticipated interviews and at DOE public meetings that small business manufacturers behavioral changes. For the reasons if they were aware of any other small (including the one foreign small stated in the preamble, DOE believes manufacturer) account for that this final rule is consistent with 86 ‘‘CCMS.’’ CCMS. www.regulations.doe.gov/ approximately 5 percent of the market these principles, including the certification-data/. for each of the Class A and Class B 87 ENERGY STAR Certified Vending Machines. requirement that, to the extent June 6, 2013. www.energystar.gov/products/ market segments. The remaining 95 permitted by law, benefits justify costs certified-products. percent of both Class A and Class B and that net benefits are maximized. 88 Hoovers. www.hoovers.com/. market segments are held by the three

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1108 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

large manufacturers: Crane, Royal manufacturers and large manufacturers. the conversion costs relative to annual Vendors, and SVA. Using its count of manufacturers, DOE revenue and annual operating profit DOE derived industry conversion calculated capital conversion costs under the final standard level, as shown using a top-down approach described in (Table VI.1) and product conversion in VI.3. The current annual revenue and methodology section IV.J.2.a. Using costs (Table VI.2) for an average small annual operating profit estimates are product platform counts by equipment manufacturer versus an average large derived from the GRIM’s industry type (i.e., Class A, Class B, Combination manufacturer. To provide context on the revenue calculations and the market A, Combination B) and manufacturer, size of the conversion costs relative to share breakdowns of small versus large DOE estimated the distribution of the size of the businesses, DOE presents manufacturers. industry conversion costs between small

TABLE VI.1—COMPARISON OF TYPICAL SMALL AND LARGE MANUFACTURER’S CAPITAL CONVERSION COSTS *

Capital conversion Capital conversion costs for typical costs for typical Trial standard level small large manufacturer manufacturer (2014$ millions) (2014$ millions)

TSL 1 ...... 0.03 0.06 TSL 2 ...... 0.03 0.06 TSL 3 ...... 0.03 0.06 TSL 4 ...... 0.11 0.20 TSL 5 ...... 0.31 0.70 * Capital conversion costs are the capital investments made during the 3-year period between the publication of the final rule and the compli- ance year of the final standard.

TABLE VI.2—COMPARISON OF TYPICAL SMALL AND LARGE MANUFACTURER’S PRODUCT CONVERSION COSTS *

Product Product conversion costs conversion costs Trial standard level for typical small for typical large manufacturer manufacturer (2014$ millions) (2014$ millions)

TSL 1 ...... 0.06 0.09 TSL 2 ...... 0.06 0.09 TSL 3 ...... 0.06 0.09 TSL 4 ...... 0.12 0.19 TSL 5 ...... 0.23 0.54 * Product conversion costs are the R&D and other product development investments made during the 3-year period between the publication of the final rule and the compliance year of the final standard.

TABLE VI.3—COMPARISON OF CONVERSION COSTS FOR AN AVERAGE SMALL AND AN AVERAGE LARGE MANUFACTURER AT TSL 3

Capital Product Conversion Conversion conversion conversion Conversion Conversion costs/conver- costs/conver- cost cost costs/annual costs/annual sion period sion period op- (2014$ (2014$ revenue operating profit revenue * erating profit * millions) millions) (%) (%) (%) (%)

Small Manufacturer ...... 0.03 0.06 1.5 26.4 0.5 8.8 Large Manufacturer ...... 0.06 0.09 0.3 5.8 0.1 1.9 * The conversion period, the time between the final rule publication year and the compliance year for this rulemaking, is 3 years.

At the established standard level, ENERGY STAR databases will be average large manufacturer would need DOE estimates total conversion costs compliant with standards as amended to reinvest roughly 1.9 percent of its associated with new and amended in this final rule, with no modification operating profit per year over the 3-year energy conservation standards for an required under appendix A. This conversion period. average small manufacturer to be includes units from AMS, Wittern, and Product conversion costs, which $87,000, which is approximately 1.5 Seaga (all small manufacturers), in include one-time investments such as percent of annual revenue and 26.4 addition to Royal, Crane, and equipment redesigns and industry percent of annual operating profit. This SandenVendo (all large manufacturers). certification, are a key driver of suggests that an average small The total conversion costs associated conversion investments to comply with manufacturer would need to reinvest with new and amended energy the established level of standards. roughly 8.8 percent of its operating conservation standards for an average Product conversion costs tend to be profit per year over the conversion large manufacturer is $150,000, which is fixed and do not scale with sales period to comply with standards. In approximately 0.3 percent of annual volume. For each equipment platform, addition, DOE found that 17 of 19 Class revenue and 5.8 percent of annual small businesses must make redesign A models in the combined CCMS and operating profit. This suggests that an investments that are similar to their

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1109

large competitors. However, because belief that DOE did not adequately manufacturers are estimated to be the small manufacturers’ costs are spread analyze the impact of any alternatives same at TSL 1 and TSL 2 as at TSL 3 over a lower volume of units, it takes presented in the RIA on small ($87,000). longer for small manufacturers to manufacturers and questioned DOE’s Additionally, DOE considered recover their investments. Similarly, analysis of lower TSLs as alternatives to standards at higher efficiency levels, capital conversion costs are spread the proposed standard if EPCA restricts corresponding to TSL 4 and TSL 5. TSL across a lower volume of shipments for DOE from selecting such less 4 achieves approximately 94 percent small business manufacturers. DOE burdensome standards. (SBA Advocacy, higher savings than TSL 3, and TSL 5 notes that all small manufacturers No. 61 at p. 4). achieves approximately 191 percent manufacturer both conventional (i.e., DOE thanks SVA and ASAP for their higher savings than TSL 3. However, Class A and Class B equipment) as well comments regarding the efficacy of DOE rejected this TSL due to the as combination equipment; there are no ENERGY STAR in driving the market negative NPV results. small manufacturers that manufacturer towards increased efficiency and agrees Furthermore, the estimated only combination equipment. DOE’s with the ASAP assessment of ENERGY conversion costs for small business product research suggests the STAR and DOE’s energy conservation manufacturers are significantly higher at combination and conventional standards as being complementary and TSL 4 and TSL 5 than at TSL 3. To equipment from the same manufacturer more effective than voluntary standards comply with TSL 4, the average small often share design elements, such as alone. In particular, in response to manufacturer must make $228,000 in cabinet and glass pack designs. SVA’s comment regarding the efficacy conversion cost investments, which is Manufacturers that produce both of voluntary programs like ENEGY $141,000 more than at TSL 3. To combination and conventional STAR in achieving energy savings, DOE comply with TSL 5, the average small equipment using shared design considered such alternatives in the manufacturer must make $542,000 in elements would experience conversion Regulatory Impact Analysis. However, conversion cost investments, which is costs lower than those estimated since DOE notes that it is difficult to $455,000 more than at TSL 3. a single redesign effort could be confidently estimate the future impacts DOE believes that establishing leveraged across models in multiple of voluntary or market-based programs standards at TSL 3 balances the benefits equipment classes. because DOE does not control the of the energy savings at TSL 3 with the DOE notes that, in response to stringency of any such programs potential burdens placed on beverage stakeholder feedback relating to the compared to the current equipment vending machine manufacturers, 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, it has updated its efficiency distributions. Further, unlike including small business manufacturers. engineering analysis and standard the energy conservation standards Accordingly, DOE is declining to adopt efficiency levels for this final rule, adopted in this final rule, compliance one of the other TSLs considered in the resulting in less burdensome standard with such programs or incentives is analysis, or the other policy alternatives levels for small manufacturers of voluntary, and it is therefore difficult to detailed as part of the regulatory beverage vending machines relative to estimate savings since it is unclear if impacts analysis included in chapter 17 the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR proposal. In and how many manufacturers or of the final rule TSD. the 2015 BVM ECS NOPR, DOE customers will choose to participate. In Regarding SBA Advocacy’s comment estimated that the average small addition, as noted by ASAP, the benefits questioning DOE’s analysis of lower manufacturer would incur costs of of any such voluntary programs would TSLs are reasonable regulatory $217,000 as a result of proposed likely be significantly less than DOE’s alternatives, DOE is following SBA standards. For this final rule, DOE amended energy conservation Advocacy’s public guidance to Federal estimates that the average small standards, since it is unlikely that there agencies for how to comply with the manufacturer will incur costs of $87,000 would be significant percent market Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Act, as a result of final standards. penetration or commensurately more- wherein SBA Advocacy states that stringent energy efficiency targets for agencies ‘‘should consider a variety of 3. Duplication, Overlap, and Conflict beverage vending machines. mechanisms to reach the regulatory With Other Rules and Regulations In response to SBA Advocacy’s objective without regard to whether that DOE is not aware of any rules or comment regarding DOE’s analysis of mechanism is statutorily permitted.’’ 89 regulations that duplicate, overlap, or the impacts of regulatory alternatives on DOE also notes that additional conflict with today’s final rule. small businesses, the discussion in the compliance flexibilities may be previous section analyzes impacts on available through other means. EPCA 4. Significant Alternatives to the Rule small businesses that would result from provides that a manufacturer whose DOE received two comments DOE’s final rule, TSL 3. In reviewing annual gross revenue from all of its concerning alternative programs. SVA alternatives to the final rule, DOE operations does not exceed $8 million expressed the belief that voluntary examined energy conservation may apply for an exemption from all or programs such as ENERGY STAR are standards set at lower efficiency levels. part of an energy conservation standard more effective in driving the market As a result of these updates, DOE found for a period not longer than 24 months towards more efficient equipment than that TSL 1 and TSL 2 would not reduce after the effective date of a final rule mandatory energy conservation the impacts on small business establishing the standard. Additionally, standards. (SVA, Public Meeting manufacturers (relative to TSL 3) and Section 504 of the Department of Energy Transcript, No. 48 at p. 117) ASAP both would come at the expense of a Organization Act, 42 U.S.C. 7194, commented that while ENERGY STAR reduction in energy savings and a provides authority for the Secretary to has been effective in moving the market reduction in consumer NPV. TSL 1 adjust a rule issued under EPCA in towards more efficient equipment, achieves 86 percent lower energy order to prevent ‘‘special hardship, DOE’s final standards can achieve far savings compared to the energy savings greater savings. (ASAP, Public Meeting at TSL 3. TSL 2 achieves 48 percent 89 U.S. Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy. A Guide for Government Agencies, How Transcript, No. 48 at p. 118) Neither lower energy savings compared to the to Comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act. May comment provided any supporting data. energy savings at TSL 3. The estimated 2012. https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/ In addition, SBA Advocacy stated its conversion costs for small business rfaguide_0512_0.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1110 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

inequity, or unfair distribution of requirements for application of a CX. following requirements: (1) Eliminate burdens’’ that may be imposed on that See 10 CFR part 1021, App. B, B5.1(b); drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write manufacturer as a result of such rule. 1021.410(b) and App. B, B(1)–(5). The regulations to minimize litigation; (3) Manufacturers should refer to 10 CFR final rule fits within this category of provide a clear legal standard for part 430, subpart E, and part 1003 for actions because it is a rulemaking that affected conduct rather than a general additional details. establishes energy conservation standard; and (4) promote simplification DOE believes that establishing standards for consumer products or and burden reduction. 61 FR 4729 (Feb. standards at TSL 3 balances the benefits industrial equipment, and for which 7, 1996). Regarding the review required of the energy savings at TSL 3 with the none of the exceptions identified in CX by section 3(a), section 3(b) of Executive potential burdens placed on refrigerated B5.1(b) apply. Therefore, DOE has made Order 12988 specifically requires that beverage vending machine a CX determination for this rulemaking, Executive agencies make every manufacturers, including small business and DOE does not need to prepare an reasonable effort to ensure that the manufacturers. Accordingly, DOE is Environmental Assessment or regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the declining to adopt one of the other TSLs Environmental Impact Statement for preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly considered in the analysis, or the other this rule. DOE’s CX determination for specifies any effect on existing Federal policy alternatives detailed as part of this rule is available at http:// law or regulation; (3) provides a clear the regulatory impacts analysis included energy.gov/nepa/categorical-exclusion- legal standard for affected conduct in Chapter 17 of this NOPR TSD. cx-determinations-cx. while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the C. Review Under the Paperwork E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 Reduction Act retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism.’’ defines key terms; and (6) addresses Manufacturers of beverage vending 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999) imposes other important issues affecting clarity machines must certify to DOE that their certain requirements on Federal and general draftsmanship under any equipment comply with any applicable agencies formulating and implementing guidelines issued by the Attorney energy conservation standards. In policies or regulations that preempt General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order certifying compliance, manufacturers State law or that have Federalism 12988 requires Executive agencies to must test their equipment according to implications. The Executive Order review regulations in light of applicable the DOE test procedures for beverage requires agencies to examine the standards in section 3(a) and section vending machines, including any constitutional and statutory authority 3(b) to determine whether they are met amendments adopted for those test supporting any action that would limit or it is unreasonable to meet one or procedures. DOE has established the policymaking discretion of the more of them. DOE has completed the regulations for the certification and States and to carefully assess the required review and determined that, to recordkeeping requirements for all necessity for such actions. The the extent permitted by law, this final covered consumer products and Executive Order also requires agencies rule meets the relevant standards of commercial equipment, including to have an accountable process to Executive Order 12988. beverage vending machines. 76 FR ensure meaningful and timely input by 12422 (March 7, 2011); 80 FR 5099 (Jan. State and local officials in the G. Review Under the Unfunded 30, 2015). The collection-of-information development of regulatory policies that Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requirement for the certification and have Federalism implications. On Title II of the Unfunded Mandates recordkeeping is subject to review and March 14, 2000, DOE published a Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires approval by OMB under the Paperwork statement of policy describing the each Federal agency to assess the effects Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement intergovernmental consultation process of Federal regulatory actions on State, has been approved by OMB under OMB it will follow in the development of local, and Tribal governments and the control number 1910–1400. Public such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec. reporting burden for the certification is examined this final rule and has 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a estimated to average 30 hours per determined that it would not have a regulatory action likely to result in a response, including the time for substantial direct effect on the States, on rule that may cause the expenditure by reviewing instructions, searching the relationship between the national State, local, and Tribal governments, in existing data sources, gathering and government and the States, or on the the aggregate, or by the private sector of maintaining the data needed, and distribution of power and $100 million or more in any one year completing and reviewing the collection responsibilities among the various (adjusted annually for inflation), section of information. levels of government. EPCA governs and 202 of UMRA requires a Federal agency Notwithstanding any other provision prescribes Federal preemption of State to publish a written statement that of the law, no person is required to regulations as to energy conservation for estimates the resulting costs, benefits, respond to, nor shall any person be the equipment that is the subject of this and other effects on the national subject to a penalty for failure to comply final rule. States can petition DOE for economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The with, a collection of information subject exemption from such preemption to the UMRA also requires a Federal agency to to the requirements of the PRA, unless extent, and based on criteria, set forth in develop an effective process to permit that collection of information displays a EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297) Therefore, no timely input by elected officers of State, currently valid OMB Control Number. further action is required by Executive local, and Tribal governments on a Order 13132. ‘‘significant intergovernmental D. Review Under the National mandate,’’ and requires an agency plan Environmental Policy Act of 1969 F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 for giving notice and opportunity for Pursuant to the National With respect to the review of existing timely input to potentially affected Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of regulations and the promulgation of small governments before establishing 1969, DOE has determined that the final new regulations, section 3(a) of any requirements that might rule fits within the category of actions Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice significantly or uniquely affect them. On included in Categorical Exclusion (CX) Reform,’’ imposes on Federal agencies March 18, 1997, DOE published a B5.1 and otherwise meets the the general duty to adhere to the statement of policy on its process for

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1111

intergovernmental consultation under Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), L. Review Under the Information UMRA. 62 FR 12820. DOE’s policy DOE has determined that this final rule Quality Bulletin for Peer Review statement is also available at http:// would not result in any takings that On December 16, 2004, OMB, in energy.gov/sites/prod/files/gcprod/ might require compensation under the _ consultation with the Office of Science documents/umra 97.pdf. Fifth Amendment to the U.S. and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued Section 202 of UMRA authorizes a Constitution. its Final Information Quality Bulletin Federal agency to respond to the content for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR requirements of UMRA in any other J. Review Under the Treasury and 2664 (Jan. 14, 2005). The Bulletin statement or analysis that accompanies General Government Appropriations establishes that certain scientific the final rule. (2 U.S.C. 1532(c)). The Act, 2001 information shall be peer reviewed by content requirements of section 202(b) Section 515 of the Treasury and qualified specialists before it is of UMRA relevant to a private sector disseminated by the Federal mandate substantially overlap the General Government Appropriations Government, including influential economic analysis requirements that Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516, note) apply under section 325(o) of EPCA and provides for Federal agencies to review scientific information related to agency Executive Order 12866. The most disseminations of information to regulatory actions. The purpose of the bulletin is to enhance the quality and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of the public under information quality this document and the ‘‘Regulatory guidelines established by each agency credibility of the Government’s Impact Analysis’’ section of the TSD for pursuant to general guidelines issued by scientific information. Under the this final rule respond to those OMB. OMB’s guidelines were published Bulletin, the energy conservation requirements. at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and standards rulemaking analyses are Under section 205 of UMRA, the DOE’s guidelines were published at 67 ‘‘influential scientific information,’’ Department is obligated to identify and FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has which the Bulletin defines as ‘‘scientific consider a reasonable number of reviewed this final rule under the OMB information the agency reasonably can regulatory alternatives before and DOE guidelines and has concluded determine will have, or does have, a promulgating a rule for which a written that it is consistent with applicable clear and substantial impact on statement under section 202 is required. policies in those guidelines. important public policies or private (2 U.S.C. 1535(a)) DOE is required to sector decisions.’’ Id at FR 2667. K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 select from those alternatives the most In response to OMB’s Bulletin, DOE conducted formal in-progress peer cost-effective and least burdensome Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions reviews of the energy conservation alternative that achieves the objectives Concerning Regulations That standards development process and of the rule unless DOE publishes an Significantly Affect Energy Supply, analyses and has prepared a Peer explanation for doing otherwise, or the Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May Review Report pertaining to the energy selection of such an alternative is 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to conservation standards rulemaking inconsistent with law. As required by 42 prepare and submit to OIRA at OMB, a U.S.C. 6295(d), (f), and (o), 6313(e), and analyses. Generation of this report Statement of Energy Effects for any involved a rigorous, formal, and 6316(a), this final rule would establish significant energy action. A ‘‘significant new and amended energy conservation documented evaluation using objective energy action’’ is defined as any action criteria and qualified and independent standards for beverage vending by an agency that promulgates or is machines that are designed to achieve reviewers to make a judgment as to the expected to lead to promulgation of a technical/scientific/business merit, the the maximum improvement in energy final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant efficiency that DOE has determined to actual or anticipated results, and the regulatory action under Executive Order productivity and management be both technologically feasible and 12866, or any successor order; and (2) economically justified. A full discussion effectiveness of programs and/or is likely to have a significant adverse projects. The ‘‘Energy Conservation of the alternatives considered by DOE is effect on the supply, distribution, or use presented in the ‘‘Regulatory Impact Standards Rulemaking Peer Review of energy, or (3) is designated by the Report’’ dated February 2007 has been Analysis’’ section of the TSD for this Administrator of OIRA as a significant final rule. disseminated and is available at the energy action. For any significant energy following Web site: http://energy.gov/ H. Review Under the Treasury and action, the agency must give a detailed eere/buildings/downloads/energy- General Government Appropriations statement of any adverse effects on conservation-standards-rulemaking- Act, 1999 energy supply, distribution, or use peer-review-report. should the proposal be implemented, Section 654 of the Treasury and and of reasonable alternatives to the M. Review Under Section 32 of the General Government Appropriations action and their expected benefits on Federal Energy Administration Act of Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires energy supply, distribution, and use. 1974 Federal agencies to issue a Family Policymaking Assessment for any rule DOE has concluded that this Under section 301 of the Department that may affect family well-being. This regulatory action, which sets forth new of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95– final rule would not have any impact on and amended energy conservation 91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply the autonomy or integrity of the family standards for beverage vending with section 32 of the Federal Energy as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has machines, is not a significant energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended concluded that it is not necessary to action because the standards are not by the Federal Energy Administration prepare a Family Policymaking likely to have a significant adverse effect Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. Assessment. on the supply, distribution, or use of 788; FEAA) Section 32 essentially energy, nor has it been designated as provides in relevant part that, where a I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 such by the Administrator at OIRA. proposed rule authorizes or requires use Pursuant to Executive Order 12630, Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a of commercial standards, the notice of ‘‘Governmental Actions and Interference Statement of Energy Effects on this final proposed rulemaking must inform the with Constitutionally Protected Property rule. public of the use and background of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 1112 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

such standards. In addition, section PART 429—CERTIFICATION, measured pursuant to these 32(c) requires DOE to consult with the COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT requirements for the purposes of Attorney General and the Chairman of FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND determining whether a given basic the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL model meets the definition of Class A or concerning the impact of the EQUIPMENT Combination A, as presented at 10 CFR commercial or industry standards on 431.292. The transparent and non- competition. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 429 transparent surface areas shall be continues to read as follows: determined on the front side of the This final rule incorporates testing beverage vending machine at the methods contained in the following Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. outermost surfaces of the beverage standard: ASTM Standard E 1084–86, ■ 2. Section 429.52 is amended by vending machine cabinet, from edge to ‘‘Standard Test Method for Solar adding paragraph (a)(3) to read as edge, excluding any legs or other Transmittance (Terrestrial) of Sheet follows: protrusions that extend beyond the Materials Using Sunlight.’’ DOE has dimensions of the primary cabinet. evaluated this standard and is unable to § 429.52 Refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines. Determine the transparent and non- conclude whether it fully complies with transparent areas on each side of a (a) * * * the requirements of section 32(b) of the beverage vending machine as described (3) The representative value of Federal Energy Administration Act (i.e., in paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (ii) of this refrigerated volume of a basic model whether they were developed in a section. For combination vending reported in accordance with paragraph manner that fully provides for public machines, disregard the surface area (b)(2) of this section shall be the mean participation, comment, and review). surrounding any refrigerated of the refrigerated volumes measured for DOE has consulted with both the compartments that are not designed to each tested unit of the basic model and Attorney General and the Chairwoman be refrigerated (as demonstrated by the determined in accordance with the test of the FTC about the impact on presence of temperature controls), procedure in § 431.296. competition of using the methods whether or not it is transparent. contained in this standard and has * * * * * Determine the percent transparent received no comments objecting to its ■ 3. Section 429.134 is amended by surface area on the front side of the use. adding paragraph (g) to read as follows: beverage vending machine as a ratio of the measured transparent area on that N. Congressional Notification § 429.134 Product-specific enforcement provisions. side divided by the sum of the measured transparent and non-transparent areas, As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will * * * * * multiplying the result by 100. report to Congress on the promulgation (g) Refrigerated bottled or canned (i) Determination of transparent area. of this rule prior to its effective date. beverage vending machines—(1) Determine the total surface area that is The report will state that it has been Verification of refrigerated volume. The transparent as the sum of all surface determined that the rule is a ‘‘major refrigerated volume (V) of each tested areas on the front side of a beverage rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). unit of the basic model will be vending machine that meet the measured pursuant to the test VII. Approval of the Office of the definition of transparent at 10 CFR requirements of 10 CFR 431.296. The Secretary 431.292. When determining whether or results of the measurement(s) will be not a particular wall segment is The Secretary of Energy has approved compared to the representative value of transparent, transparency should be publication of this final rule. refrigerated volume certified by the determined for the aggregate manufacturer. The certified refrigerated performance of all the materials List of Subjects volume will be considered valid only if between the refrigerated volume and the 10 CFR Part 429 the measurement(s) (either the ambient environment; the composite measured refrigerated volume for a performance of all those materials in a Confidential business information, single unit sample or the average of the particular wall segment must meet the Energy conservation, Household measured refrigerated volumes for a definition of transparent for that area be appliances, Imports, Reporting and multiple unit sample) is within five treated as transparent. recordkeeping requirements. percent of the certified refrigerated (ii) Determination of non-transparent volume. area. Determine the total surface area 10 CFR Part 431 (i) If the representative value of that is not transparent as the sum of all refrigerated volume is found to be valid, Administrative practice and surface areas on the front side of a the certified refrigerated volume will be procedure, Confidential business beverage vending machine that are not used as the basis for calculation of information, Energy conservation, considered part of the transparent area, maximum daily energy consumption for Incorporation by reference, Reporting as determined in accordance with the basic model. paragraph (g)(2)(i) of this section. and recordkeeping requirements. (ii) If the representative value of Issued in Washington, DC, on December refrigerated volume is found to be PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY 23, 2015. invalid, the average measured PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN David J. Friedman, refrigerated volume determined from COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Energy the tested unit(s) will serve as the basis EQUIPMENT for calculation of maximum daily Efficiency and Renewable Energy. ■ energy consumption for the tested basic 4. The authority citation for part 431 For the reasons set forth in the model. continues to read as follows: preamble, DOE amends parts 429 and (2) Verification of surface area, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. 431 of chapter II of title 10 of the Code transparent, and non-transparent areas. ■ 5. Section 431.292 is amended by: of Federal Regulations, as set forth The percent transparent surface area on ■ a. Revising the definitions for ‘‘Class below: the front side of the basic model will be A’’ and ‘‘Class B’’;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1113

■ b. Adding in alphabetical order Materials Using Sunlight,’’ approved Deputy General Counsel for Litigation, definitions for ‘‘Combination A’’ and April 1, 2009, IBR approved for Regulation and Enforcement ‘‘Combination B’’; § 431.292. 1000 Independence Ave. SW., ■ c. Revising the definition of (2) [Reserved] U.S. Department of Energy ‘‘Combination vending machine’’; and ■ 7. Section 431.296 is revised to read Washington, DC 20585 ■ d. Adding in alphabetical order a as follows: Re: Energy Conservation Standards for definition for ‘‘Transparent’’. Refrigerated Beverage Vending The revisions and additions read as § 431.296 Energy conservation standards and their effective dates. Machines; Doc. No. EERE–2013– follows: BT–STD–0022 (a) Each refrigerated bottled or canned § 431.292 Definitions concerning beverage vending machine Dear Deputy General Counsel Harkavy: refrigerated bottled or canned beverage I am responding to your August 20, vending machines. manufactured on or after August 31, 2012 and before January 8, 2019, shall 2015, letter seeking the views of the * * * * * have a daily energy consumption (in Attorney General about the potential Class A means a refrigerated bottled kilowatt hours per day), when measured impact on competition of proposed or canned beverage vending machine in accordance with the DOE test energy conservation standards for that is not a combination vending procedure at § 431.294, that does not refrigerated beverage vending machines. machine and in which 25 percent or exceed the following: Your request was submitted under more of the surface area on the front Section 325(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) of the Energy side of the beverage vending machine is Maximum daily energy Policy and Conservation Act, as transparent. Equipment class consumption amended (ECPA), 42 U.S.C. Class B means a refrigerated bottled or (kilowatt hours per day) 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V), which requires the canned beverage vending machine that × Attorney General to make a is not considered to be Class A and is Class A ...... 0.055 V † + 2.56. determination of the impact of any Class B ...... 0.073 × V † + 3.16. not a combination vending machine. lessening of competition that is likely to Combination A means a combination Combination [RESERVED]. Vending Ma- result from the imposition of proposed vending machine where 25 percent or chines. energy conservation standards. The more of the surface area on the front Attorney General’s responsibility for side of the beverage vending machine is † ‘‘V’’ is the representative value of refrig- erated volume (ft3) of the BVM model, as cal- responding to requests from other transparent. culated pursuant to 10 CFR 429.52(a)(3). departments about the effect of a Combination B means a combination program on competition has been vending machine that is not considered (b) Each refrigerated bottled or canned delegated to the Assistant Attorney to be Combination A. beverage vending machine General for the Antitrust Division in 28 Combination vending machine means manufactured on or after January 8, CFR § 0.40(g). a bottled or canned beverage vending 2019, shall have a daily energy In conducting its analysis, the machine containing two or more consumption (in kilowatt hours per Antitrust Division examines whether a compartments separated by a solid day), when measured in accordance proposed standard may lessen partition, that may or may not share a with the DOE test procedure at competition, for example, by product delivery chute, in which at least § 431.294, that does not exceed the substantially limiting consumer choice one compartment is designed to be following: or increasing industry concentration. A refrigerated, as demonstrated by the lessening of competition could result in presence of temperature controls, and at Maximum daily energy Equipment class consumption higher prices to manufacturers and least one compartment is not. (kilowatt hours per day) consumers. * * * * * We have reviewed the proposed Transparent means greater than or Class A ...... 0.052 × V † + 2.43. standards contained in the Notice of equal to 45 percent light transmittance, Class B ...... 0.052 × V † + 2.20. Proposed Rulemaking (80 Fed. Reg. × as determined in accordance with Combination A ... 0.086 V † + 2.66. 50462, Aug. 19, 2015) (NOPR) and the Combination B ... 0.111 × V † + 2.04. ASTM E 1084–86 (Reapproved 2009), related Technical Support Documents. (incorporated by reference, see † ‘‘V’’ is the representative value of refrig- We have also reviewed supplementary § 431.293) at normal incidence and in erated volume (ft3) of the BVM model, as cal- information submitted to the Attorney the intended direction of viewing. culated pursuant to 10 CFR 429.52(a)(3). General by the Department of Energy, as * * * * * * * * * * well as materials presented at the public ■ 6. Section 431.293 is amended by Note: The following letter will not appear meeting held on the proposed standards adding paragraph (c) to read as follows: in the Code of Federal Regulations. on September 29, 2015. Based on this review, our conclusion is that the § 431.293 Materials incorporated by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE proposed energy conservation standards reference. Antitrust Division for refrigerated beverage vending William J. Baer * * * * * machines are unlikely to have a Assistant Attorney General (c) ASTM. ASTM International, 100 significant adverse impact on Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Main Justice Building 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., competition. Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959, (877) Sincerely, 909–2786, or go to www.astm.org. Washington, DC 20530–0001 (1) ASTM E 1084–86 (Reapproved (202) 514–2401 I (202) 616–2645 (Fax) William J. Baer 2009), ‘‘Standard Test Method for Solar October 19, 2015 [FR Doc. 2015–33074 Filed 1–7–16; 8:45 am] Transmittance (Terrestrial) of Sheet Anne Harkavy BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:19 Jan 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\08JAR2.SGM 08JAR2 srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 81, No. 5 Friday, January 8, 2016

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING JANUARY

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. Proposed Rules: Presidential Documents 3 CFR 172...... 42 Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 Proclamations: The United States Government Manual 741–6000 9385...... 713 22 CFR 9386...... 715 Other Services Proposed Rules: 9387...... 717 147...... 44 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741–6020 Administrative Orders: Privacy Act Compilation 741–6064 Memorandums: 24 CFR Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 741–6043 Memorandum of Proposed Rules: January 4, 2016 ...... 719 Ch. IX...... 881 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 7 CFR 26 CFR World Wide Web Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 271...... 398 1...... 194, 882 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications 272...... 398 32 CFR is located at: www.fdsys.gov. 273...... 398 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 274...... 398 706...... 8 Inspection List, indexes, and Code of Federal Regulations are 278...... 398 33 CFR located at: www.ofr.gov. 10 CFR 117...... 10 E-mail 72...... 371 151...... 173 165...... 11 FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is 429...... 580, 1028 Proposed Rules: an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 430...... 580 110...... 194 form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form 431...... 1028 of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and Proposed Rules: 38 CFR PDF links to the full text of each document. 50...... 410 72...... 412 Proposed Rules: To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select 17...... 196 Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list 14 CFR (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 39 CFR 39 ...... 145, 147, 869 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 61...... 1 3017...... 869 service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 91...... 721, 727 40 CFR To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 121...... 1 135...... 1 52...... 296 and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow 62...... 380 the instructions. Proposed Rules: 141...... 13 39.....22, 24, 27, 28, 30, 32, 34, FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot Proposed Rules: respond to specific inquiries. 38, 191 382...... 193 62...... 414 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 122...... 415 15 CFR Federal Register system to: [email protected] 41 CFR 902...... 150 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or Proposed Rules: regulations. Proposed Rules: 300–3...... 884 CFR Checklist. Effective January 1, 2009, the CFR Checklist no 922...... 879 301–11...... 884 longer appears in the Federal Register. This information can be 16 CFR 301–12...... 884 found online at http://bookstore.gpo.gov/. 301–70...... 884 1109...... 2 1500...... 2 42 CFR FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, JANUARY 17 CFR Proposed Rules: 1–144...... 4 100...... 884 23...... 636 145–370...... 5 140...... 636 45 CFR 371–718...... 6 232...... 3 719–868...... 7 164...... 382 Proposed Rules: 869–1114...... 8 240...... 733 47 CFR 1...... 396 20 CFR 20...... 173 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 404...... 41 20...... 204 21 CFR 49 CFR 176...... 5 Proposed Rules: 884 ...... 354, 364, 378 195...... 885

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:00 Jan 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\08JACU.LOC 08JACU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / Reader Aids

512...... 47 660...... 183 Proposed Rules: 660...... 215 679 ...... 150, 184, 188 17 ...... 214, 435, 1000 679...... 897 50 CFR 32...... 886, 887 635...... 19 36...... 886, 887

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:00 Jan 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\08JACU.LOC 08JACU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDCU Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 5 / Friday, January 8, 2016 / 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 December 23, 2015 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 20:00 Jan 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\08JACU.LOC 08JACU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDCU