Vol. 79 Friday, No. 45 March 7, 2014 Pages 12923–13188

Vol. 79 Friday, No. 45 March 7, 2014

Pages 12923–13188

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER

VerDate Mar 15 2010 19:42 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\07MRWS.LOC 07MRWS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGWS II Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014

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 Printing 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. Paper or fiche 202–741–6005 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 202–741–6005 Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the 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 Printing 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 Printing 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 Printing 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: 77 FR 12345. Postmaster: Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents, Federal Register, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.

VerDate Mar 15 2010 19:42 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\07MRWS.LOC 07MRWS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGWS III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 45

Friday, March 7, 2014

Agricultural Marketing Service Meetings: PROPOSED RULES National Defense University Board of Visitors, 13048 Amendments to Marketing Agreements, Orders: Milk in the Appalachian and Southeast Marketing Areas, Drug Enforcement Administration 12985–13002 RULES Milk in the Appalachian, Florida and Southeast Schedules of Controlled Substances: Marketing Areas, 12963–12985 Temporary Placement of 10 Synthetic Cathinones into Schedule I, 12938–12943 Agriculture Department NOTICES See Agricultural Marketing Service Controlled Substances: See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 2014 Proposed Aggregate Production Quota for Four See Forest Service Temporarily Controlled Synthetic Cannabinoids, 13076–13077 Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service NOTICES Energy Department Nonregulated Status; Petitions: See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Monsanto Co.; Maize Genetically Engineered for NOTICES Protection Against Corn Rootworm and Resistance to Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Glyphosate, 13035–13036 Submissions, and Approvals, 13048–13049 Blind or Severely Disabled, Committee for Purchase From Environmental Protection Agency People Who Are RULES See Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Severely Disabled Promulgations: Oklahoma; Regional Haze and Interstate Transport Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection Affecting Visibility; American Electric Power/Public NOTICES Service Co. Plan Withdrawal, 12954–12957 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Oklahoma; Regional Haze and Interstate Transport Submissions, and Approvals, 13043–13044 Affecting Visibility; Revised BART Determination for Requests for Nominations: American Electric Power/Public Service Co., 12944– Consumer Advisory Board and Councils, 13044–13045 12954 PROPOSED RULES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: NOTICES 2014 and 2015 Critical Use Exemption from the Phaseout Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, of Methyl Bromide, 13006–13017 Submissions, and Approvals, 13053–13058 NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc., 13052 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Executive Office of the President Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, See Presidential Documents Submissions, and Approvals, 13058–13060 Federal Aviation Administration Children and Families Administration RULES NOTICES Qualification, Service, and Use of Crewmembers and Program Policies and Procedures for the Native Asset Aircraft Dispatchers, 12937–12938 Building Initiative, 13060–13062 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Commerce Department Airbus Airplanes, 13003–13005 See International Trade Administration See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Federal Election Commission NOTICES Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Meetings; Sunshine Act, 13052–13053 Severely Disabled NOTICES Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Procurement List; Additions and Deletions, 13042–13043 NOTICES Combined Filings, 13049–13050 Corporation for National and Community Service Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for NOTICES Blanket Section 204 Authorization: Meetings; Sunshine Act, 13045–13046 Dow Chemical Co., 13051 Energy Utility Group, LLC, 13051 Defense Department Union Carbide Corp., 13050 NOTICES Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications, 13051– Arms Sales, 13046–13048 13052

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:44 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\07MRCN.SGM 07MRCN mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCN IV Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Contents

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration International Trade Administration NOTICES NOTICES Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications: Allocation of Duty Expenses: Diabetes Mellitus, 13086–13087 Calendar Year 2014 for Watch Producers Located in the Vision, 13085–13086 United States Virgin Islands, 13037–13038 Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews; Results, Federal Transit Administration Extensions, Amendments, etc.: NOTICES Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People’s Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Republic of China, 13038–13039 Submissions, and Approvals, 13088–13089 Court Decision Not in Harmony with Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, etc.: Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of Food and Drug Administration China, 13039–13040 NOTICES Meetings: International Trade Commission Advancing Regulatory Science for High Throughput NOTICES Sequencing Devices for Microbial Identification, etc., Complaints: 13062–13063 Certain Hemostatic Products and Components Thereof, Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee, 13075–13076 13064 Justice Department Forest Service See Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES See Justice Programs Office Meetings: Del Norte Resource Advisory Committee, 13037 Justice Programs Office Humboldt County Resource Advisory Committee, 13036 NOTICES Meetings: Health and Human Services Department National Motor Vehicle Title Information System Federal See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee, 13077–13078 See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services See Children and Families Administration Labor Department See Food and Drug Administration See Occupational Safety and Health Administration See Health Resources and Services Administration See National Institutes of Health Legal Services Corporation See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services PROPOSED RULES Administration Restrictions on Legal Assistance to Aliens, 13017–13022

Health Resources and Services Administration National Institutes of Health NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Meetings: National Advisory Council on Nurse Education and National Institute on Aging, 13065 Practice, 13064–13065 National Toxicology Program Board of Scientific Counselors, 13065–13066 Homeland Security Department RULES National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Sexual Abuse RULES and Assault in Confinement Facilities, 13100–13183 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic: Housing and Urban Development Department Snapper–Grouper Resources of the South Atlantic; Trip Limit Reduction, 12957 NOTICES Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Federal Properties Suitable as Facilities to Assist the Pacific Cod by Catcher/Processors Using Hook-and-Line Homeless, 13070–13073 Gear in the Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska, 12959 Interior Department Pollock in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands; See Ocean Energy Management Bureau Reallocation, 12959–12961 NOTICES Reallocation of Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Allocation of Duty Expenses: Aleutian Islands Management Area, 12958–12959 Calendar Year 2014 for Watch Producers Located in the Sablefish Managed Under the Individual Fishing Quota United States Virgin Islands, 13037–13038 Program, 12961–12962 Requests for Nominations: Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Public Advisory Committee, Summer Flounder Fishery; Quota Transfer, 12958 13073–13074 PROPOSED RULES Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Internal Revenue Service Activities: NOTICES U.S. Navy Missile Launches from San Nicolas Island, CA, Privacy Act; Amendments, 13089–13096 13022–13034

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:44 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\07MRCN.SGM 07MRCN mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCN Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Contents V

NOTICES Small Business Administration Meetings: NOTICES Atlantic Shark Identification and Protected Species Safe Meetings: Handling, Release, and Identification Workshops, Federal Interagency Task Force, 13084–13085 13040–13042 Permits: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Marine Mammals; File No. 14450, 13042 Administration

Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES PROPOSED RULES List of HHS-Certified Laboratories and Instrumented Initial Draft Guidance for Industry and Staff: Testing Facilities: Shielding and Radiation Protection Review Effort and Urine Drug Testing for Federal Agencies, 13066–13068 Licensing Conditions for Dry Storage Applications; Meetings: Withdrawal, 13002–13003 Advisory Committee for Women’s Services, 13069 NOTICES Center for Mental Health Services, 13070 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, 13068 License Renewal Application for Davis–Besse Nuclear Center for Substance Abuse Treatment National Advisory Power Station, Unit 1, 13079–13080 Council, 13068 Exemption and Combined License Amendments: National Advisory Council, 13068–13069 Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Units 2 and 3; South National Advisory Councils and Advisory Committees, Carolina Electric and Gas; Liquid Radwaste System 13069–13070 Consistency Changes, 13081–13082 Surface Transportation Board Occupational Safety and Health Administration NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Productivity Adjustments: Process Safety Management and Prevention of Major Railroad Cost Recovery Procedures, 13089 Chemical Accidents; Extension of Comment Period, 13006 Transportation Department NOTICES See Federal Aviation Administration Revocations; Experimental Variance and Interim Orders: See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Interlake Stamping Corp., Also DBA Interlake Industries, See Federal Transit Administration Inc., 13078–13079 See Surface Transportation Board

Ocean Energy Management Bureau Treasury Department NOTICES See Internal Revenue Service Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: RULES Geological and Geophysical Exploration on the Mid- and Privacy Act; Implementation, 12943–12944 South Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf, 13074–13075 Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Postal Regulatory Commission Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, NOTICES Submissions, and Approvals: New Postal Products, 13082–13083 Bowel and Bladder Care Billing Form, 13096–13097 Postal Products; Amendments, 13083–13084 Meetings: Advisory Committee on Disability Compensation, 13097 Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS Special Observances: Separate Parts In This Issue American Red Cross Month (Proc. 9083), 12927–12928 Irish-American Heritage Month (Proc. 9084), 12929– Part II 12930 Homeland Security Department, 13100–13183 National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month (Proc. 9085), 12931–12932 National Consumer Protection Week (Proc. 9086), 12933– Part III 12934 Presidential Documents, 13185–13188 Read Across America Day (Proc. 9087), 12935–12936 Women’s History Month (Proc. 9088), 13185–13188 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Reader Aids Boys and Young Men of Color; Creating and Expanding Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this page for Ladders of Opportunity (Memorandum of February 27, phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, 2014), 12923–12926 and notice of recently enacted public laws. To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents Securities and Exchange Commission LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// NOTICES listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Trading Suspension Orders: archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change Aventura Equities, Inc., 13084 settings); then follow the instructions.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:44 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\07MRCN.SGM 07MRCN mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCN VI Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / 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.

3 CFR Proclamations: 9083...... 12927 9084...... 12929 9085...... 12931 9086...... 12933 9087...... 12935 9088...... 13187 Administrative Orders: Memorandums: Memorandum of February 27, 2014 ...... 12923 6 CFR 115...... 13100 7 CFR Proposed Rules: 1005 (2 documents) ...... 12963, 12985 1006...... 12963 1007 (2 documents) ...... 12963, 12985 10 CFR Proposed Rules: 72...... 13002 14 CFR 11...... 12937 Proposed Rules: 39...... 13003 21 CFR 1308...... 12938 29 CFR Proposed Rules: 1910...... 13006 31 CFR 1...... 12943 40 CFR 52 (2 documents) ...... 12944, 12954 Proposed Rules: 82...... 13006 45 CFR Proposed Rules: 1626...... 13017 50 CFR 622...... 12957 648...... 12958 679 (4 documents) ...... 12958, 12959, 12961 Proposed Rules: 217...... 13022

VerDate Mar 15 2010 19:45 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\07MRLS.LOC 07MRLS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGLS 12923

Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 79, No. 45

Friday, March 7, 2014

Title 3— Memorandum of February 27, 2014

The President Creating and Expanding Ladders of Opportunity for Boys and Young Men of Color

Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies

Over the course of my Administration, we have made consistent progress on important goals such as reducing high school dropout rates and lowering unemployment and crime. Yet as the Congress, State and local governments, research institutions, and leading private-sector organizations have all recognized, persistent gaps in employment, educational outcomes, and career skills remain for many boys and young men of color throughout their lives. Many boys and young men of color will arrive at kindergarten less prepared than their peers in early language and literacy skills, leaving them less likely to finish school. Labor-force participation rates for young men of color have dropped, and far too many lack the skills they need to succeed. The disproportionate number of African American and Hispanic young men who are unemployed or involved in the criminal justice system undermines family and community stability and is a drag on State and Federal budgets. And, young men of color are far more likely to be victims of murder than their white peers, accounting for almost half of the country’s murder victims each year. These outcomes are troubling, and they represent only a portion of the social and economic cost to our Nation when the full potential of so many boys and young men is left unrealized. By focusing on the critical challenges, risk factors, and opportunities for boys and young men of color at key life stages, we can improve their long-term outcomes and ability to contribute to the Nation’s competiveness, economic mobility and growth, and civil society. Unlocking their full potential will benefit not only them, but all Americans. Therefore, I am establishing the My Brother’s Keeper initiative, an interagency effort to improve measurably the expected educational and life outcomes for and address the persistent opportunity gaps faced by boys and young men of color. The initiative will help us determine the public and private efforts that are working and how to expand upon them, how the Federal Government’s own policies and programs can better support these efforts, and how to better involve State and local officials, the private sector, and the philanthropic community. By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct the following: Section 1. My Brother’s Keeper Task Force. (a) There is established a My Brother’s Keeper Task Force (Task Force) to develop a coordinated Federal effort to improve significantly the expected life outcomes for boys and young men of color (including African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Native Americans) and their contributions to U.S. prosperity. The Task Force shall be chaired by the Assistant to the President and Cabinet Secretary. In addition to the Chair, the Task Force shall consist of the following members: (i) the Attorney General; (ii) the Secretary of Agriculture; (iii) the Secretary of Commerce;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:47 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRO0.SGM 07MRO0 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with O0 12924 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents

(iv) the Secretary of Defense; (v) the Secretary of Education; (vi) the Secretary of Health and Human Services; (vii) the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; (viii) the Secretary of the Interior; (ix) the Secretary of Labor; (x) the Secretary of Transportation; (xi) the Director of the Office of Management and Budget; (xii) the Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers; (xiii) the Director of the Office of Personnel Management; (xiv) the Administrator of the Small Business Administration; (xv) the Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation for National and Com- munity Service; (xvi) the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement; (xvii) the Director of the Domestic Policy Council; (xviii) the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy; (xix) the Director of the National Economic Council; and (xx) the heads of such other executive departments, agencies, and offices as the Chair may, from time to time, designate. (b) A member of the Task Force may designate a senior-level official who is from the member’s department, agency, or office, and is a full- time officer or employee of the Federal Government, to perform the day- to-day Task Force functions of the member. At the direction of the Chair, the Task Force may establish subgroups consisting exclusively of Task Force members or their designees under this subsection, as appropriate. (c) The Deputy Secretary of Education shall serve as Executive Director of the Task Force, determine its agenda, convene regular meetings of the Task Force, and supervise its work under the direction of the Chair. The Department of Education shall provide funding and administrative support for the Task Force to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations. Each executive department or agency shall bear its own expenses for participating in the Task Force. Sec. 2. Mission and Function of the Task Force. (a) The Task Force shall, consistent with applicable law, work across executive departments and agencies to: (i) develop a comprehensive public Web site, to be maintained by the Department of Education, that will assess, on an ongoing basis, critical indicators of life outcomes for boys and young men of color (and other ethnic, income, and relevant subgroups) in absolute and relative terms; (ii) assess the impact of Federal policies, regulations, and programs of general applicability on boys and young men of color, so as to develop proposals that will enhance positive outcomes and eliminate or reduce negative ones; (iii) create an Administration-wide, online public portal to identify and disseminate successful programs and practices that improve outcomes for boys and young men of color; (iv) recommend, where appropriate, incentives for the broad adoption by national, State, and local public and private decisionmakers of effective and innovative strategies and practices for providing opportunities to and improving outcomes for boys and young men of color; (v) consistent with applicable privacy laws and regulations, provide relevant Federal data assets and expertise to public and private efforts to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:47 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRO0.SGM 07MRO0 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with O0 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents 12925

increase opportunities and improve life outcomes for boys and young men of color, and explore ways to coordinate with State and local governments and non-governmental actors with useful data and expertise; (vi) ensure coordination with other Federal interagency groups and relevant public-private initiatives; (vii) work with external stakeholders to highlight the opportunities, challenges, and efforts affecting boys and young men of color; and (viii) recommend to the President means of ensuring sustained efforts within the Federal Government and continued partnership with the private sector and philanthropic community as set forth in this memorandum. (b) The Task Force shall focus on evidence-based intervention points and issues facing boys and young men of color up to the age of 25, with a particular focus on issues important to young men under the age of 15. Specifically, the Task Force shall focus on the following issues, among others: access to early childhood supports; grade school literacy; pathways to college and a career, including issues arising from school disciplinary action; access to mentoring services and support networks; and interactions with the criminal justice system and violent crime. (c) Within 30 days of the date of this memorandum, each member of the Task Force shall provide recommended indicators of life outcomes for the public Web site described in subsection (a)(i) of this section, and a plan for providing data on such indicators. (d) Within 45 days of the date of this memorandum, each member of the Task Force shall identify any relevant programs and data-driven assessments within the member’s department or agency for consideration in the portal described in subsection (a)(iii) of this section. (e) Within 90 days of the date of this memorandum, the Task Force shall provide the President with a report on its progress and recommendations with respect to the functions set forth in subsection (a) of this section. Additionally, the Task Force shall provide, within 1 year of the date of this memorandum, a status report to the President regarding the implementation of this memorandum. Sec. 3. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this memorandum shall be con- strued to impair or otherwise affect: (i) the authority granted by law or Executive Order to an agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. (b) This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:47 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRO0.SGM 07MRO0 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with O0 12926 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents

(c) This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. (d) The Secretary of Education is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, February 27, 2014

[FR Doc. 2014–05073 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Billing code 4000–01

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:47 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRO0.SGM 07MRO0 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with O0 OB#1.EPS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents 12927 Presidential Documents

Proclamation 9083 of February 28, 2014

American Red Cross Month, 2014

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation On the bloodied battlefields of the Civil War, Clara Barton risked her life to aid the wounded, raise spirits, and deliver dearly needed medical supplies. She went on to found the American Red Cross in 1881, which would carry forward her legacy of compassion. Since then, service and relief organizations have demonstrated time and time again that amid the greatest hardship, all of us can unite in shared commitment to helping our fellow human beings. During American Red Cross Month, we honor those who devote themselves to bringing relief where there is suffering, inspiring hope where there is despair, and healing the wounds of disaster and war. Today, American Red Cross workers, alongside countless humanitarian organizations and caring volunteers, deliver life-saving assistance in every corner of our Nation and all across the globe. They help us donate blood to the ill and injured, fortify towns against rising flood waters, teach us first aid, and rebuild communities in the wake of terrible disasters. Last year, we saw this compassion once again when a tornado tore through Oklahoma, leaving homes destroyed and schools in rubble. Americans came together as one people and one family, determined to stand with those affected every step of the way and to emerge from this tragedy stronger than ever before. During the darkness of storm, we see what is brightest in America—the drive to shield our neighbors from danger, to roll up our sleeves in times of crisis, to respond as one Nation and leave no one behind. This month, as we honor our incredible relief and service organizations, let us also celebrate that uniquely American spirit that calls us, across all lines of background and belief, to set aside smaller differences in service of a greater purpose. NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America and Honorary Chairman of the American Red Cross, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 2014 as American Red Cross Month. I encourage all Americans to observe this month with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities, and by supporting the work of service and relief organizations.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:54 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD0.SGM 07MRD0 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with D0 12928 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-eighth day of February, in the year of our Lord two thousand fourteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-eighth.

[FR Doc. 2014–05074 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Billing code 3295–F4

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:54 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD0.SGM 07MRD0 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with D0 OB#1.EPS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents 12929 Presidential Documents

Proclamation 9084 of February 28, 2014

Irish-American Heritage Month, 2014

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation Centuries after America welcomed the first sons and daughters of the Emerald Isle to our shores, Irish heritage continues to enrich our Nation. This month, we reflect on proud traditions handed down through the generations, and we celebrate the many threads of green woven into the red, white, and blue. Irish Americans have defended our country through times of war, strengthened communities from coast to coast, and poured sweat and blood into building our infrastructure and raising our skyscrapers. Some endured hun- ger, hardship, and prejudice; many rose to be leaders of government, industry, or culture. Their journey is a testament to the resilience of the Irish character, a people who never stopped dreaming of a brighter future and never stopped striving to make that dream a reality. Today, Americans of all backgrounds can find common ground in the values of faith and perseverance, and we can all draw strength from the unshakable belief that through hard work and sacrifice, we can forge better lives for ourselves and our families. The American and Irish peoples enjoy a friendship deepened by both shared heritage and shared ideals. On the international stage, we are proud to work in concert toward a freer, more just world. As we honor that enduring connection during Irish-American Heritage Month, let us look forward to many more generations of partnership. May the bond between our peoples only grow in the centuries to come. NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 2014 as Irish-American Heritage Month. I call upon all Americans to observe this month with appropriate ceremonies, activities, and programs.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:50 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD1.SGM 07MRD1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with D1 12930 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents

[FR Doc. 2014–05075 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Billing code 3295–F4

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:50 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD1.SGM 07MRD1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with D1 OB#1.EPS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents 12931 Presidential Documents

Proclamation 9085 of February 28, 2014

National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month, 2014

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation The second leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States, colorectal cancer claims more than 50,000 American lives each year. Because the odds of survival rise dramatically when this cancer is caught early, calling attention to it can save lives. During National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month, we aim to improve public understanding of risk factors and screening recommendations, reach for better treatments, and set our sights on a cure. While anyone can get colorectal cancer, the risk increases with age. Nine out of ten cases occur in people over 50 years old, and the likelihood is also greater for people of African-American or Eastern European descent and those with inflammatory bowel disease or a family history of colorectal cancer. Symptoms can include stomach pain, aches, or cramps that do not go away and weight loss without a known cause. Yet many cases have no symptoms, especially early on, when it can be prevented or more effectively treated. That is why it is crucial for people of all ages to discuss colorectal cancer with their doctors and those at risk or between ages 50 and 75 to get regular screenings. My Administration is funding research to improve prevention and treatment, and to identify the best ways to promote colorectal cancer screening. We are also working to ensure screenings and treatment are available and affordable for all. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funds programs that provide these tests to underserved, at-risk Americans. And under the Affordable Care Act, most health insurance plans cover recommended preventive services, including colorectal cancer screening for adults ages 50 to 75, at no out-of-pocket cost to the patient. Thanks to the health care law, insurance companies can no longer put annual or lifetime dollar caps on essential health benefits or discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions. Americans have their first chance to sign up for affordable, high quality coverage in the Health Insurance Marketplace through open enrollment until March 31st, and annually going forward. Everyone has a role to play in reducing deaths from colorectal cancer. This month, I encourage Americans to talk to at-risk parents, grandparents, or friends of all ages about getting screened. If we look out for one another, we can better the chances of survival and keep more families whole. NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 2014 as National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month. I encourage all citizens, government agencies, private businesses, non-profit organizations, and other groups to join in activities that will increase awareness and prevention of colorectal cancer.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:51 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD2.SGM 07MRD2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with D2 12932 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents

[FR Doc. 2014–05076 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Billing code 3295–F4

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:51 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD2.SGM 07MRD2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with D2 OB#1.EPS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents 12933 Presidential Documents

Proclamation 9086 of February 28, 2014

National Consumer Protection Week, 2014

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation The premise that we are all created equal is the opening line in the American story, and while we do not promise equal outcomes, we have always strived to deliver equal opportunity. When everyone gets a fair shot, does their fair share, and plays by the same set of rules, the best ideas rise to the top and our economy thrives. After 6 years of digging out of a historic crisis brought on by widespread abuses in our financial system, it is clearer than ever that we cannot succeed without strong consumer protections. This week, we remember that our Nation’s economy is only as strong as its people, and we recommit to fostering a sense of basic fairness in our marketplace. Since I took office, my Administration has worked tirelessly to expose deceptive mortgage schemes, crack down on abusive debt collection practices, and ensure an irresponsible few cannot hurt consumers by illegally rigging markets for their own gain. We have taken action to prevent credit card companies from hiding fees in intentionally obscure text and given families access to clear, comprehensive information on student loans. We passed the strongest consumer financial protection law in history and created an independent watchdog charged with looking out for the American people in the financial world. And to introduce more choice for those planning for retirement, I launched the myRA program, a new type of savings bond that lets Americans keep the same account, even if they change jobs. It is also critical that all Americans know their rights and have the tools to weigh the risks and potential benefits of their choices in the open market. In partnership with consumer advocates, my Administration launched www.NCPW.gov, which provides advice on everything from avoiding scams, protecting identities, and staying informed about product recalls to managing debt and making sound financial decisions. During National Consumer Protection Week, let us recognize the men and women who power the engine of prosperity. Together, let us build an economy that works for everyone, leaves no one behind, and allows every American to pursue their own measure of happiness. NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 2 through March 8, 2014, as National Consumer Protection Week. I call upon government officials, industry leaders, and advocates across the Nation to share information about consumer protection and provide our citizens with information about their rights as consumers.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:52 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD3.SGM 07MRD3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with D3 12934 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents

[FR Doc. 2014–05079 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Billing code 3295–F4

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:52 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD3.SGM 07MRD3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with D3 OB#1.EPS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents 12935 Presidential Documents

Proclamation 9087 of February 28, 2014

Read Across America Day, 2014

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation Literacy is the foundation of every child’s education. It opens doorways to opportunity, transports us across time and space, and binds family and friends closer together. When parents, educators, librarians, and mentors read with children, they give a gift that will nourish souls for a lifetime. Today, Americans young and old will take time to get lost in a story and do their part to cultivate the next generation of talent and intellect. This day is also a time to honor the legacy of Theodor Seuss Geisel, known to us as Dr. Seuss. Countless Americans can recall his books as their first step into the lands of letters and wordplay. With creatures, contraptions, and vibrant characters, they have led generations of happy travelers through voyages of the imagination. Yet his tales also challenge dictators and discrimination. They call us to open our minds, to take responsibility for ourselves and our planet. And they remind us that the value of our possessions pales in comparison to that of the ties we share with family, friends, and community. From children’s stories to classic works of literature, the written word allows us to see the world from new perspectives. It helps us understand what it means to be human and what it means to be American. During Read Across America Day, let us celebrate, rediscover, and engage our children in this wonderful pastime. NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 3, 2014, as Read Across America Day. I call upon children, families, educators, librarians, public officials, and all the people of the United States to observe this day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:53 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD4.SGM 07MRD4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with D4 12936 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents

[FR Doc. 2014–05080 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Billing code 3295–F4

VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:53 Mar 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD4.SGM 07MRD4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with D4 OB#1.EPS 12937

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 45

Friday, March 7, 2014

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Law, Legislation, and Regulations collection amendments to OMB for its contains regulatory documents having general Division, AGC–200, Federal Aviation review. applicability and legal effect, most of which Administration, 800 Independence On January 9, 2014, OMB approved are keyed to and codified in the Code of Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; the information collection request. The Federal Regulations, which is published under telephone (202) 267–3073; email OMB control number is 2120–0739. 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. [email protected]. Technical Amendment The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of The FAA lists OMB control numbers new books are listed in the first FEDERAL Background assigned to its information collection REGISTER issue of each week. On November 12, 2013, the FAA activities in 14 CFR 11.201(b). published a final rule entitled Accordingly, this technical amendment ‘‘Qualification, Service and Use of updates 14 CFR 11.201(b) to display DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Crewmembers and Aircraft Dispatchers’’ OMB control number 2120–0739 (78 FR 67800). This final rule revises the associated with the information Federal Aviation Administration training requirements for pilots in air collection activities in the final rule, carrier operations. The regulations Qualification, Service and Use of 14 CFR Part 11 enhance air carrier pilot training Crewmembers and Aircraft Dispatchers. [Docket No. FAA–2008–0677; Amdt. No. 11– programs by emphasizing the See 78 FR 67800. 56] development of pilots’ manual handling Because this amendment is technical RIN 2120–AJ00 skills and adding safety-critical tasks in nature and results in no substantive such as recovery from stall and upset. change, the FAA finds that the notice Qualification, Service, and Use of The final rule also requires enhanced and public procedures under 5 U.S.C. Crewmembers and Aircraft runway safety training and pilot 553(b) are unnecessary. For the same Dispatchers monitoring training to be incorporated reason, the FAA finds good cause exists into existing requirements for scenario- under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make the AGENCY: Federal Aviation based flight training and requires air amendment effective in less than 30 Administration, DOT. carriers to implement remedial training days. ACTION: Final rule; technical programs for pilots. The FAA expects amendment. these changes to contribute to a List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 11 reduction in aviation accidents. Administrative practice and SUMMARY: On November 12, 2013, the Additionally, the final rule revises procedure, Reporting and recordkeeping FAA published a final rule entitled recordkeeping requirements for requirements. ‘‘Qualification, Service and Use of communications between the flightcrew The Amendment Crewmembers and Aircraft Dispatchers’’ and dispatch; ensures that personnel which will result in new information identified as flight attendants have In consideration of the foregoing the collection requirements. This technical completed flight attendant training and Federal Aviation Administration amendment updates the FAA’s list of qualification requirements; provides amends Chapter I of Title 14 Code of OMB control numbers to display the civil enforcement authority for making Federal Regulations as follows: control number associated with the fraudulent statements; and, provides a approved information collection number of conforming and technical PART 11—GENERAL RULEMAKING activities in the ‘‘Qualification, Service changes to existing air carrier PROCEDURES and Use of Crewmembers and Aircraft crewmember training and qualification ■ Dispatchers’’ final rule. requirements. The final rule also 1. The authority citation for part 11 is DATES: Effective March 12, 2014. includes provisions that provide revised to read as follows: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For opportunities for air carriers to modify Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101, technical questions concerning this training program requirements for 40103, 40105, 40109, 40113, 44110, 44502, action, contact Nancy Lauck Claussen, flightcrew members when the air carrier 44701–44702, 44711, and 46102. Air Transportation Division, AFS–200, operates multiple aircraft types with ■ 2. In § 11.201 in paragraph (b), revise Federal Aviation Administration, 800 similar design and flight handling the entry to Part 121 to read as follows: Independence Avenue SW., characteristics. Washington, DC 20591; telephone: 202– This final rule will result in new § 11.201 Office of Management and Budget 267–9991; email: nancy.l.claussen@ information collection requirements. As (OMB) control numbers assigned under the faa.gov. For legal questions concerning required by the Paperwork Reduction Paperwork Reduction Act. this action, contact Sara Mikolop, Office Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), the * * * * * of the Chief Counsel—International FAA submitted these information (b) * * *

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12938 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

14 CFR part or section identified and described Current OMB control number

*******

Part 121 ...... 2120–0008, 2120–0028, 2120–0535, 2120–0571, 2120–0600, 2120– 0606, 2120–0614, 2120–0616, 2120–0631, 2120–0651, 2120–0653, 2120–0691, 2120–0702, 2120–0739

*******

Issued in Washington, DC, under the administrative, civil, and criminal Section 201 of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811, authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f) and sanctions applicable to schedule I provides the Attorney General with the 44701(a) on February 28, 2014. controlled substances will be imposed authority to temporarily place a Lirio Liu, on persons who handle (manufacture, substance into schedule I of the CSA for Director, Office of Rulemaking. distribute, import, export, engage in two years without regard to the [FR Doc. 2014–04902 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] research, conduct instructional requirements of 21 U.S.C. 811(b) if he BILLING CODE 4910–13–P activities, and possess), or propose to finds that such action is necessary to handle these synthetic cathinones. avoid an imminent hazard to the public DATES: This final order is effective safety. 21 U.S.C. 811(h). In addition, if DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE March 7, 2014. proceedings to control a substance are FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: initiated under 21 U.S.C. 811(a)(1), the Drug Enforcement Administration Ruth A. Carter, Office of Diversion Attorney General may extend the Control, Drug Enforcement temporary scheduling for up to one 21 CFR Part 1308 Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 year. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(2). Where the necessary findings are [Docket No. DEA–386] Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152, Telephone (202) 598–6812. made, a substance may be temporarily scheduled if it is not listed in any other Schedules of Controlled Substances: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: schedule under section 202 of the CSA, Temporary Placement of 10 Synthetic Legal Authority 21 U.S.C. 812, or if there is no Cathinones Into Schedule I The DEA implements and enforces exemption or approval in effect for the AGENCY: Drug Enforcement titles II and III of the Comprehensive substance under section 505 of the Administration, Department of Justice. Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ACTION: Final order. of 1970, as amended. Titles II and III are (FDCA), 21 U.S.C. 355. 21 U.S.C. referred to as the ‘‘Controlled 811(h)(1); 21 CFR part 1308. The SUMMARY: The Deputy Administrator of Substances Act’’ and the ‘‘Controlled Attorney General has delegated his the Drug Enforcement Administration Substances Import and Export Act,’’ authority under 21 U.S.C. 811 to the (DEA) is issuing this final order to respectively, and are collectively Administrator of the DEA, who in turn temporarily schedule 10 synthetic referred to as the ‘‘Controlled has delegated her authority to the cathinones into schedule I pursuant to Substances Act’’ or the ‘‘CSA’’ for the Deputy Administrator of the DEA. 28 the temporary scheduling provisions of purpose of this action. 21 U.S.C. 801– CFR 0.100, Appendix to Subpart R of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). 971. The DEA publishes the Part 0, Sec. 12. The 10 substances are: 4-methyl-N- implementing regulations for these Background ethylcathinone (‘‘4-MEC’’); 4-methyl- statutes in title 21 of the Code of Federal Section 201(h)(4) of the CSA (21 alpha-pyrrolidinopropiophenone (‘‘4- Regulations (CFR), parts 1300 to 1321. U.S.C. 811(h)(4)) requires the Deputy MePPP’’); alpha- The CSA and its implementing Administrator to notify the Secretary of pyrrolidinopentiophenone (‘‘a-PVP’’); 1- regulations are designed to prevent, the Department of Health and Human (1,3-benzodioxol-5-yl)-2- detect, and eliminate the diversion of Services (HHS) of his intention to (methylamino)butan-1-one (‘‘butylone’’); controlled substances and listed temporarily place a substance into 2-(methylamino)-1-phenylpentan-1-one chemicals into the illicit market while schedule I of the CSA.1 The Deputy (‘‘pentedrone’’); 1-(1,3-benzodioxol-5- providing for the legitimate medical, Administrator transmitted notice of his yl)-2-(methylamino)pentan-1-one scientific, research, and industrial needs intent to place 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, (‘‘pentylone’’); 4-fluoro-N- of the United States. Controlled butylone, pentedrone, pentylone, 4- methylcathinone (‘‘4–FMC’’); 3-fluoro- substances have the potential for abuse FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, and a-PBP N-methylcathinone (‘‘3–FMC’’); 1- and dependence and are controlled to into schedule I on a temporary basis to (naphthalen-2-yl)-2-(pyrrolidin-1- protect the public health and safety. yl)pentan-1-one (‘‘naphyrone’’); and Under the CSA, controlled substances 1 Because the Secretary of the HHS has delegated alpha-pyrrolidinobutiophenone (‘‘a- are classified into one of five schedules to the Assistant Secretary for Health of the HHS the PBP’’). This action is based on a finding based upon their potential for abuse, authority to make domestic drug scheduling by the Deputy Administrator that the their currently accepted medical use, recommendations, for purposes of this Final Order, placement of these synthetic cathinones and the degree of dependence the all subsequent references to ‘‘Secretary’’ have been replaced with ‘‘Assistant Secretary.’’ As set forth in and their optical, positional, and substance may cause. 21 U.S.C. 812. The a memorandum of understanding entered into by geometric isomers, salts and salts of initial schedules of controlled HHS, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and isomers into schedule I of the CSA is substances established by Congress are the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), FDA acts as the lead agency within HHS in carrying out necessary to avoid an imminent hazard found at 21 U.S.C. 812(c), and the the Assistant Secretary’s scheduling responsibilities to the public safety. As a result of this current list of all scheduled substances under the CSA, with the concurrence of NIDA. 50 order, the regulatory controls and is published at 21 CFR part 1308. FR 9518, Mar. 8, 1985.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12939

the Assistant Secretary by letter dated use in treatment in the United States, cleaner,’’ ‘‘stain remover,’’ ‘‘plant food November 7, 2013. The Assistant and a lack of accepted safety for use or fertilizer,’’ ‘‘insect repellants,’’ or Secretary responded to this notice by under medical supervision. ‘‘bath salts.’’ These products are sold at letter dated December 4, 2013, and smoke shops, head shops, convenience Synthetic Cathinones advised that based on review by the stores, adult book stores, and gas FDA, there are currently no Synthetic cathinones are b-keto- stations and can also be purchased on investigational new drug applications or phenethylamine derivatives of the larger the Internet. These substances are approved new drug applications for 4- phenethylamine structural class commonly encountered in the form of MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, (amphetamines, cathinones, 2C powders, crystals, resins, tablets, and pentedrone, pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, compounds, aminoindanes, etc.). capsules. naphyrone, or a-PBP. The Assistant Synthetic cathinones share a core From January 2010 through December Secretary also stated that the HHS has phenethylamine structure with 2013, according to the System to no objection to the temporary placement substitutions at the b-position, a- Retrieve Information from Drug of 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, position, phenyl ring, or nitrogen atom. Evidence 2 (STRIDE) data, there are 377 pentedrone, pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, The addition of a beta-keto (b-keto) exhibits for 4-MEC; 125 exhibits for 4- naphyrone, and a-PBP into schedule I of substituent (i.e., carbonyl (C=O)) to the MePPP; 689 exhibits for a-PVP; 75 the CSA. phenethylamine core structure along exhibits for butylone; 304 exhibits for The DEA has taken into consideration with substitutions on the alpha (a) pentedrone; 121 exhibits for pentylone; the Assistant Secretary’s comments as carbon (C) atom or the nitrogen (N) atom 37 exhibits for FMC 3; 24 exhibits for required by 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4). As 4- produce a variety of substances called naphyrone; and 37 exhibits for a-PBP. MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, cathinones or synthetic cathinones. From January 2010 through December pentedrone, pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, Many synthetic cathinones produce 2013, the National Forensic Laboratory naphyrone, and a-PBP are not currently pharmacological effects substantially Information System 4 (NFLIS) registered listed in any schedule under the CSA, similar to the schedule I substances 9,113 reports containing these synthetic and as no exemptions or approvals are cathinone, methcathinone, and 3,4- cathinones (4-MEC—1,952 reports; 4- in effect for 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, methylenedioxymethamphetamine MePPP—289 reports; a-PVP—4,536 butylone, pentedrone, pentylone, 4- (MDMA) and schedule II stimulants reports; butylone—495 reports; FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, and a-PBP amphetamine, methamphetamine, and pentedrone—1,167 reports; pentylone— under section 505 of the FDCA, 21 cocaine. 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, 238 reports; FMC 5—292 reports; U.S.C. 355, the conditions of 21 U.S.C. butylone, pentedrone, pentylone, 4- naphyrone—44 reports; a-PBP—100 811(h)(1) have been satisfied. As FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, and a-PBP are reports) across 42 States. required by 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1)(A), a synthetic cathinones and are notice of intent to temporarily schedule structurally and pharmacologically Factor 4. History and Current Pattern of these 10 synthetic cathinones was similar to amphetamine, MDMA, Abuse published in the Federal Register on cathinone, and other related substances. 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, January 28, 2014. 79 FR 4429. Accordingly, these synthetic cathinone pentedrone, pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, To find that placing a substance substances share substantial similarities naphyrone, and a-PBP are synthetic temporarily into schedule I of the CSA with schedule I and schedule II cathinones that emerged on the United is necessary to avoid an imminent substances with respect to desired and States’ illicit drug market around the hazard to the public safety, the Deputy adverse effects. In general, desired time of the temporary scheduling of Administrator is required to consider effects reported by abusers of synthetic mephedrone, MDPV, and methylone on three of the eight factors set forth in cathinone substances include euphoria, October 21, 2011. 76 FR 65371. section 201(c) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. sense of well-being, increased Mephedrone and MDPV were 811(c): The substance’s history and sociability, energy, empathy, increased permanently placed in schedule I on current pattern of abuse; the scope, alertness, and improved concentration July 9, 2012, by the Food and Drug duration, and significance of abuse; and and focus. Abusers also report Administration Safety and Innovation what, if any, risk there is to the public experiencing unwanted effects such as Act (Pub. L. 112–144), and methylone health. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(3). tremor, vomiting, agitation, sweating, was permanently placed in schedule I Consideration of these factors includes fever, and chest pain. Other adverse or by the DEA on April 12, 2013 (78 FR actual abuse, diversion from legitimate toxic effects that have been reported 21818). These synthetic cathinone channels, and clandestine importation, with the abuse of synthetic cathinones substances, like the schedule I synthetic manufacture, or distribution. 21 U.S.C. include tachycardia, hypertension, cathinones (mephedrone, methylone, 811(h)(3). hyperthermia, mydriasis, and MDPV), are promoted as being a A substance meeting the statutory rhabdomyolysis, hyponatremia, ‘‘legal’’ alternative to cocaine, requirements for temporary scheduling seizures, altered mental status methamphetamine, and MDMA. may only be placed in schedule I. 21 (paranoia, hallucinations, delusions), Products that contain 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, U.S.C. 811(h)(1). Substances in schedule and even death. These synthetic I are those that have a high potential for cathinone substances have no known 2 STRIDE is a database of drug exhibits sent to the abuse, no currently accepted medical medical use in the United States but DEA laboratories for analysis. Exhibits from the use in treatment in the United States, evidence demonstrates that these database are from the DEA, other Federal agencies, and a lack of accepted safety for use substances are being abused by and some local law enforcement agencies. STRIDE data was queried on 2/5/2014 by date submitted to under medical supervision. 21 U.S.C. individuals. There have been Federal forensic laboratories. 812(b)(1). Available data and documented reports of emergency room 3 FMC refers to both 3-FMC and 4-FMC. information for 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a- admissions and deaths associated with 4 NFLIS is a national drug forensic laboratory PVP, butylone, pentedrone, pentylone, the abuse of synthetic cathinone reporting system that systematically collects results 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, and a-PBP substances. from drug chemistry analyses conducted by State and local forensic laboratories across the country. indicate that these 10 synthetic Products that contain synthetic NFLIS State and local forensic drug reports were cathinones have a high potential for cathinones have been falsely marketed queried on 2/6/2014. abuse, no currently accepted medical as ‘‘research chemicals,’’ ‘‘jewelry 5 FMC refers to both 3-FMC and 4-FMC.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12940 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, high school) used synthetic cathinone encounters; a-PVP—40 encounters; pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, substances in 2012. Similarly, the use of butylone—21 encounters; pentedrone— and a-PBP are falsely marketed as synthetic cathinone substances among 18 encounters; pentylone—10 ‘‘research chemicals,’’ ‘‘jewelry 8th, 10th, and 12th grade students, and encounters; FMC 9—13 encounters; cleaner,’’ ‘‘stain remover,’’ ‘‘plant food young adults (non-college peers aged 19 naphyrone—3 encounters; a-PBP—11 or fertilizer,’’ ‘‘insect repellants,’’ or to 28-years-old) was 0.8%, 0.6%, 1.3%, encounters), thus indicating the appeal ‘‘bath salts.’’ They are sold at smoke and 0.8%, respectively. of these substances. Most of the shops, head shops, convenience stores, shipments of these synthetic cathinones adult book stores, and gas stations, and Factor 5. Scope, Duration and originated overseas and were destined can also be purchased on the Internet Significance of Abuse for delivery throughout the United under a variety of product names (e.g., 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, States to States including Arizona, ‘‘White Dove,’’ ‘‘Explosion,’’ and pentedrone, pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, ‘‘Tranquility’’). They are commonly naphyrone, and a-PBP, like the Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Michigan, encountered in the form of powders, schedule I cathinones mephedrone, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New crystals, resins, tablets, and capsules. methylone, and MDPV, are popular Jersey, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, The packages of these commercial recreational drugs. Evidence that these Texas, Virginia, Washington, and products usually contain the warning synthetic cathinone substances are Wyoming. ‘‘not for human consumption.’’ being abused is indicated by law Concerns over the abuse of these Information from published scientific enforcement encounters of these synthetic cathinone substances have studies indicates that the most common substances. Forensic laboratories have prompted many States to regulate them. routes of administration for synthetic analyzed drug exhibits received from As of June 24, 2013, more than half of cathinone substances is ingestion by State, local, and Federal law the States in the United States have swallowing capsules or tablets or nasal enforcement agencies and confirmed the emergency scheduled or enacted insufflation by snorting the powder. presence of 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, legislation placing regulatory controls Other methods of intake include butylone, pentedrone, pentylone, 4- on some or many of the 10 synthetic intravenous or intramuscular injection, FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, or a-PBP in cathinones that are the subject of this rectal administration, and swallowing these exhibits. final order. In addition, due to the use via ingestion by ‘‘bombing’’ (wrapping a STRIDE registered 1,789 drug exhibits of synthetic cathinones by service dose of powder in paper). pertaining to the trafficking, distribution members, the United States Armed There is evidence that these synthetic and abuse of 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, Forces has prohibited the use of cathinone substances are abused alone butylone, pentedrone, pentylone, 4- synthetic cathinones for intoxication or ingested with other substances FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, and a-PBP purposes. including other synthetic cathinones, from January 2010 to December 2013.7 pharmaceutical agents, or other Factor 6. What, If Any, Risk There Is Specifically, in 2010, STRIDE contains to the Public Health recreational substances. Substances four reports related to 4-MEC and none found in combination with 4-MEC, 4- for the other nine substances. However, Available evidence on the overall MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, in 2011, there were 216 reports related public health risks associated with the pentylone, 4-FMC, or naphyrone are: to these 10 substances, and in 2012, use of synthetic cathinones indicates a Other synthetic cathinones (e.g., there were 1,314 reports. In 2013, there that 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, -PVP, butylone, methylone and MDPV), common cutting were 255 reports. pentedrone, pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, agents (e.g., lidocaine, caffeine, NFLIS registered over 9,000 reports naphyrone, and a-PBP can cause acute lignocaine, ephedrine, etc.), or other from State and local forensic health problems leading to emergency recreational substances (e.g., cocaine, laboratories identifying these substances department admissions, violent methamphetamine, and amphetamine). in drug-related exhibits for the period behaviors causing harm to self or others, or death. For example, individuals have Evidence from poison centers and from January 2010 to December 2013, presented at emergency departments published reports suggest that the across 42 States. Specifically, in 2010, following exposure to some of these primary users of synthetic cathinones NFLIS registered 13 reports from 5 are youths and young adults. Synthetic synthetic cathinone substances or States containing many of these cathinone exposures reported to the products containing them. In addition, synthetic cathinone substances.8 In Texas Poison Center Network during products containing these synthetic 2011, there were 800 reports from 32 2010 and 2011 involved mostly cathinone substances often do not bear States related to these substances adolescents (12 to 19-years-old) and labeling information regarding their registered in NFLIS, in 2012 there were young adults (mean age was 30-years- ingredients and, if they do, they may not 5,519 reports from 41 States, and in old). A survey of college students list the active synthetic ingredients or 2013 there were 2,781 reports from 42 reported that the lifetime use (used at identify the health risks and potential States. least once) of synthetic cathinones hazards associated with these products. Additionally, large seizures of these among college students (at a large Acute effects of these substances are substances have occurred by the United Southeastern United States university) those typical of sympathomimetic States Customs and Border Protection is 25 out of 2,349 students surveyed. A agents (e.g., cocaine, methamphetamine, (CBP). At selected United States ports of national survey on drug use by the and amphetamine) and include, among entry, CBP encountered several Monitoring the Future (MTF) 6 research other effects, tachycardia, headache, shipments of products from April 2010 program showed that 0.2% of full-time bruxism (teeth grinding), palpitations, to November 2013 containing these college students (one to four years past agitation, anxiety, insomnia, mydriasis, synthetic cathinone substances (4- tremor, fever or sweating, and MEC—78 encounters; 4-MePPP—8 6 MTF is a research program conducted by the hypertension. Other effects, with public University of Michigan’s Institute for Social health risk implications, that have been Research under grants from NIDA. MTF tracks drug 7 STRIDE data was queried on 2/5/2014 by date use trends among American adolescents in the 8th, submitted to Federal forensic laboratories. reported from the use of synthetic 10th, and 12th grades and high school graduates 8 NFLIS State and local forensic drug reports were into adulthood by conducting nationwide surveys. queried on 2/6/2014. 9 FMC refers to both 3-FMC and 4-FMC.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12941

cathinone substances include vomiting, November 7, 2013, notified the 1. Registration. Any person who palpitations, chest pain, hyperthermia, Assistant Secretary of the DEA’s handles (manufactures, distributes, rhabdomyolysis, hyponatremia, intention to temporarily place these 10 imports, exports, engages in research, seizures, and altered mental status synthetic cathinones in schedule I. conducts instructional activities with, or (paranoia, hallucinations, and possesses), or desires to handle, 4-MEC, Conclusion delusions). Finally, the possibility of 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, death for individuals abusing 4-MEC, 4- In accordance with the provisions of pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, section 201(h) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. or a-PBP, must be registered with the pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, 811(h), the Deputy Administrator DEA to conduct such activities pursuant and a-PBP indicates that these considered available data and to 21 U.S.C. 822, 823, 957, and 958 and substances are serious public health information, herein set forth the in accordance with 21 CFR parts 1301 threats. Some of these synthetic grounds for his determination that it is and 1312 as of March 7, 2014. Any cathinone substances have been directly necessary to temporarily place 10 person who currently handles 4-MEC, 4- or indirectly implicated in the death of synthetic cathinones, 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, individuals. For example, a 24-year-old a-PVP, pentedrone, pentylone, 4-FMC, pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, female died after ingesting two capsules 3-FMC, naphyrone, and a-PBP into or a-PBP, and is not registered with the of what she believed to be ‘‘Ecstasy’’ but schedule I of the CSA, and finds that DEA, must submit an application for was subsequently confirmed to be a placement of these synthetic cathinones registration and may not continue to mixture of methylone and butylone. The into schedule I of the CSA is warranted handle 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, cause of death determined by the in order to avoid an imminent hazard to butylone, pentedrone, pentylone, 4- medical examiner was serotonin the public safety. FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, or a-PBP as of syndrome secondary to methylone and Because the Deputy Administrator March 7, 2014, unless the DEA has butylone ingestion. A 21-year-old male hereby finds that it is necessary to approved that application for who ingested butylone for suicidal temporarily place these synthetic registration, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 822, intentions died after he developed cathinones into schedule I to avoid an 823, 957, 958, and in accordance with seizures and suffered a cardiac and imminent hazard to the public safety, 21 CFR parts 1301 and 1312. Retail sales respiratory arrest. The cause of death the final order temporarily scheduling of schedule I controlled substances to was reported as multi-organ failure these substances will be effective on the the general public are not allowed under resulting from malignant serotonin date of publication in the Federal the CSA. syndrome. Register, and will be in effect for a 2. Security. 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, period of two years, with a possible butylone, pentedrone, pentylone, 4- Finding of Necessity of Schedule I extension of one additional year, FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, and a-PBP are Placement To Avoid Imminent Hazard pending completion of the regular subject to schedule I security to Public Safety (permanent) scheduling process. 21 requirements and must be handled and Based on the above summarized data U.S.C. 811(h)(1) and (2). stored pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 821, 823, and information, the continued The CSA sets forth specific criteria for 871(b), and in accordance with 21 CFR uncontrolled manufacture, distribution, scheduling a drug or other substance. 1301.71–1301.93, as of March 7, 2014. importation, exportation, and abuse of Regular scheduling actions in 3. Labeling and Packaging. All labels 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, accordance with 21 U.S.C. 811(a) are and labeling for commercial containers pentedrone, pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, subject to formal rulemaking procedures of 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, naphyrone, and a-PBP pose an done ‘‘on the record after opportunity pentedrone, pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, imminent hazard to the public safety. for a hearing’’ conducted pursuant to naphyrone, and a-PBP must be in The DEA is not aware of any currently the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 556 and 557. compliance with 21 U.S.C. 825, 958(e), accepted medical uses for these 21 U.S.C. 811. The regular scheduling and be in accordance with 21 CFR part synthetic cathinones in the United process of formal rulemaking affords 1302 as of March 7, 2014. Current DEA States. A substance meeting the interested parties with appropriate registrants shall have 30 calendar days statutory requirements for temporary process and the government with any from March 7, 2014, to comply with all scheduling, 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1), may additional relevant information needed labeling and packaging requirements. only be placed in schedule I. Substances to make a determination. Final 4. Inventory. Every DEA registrant in schedule I are those that have a high decisions that conclude the regular who possesses any quantity of 4-MEC, potential for abuse, no currently scheduling process of formal 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, accepted medical use in treatment in the rulemaking are subject to judicial pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, United States, and a lack of accepted review. 21 U.S.C. 877. Temporary or a-PBP on the effective date of this safety for use under medical scheduling orders are not subject to order, must take an inventory of all supervision. 21 U.S.C. 812(b). Based on judicial review. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(6). stocks of these substances on hand as of available data and information for 4- March 7, 2014, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, Requirements for Handling 827, 958, and in accordance with 21 pentedrone, pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, Upon the effective date of this final CFR 1304.03, 1304.04, and 1304.11(a) naphyrone, and a-PBP, the Deputy order, 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, and (d). Current DEA registrants shall Administrator has made the butylone, pentedrone, pentylone, 4- have 30 calendar days from the effective determination that these 10 synthetic FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, and a-PBP date of this order to be in compliance cathinones have a high potential for become subject to the regulatory with all inventory requirements. abuse, no currently accepted medical controls and administrative, civil, and After the initial inventory, every DEA use in treatment in the United States, criminal sanctions applicable to the registrant must take an inventory of all and a lack of accepted safety for use manufacture, distribution, importing, controlled substances (including 4-MEC, under medical supervision. As required exporting, research, conduct of 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, by section 201(h)(4) of the CSA, 21 instructional activities, and possession pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, U.S.C. 811(h)(4), the Deputy of schedule I controlled substances and a-PBP) on hand on a biennial basis, Administrator through a letter dated including the following: pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 827, 958, and in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12942 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

accordance with 21 CFR 1304.03, in the Federal Register of the intention in the public interest to schedule these 1304.04, and 1304.11. to issue such order and the grounds substances immediately because they 5. Records. All DEA registrants must upon which such order is to be issued, pose a public health risk. This maintain records with respect to 4-MEC, and (2) the date that notice of the temporary scheduling action is taken 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, proposed temporary scheduling order is pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 811(h), which is pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, transmitted to the Assistant Secretary. specifically designed to enable the DEA or a-PBP pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 827, 958, 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1). to act in an expeditious manner to avoid and in accordance with 21 CFR parts Inasmuch as section 201(h) of the an imminent hazard to the public safety 1304, 1307, and 1312 as of March 7, CSA directs that temporary scheduling from new or designer drugs or abuse of 2014. Current DEA registrants actions be issued by order and sets forth those drugs. 21 U.S.C. 811(h) exempts authorized to handle 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, the procedures by which such orders are the temporary scheduling order from a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, to be issued, the DEA believes that the standard notice and comment pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, notice and comment requirements of rulemaking procedures to ensure that or a-PBP shall have 30 calendar days section 553 of the Administrative the process moves swiftly. For the same from the effective date of this order to Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553, do reasons that underlie 21 U.S.C. 811(h), be in compliance with all recordkeeping not apply to this temporary scheduling that is, the DEA’s need to move quickly requirements. action. In the alternative, even assuming to place these substances into schedule 6. Reports. All DEA registrants who that this action might be subject to I because they pose a threat to the manufacture or distribute 4-MEC, 4- section 553 of the APA, the Deputy public safety, it would be contrary to the MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, Administrator finds that there is good public interest to delay implementation pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, cause to forgo the notice and comment of the temporary scheduling order. or a-PBP must submit reports pursuant requirements of section 553, as any Therefore, in accordance with section to 21 U.S.C. 827 and in accordance with further delays in the process for 808(2) of the CRA, this order shall take 21 CFR 1304.33 as of March 7, 2014. issuance of temporary scheduling orders effect immediately upon its publication. 7. Order Forms. All registrants who would be impracticable and contrary to distribute 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, the public interest in view of the List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1308 butylone, pentedrone, pentylone, 4- manifest urgency to avoid an imminent Administrative practice and FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, or a-PBP must hazard to the public safety. Further, the procedure, Drug traffic control, comply with order form requirements DEA believes that this temporary Reporting and recordkeeping pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 828 and in scheduling action final order is not a requirements. accordance with 21 CFR part 1305 as of ‘‘rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 601(2), For the reasons set out above, 21 CFR March 7, 2014. and, accordingly, is not subject to the part 1308 is amended as follows: 8. Importation and Exportation. All requirements of the Regulatory importation and exportation of 4-MEC, Flexibility Act (RFA). The requirements PART 1308—SCHEDULES OF 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, for the preparation of an initial CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, regulatory flexibility analysis in 5 U.S.C. or a-PBP must be in compliance with 21 603(a) are not applicable where, as here, ■ 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR U.S.C. 952, 953, 957, 958, and in the DEA is not required by section 553 Part 1308 continues to read as follows: accordance with 21 CFR part 1312 as of of the APA or any other law to publish Authority: 21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), March 7, 2014. a general notice of proposed unless otherwise noted. 9. Quota. Only registered rulemaking. ■ 2. Amend § 1308.11 by adding new manufacturers may manufacture 4-MEC, Additionally, this action is not a paragraphs (h)(19) through (h)(28), to 4-MePPP, a-PVP, butylone, pentedrone, significant regulatory action as defined read as follows: pentylone, 4-FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, by Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory or a-PBP in accordance with a quota Planning and Review), section 3(f), and, § 1308.11 Schedule I. assigned pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 826 and accordingly, this action has not been * * * * * in accordance with 21 CFR part 1303. reviewed by the Office of Management (h)*** 10. Criminal Liability. Any activity and Budget (OMB). (19) 4-methyl-N-ethylcathinone, its involving 4-MEC, 4-MePPP, a-PVP, This action will not have substantial optical, positional, and geometric butylone, pentedrone, pentylone, 4- direct effects on the States, on the isomers, salts and salts of isomers— FMC, 3-FMC, naphyrone, or a-PBP not relationship between the national 1249 (Other names: 4-MEC; 2- authorized by, or in violation of the government and the States, or on the (ethylamino)-1-(4- CSA, occurring as of March 7, 2014, is distribution of power and methylphenyl)propan-1-one) unlawful, and may subject the person to responsibilities among the various (20) 4-methyl-alpha- administrative, civil, and/or criminal levels of government. Therefore, in pyrrolidinopropiophenone, its optical, sanctions. accordance with Executive Order 13132 positional, and geometric isomers, salts (Federalism) it is determined that this and salts of isomers—7498 (Other Regulatory Matters action does not have sufficient names: 4-MePPP; MePPP; 4-methyl-a- Section 201(h) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. federalism implications to warrant the pyrrolidinopropiophenone; 1-(4- 811(h), provides for an expedited preparation of a Federalism Assessment. methylphenyl)-2-(pyrrolidin-1-yl)- temporary scheduling action where Pursuant to section 808(2) of the propan-1-one) such action is necessary to avoid an Congressional Review Act (CRA), ‘‘any (21) alpha-pyrrolidinopentiophenone, imminent hazard to the public safety. rule for which an agency for good cause its optical, positional, and geometric As provided in this subsection, the finds . . . that notice and public isomers, salts and salts of isomers— Attorney General may, by order, procedure thereon are impracticable, 7545 (Other names: a-PVP; a- schedule a substance in schedule I on a unnecessary, or contrary to the public pyrrolidinovalerophenone; 1-phenyl-2- temporary basis. Such an order may not interest, shall take effect at such time as (pyrrolidin-1-yl)pentan-1-one) be issued before the expiration of 30 the Federal agency promulgating the (22) Butylone, its optical, positional, days from (1) the publication of a notice rule determines.’’ 5 U.S.C. 808(2). It is and geometric isomers, salts and salts of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12943

isomers—7541 (Other names: bk-MBDB; applies the previously approved to which this final rule applies, 1-(1,3-benzodioxol-5-yl)-2- exemptions to the newly revised and therefore the reasons for the exemptions (methylamino)butan-1-one) renamed systems of records. are not repeated here. (23) Pentedrone, its optical, DATES: Effective April 7, 2014. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 5 positional, and geometric isomers, salts ADDRESSES: Please submit comments to U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), the head of an agency and salts of isomers—1246 (Other Anne Jensen, Tax Law Specialist, Office may promulgate rules to exempt a names: a-methylaminovalerophenone; of Privacy, Governmental Liaison, and system of records from certain 2-(methylamino)-1-phenylpentan-1-one) Disclosure, 1111 Constitution Avenue provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a if the system (24) Pentylone, its optical, positional, NW., Room 1621, Washington, DC is investigatory material compiled for and geometric isomers, salts and salts of 20224. Comments will be made law enforcement purposes. The IRS is isomers—7542 (Other names: bk-MBDP; available for inspection at the IRS hereby giving notice of a final rule to 1-(1,3-benzodioxol-5-yl)-2- Freedom of Information Reading Room exempt ‘‘Treasury/IRS 46.050, (methylamino)pentan-1-one) (Room 1621), at the above address. The Automated Information Analysis and (25) 4-fluoro-N-methylcathinone, its telephone number for the Reading Room Recordkeeping’’ from certain provisions optical, positional, and geometric is (202) 317–4997 (not a toll-free call). of the Privacy Act of 1974, pursuant to isomers, salts and salts of isomers— FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2). 1238 (Other names: 4-FMC; Anne Jensen, Tax Law Specialist, Office The exemptions pursuant to 5 U.S.C. flephedrone; 1-(4-fluorophenyl)-2- of Privacy, Governmental Liaison, and 552a(k)(2) are from the provisions (c)(3), (methylamino)propan-1-one) Disclosure, 1111 Constitution Avenue (d)(1)–(4), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G)–(I), and (f) (26) 3-fluoro-N-methylcathinone, its NW., Room 1621, Washington, DC because the system contains optical, positional, and geometric 20024. Ms. Jensen may be reached via investigatory material compiled for law isomers, salts and salts of isomers— telephone at (202) 317–4997 (not a toll- enforcement purposes. As published in 1233 (Other names: 3-FMC; 1-(3- free number). Part 1, Subpart C, of title 31 of the Code fluorophenyl)-2-(methylamino)propan- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 5 U.S.C. of Federal Regulations, section 1.36, 1-one) 552a(j)(2): Under 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), the these exemptions already apply to the (27) Naphyrone, its optical, head of any agency may promulgate records to which this final rule applies; positional, and geometric isomers, salts rules to exempt any system of records therefore the reasons for the exemptions and salts of isomers—1258 (Other within the agency from certain are not repeated here. names: naphthylpyrovalerone; 1- provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974 if As required by Executive Order (naphthalen-2-yl)-2-(pyrrolidin-1- the agency or component thereof that 12866, it has been determined that this yl)pentan-1-one) maintains the system performs as its final rule is not a significant regulatory (28) alpha-pyrrolidinobutiophenone, principal function any activities action, and therefore, does not require a its optical, positional, and geometric pertaining to the enforcement of regulatory impact analysis. isomers, salts and salts of isomers— criminal laws. Certain components of The regulation will not have a 7546 (Other names: a-PBP; 1-phenyl-2- the Department of the Treasury have as substantial direct effect on the States, on (pyrrolidin-1-yl)butan-1-one) their principal function activities the relationship between the Federal Dated: February 28, 2014. pertaining to the enforcement of Government and the States, or on the Thomas M. Harrigan, criminal laws. The IRS is hereby giving distribution of power and Deputy Administrator. notice of a final rule to exempt responsibilities among the various ‘‘Treasury/IRS 46.002, Management levels of government. Therefore, it is [FR Doc. 2014–04997 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] determined that this final rule does not BILLING CODE 4410–09–P Information System and Case Files, Criminal Investigation’’; ‘‘Treasury/IRS have federalism implications under 46.003, Confidential Informant Records, Executive Order 13132. Pursuant to the requirements of the DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Criminal Investigation’’; ‘‘Treasury/IRS 46.005, Electronic Surveillance and Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601– 612, it is hereby certified that these Office of the Secretary Monitoring Records, Criminal Investigation’’; ‘‘Treasury/IRS 46.015, regulations will not significantly affect a substantial number of small entities. 31 CFR Part 1 Relocated Witness Records, Criminal Investigation’’; and ‘‘Treasury/IRS The final rule imposes no duties or RIN 1545–AC47 46.050, Automated Information obligations on small entities. In accordance with the provisions of Privacy Act, Implementation Analysis and Recordkeeping, Criminal Investigation,’’ from certain provisions the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Department of the Treasury has AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service, of the Privacy Act of 1974, pursuant to Treasury. 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) to the extent these determined that the revision of the systems or records notices would not ACTION: Final rule. records capture criminal matters; otherwise 5 U.S.C. 552(k)(2) applies as impose new recordkeeping, application, SUMMARY: In accordance with the described in subsequent sections. reporting, or other types of information requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, The exemptions pursuant to 5 U.S.C. collection requirements. as amended, the Department of the 552a(j)(2) are from the provisions 5 List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 1 Treasury gives notice of an amendment U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (4), 5 U.S.C. Privacy. to this part to reflect revisions of 552a(d)(1), (2), (3), (4), 5 U.S.C. Part 1, Subpart C of title 31 of the existing Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 552a(e)(1), (2) and (3), 5 U.S.C. Code of Federal Regulations is amended systems of records and to exempt the 552a(e)(4)(G), (H), and (I), 5 U.S.C. as follows: resulting revised systems of records 552a(e)(5) and (8), 5 U.S.C. 552a(f), and from certain provisions of the Privacy 5 U.S.C. 552a(g). As published in Part 1, PART 1—[AMENDED] Act. Criminal Investigation has revised Subpart C, of title 31 of the Code of five systems of records and deleted one Federal Regulations, section 1.36, these ■ 1. The authority citation for part 1 system of records. This final rule exemptions already apply to the records continues to read as follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12944 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 and 31 U.S.C. 321. ■ ii. Remove the entry for IRS 46.009; § 1.36 Systems exempt in whole or in part Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552, as ■ iii. Revise the entry for IRS 46.015; from provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a and this amended. Subpart C also issued under 5 ■ iv. Remove the entry for IRS 46.022; part. U.S.C. 552a. and * * * * * ■ ■ 2. In § 1.36; v. Revise the entry for IRS 46.050. (c) * * * ■ a. In the table in paragraph (c)(1)(vii): ■ b. In the table in paragraph (g)(1)(vii), ■ i. Revise the entries for IRS 46.002, revise the entry for IRS 46.050. (1) * * * 46.003, and 46.005; The revisions read as follows: (vii) * * *

No. System name

Treasury/IRS 46.002 Management Information System and Case Files, Criminal Investigation. Treasury/IRS 46.003 Confidential Informant Records, Criminal Investigation. Treasury/IRS 46.005 Electronic Surveillance and Monitoring Records, Criminal Investigation. Treasury/IRS 46.015 Relocated Witness Records, Criminal Investigation. Treasury/IRS 46.050 Automated Information Analysis and Recordkeeping, Criminal Investigation.

* * * * * (vii) * * * (g) * * * (1) * * *

No. System name

Treasury/IRS 46.050 ...... Automated Information Analysis and Recordkeeping, Criminal Investigation.

* * * * * Power/Public Service Company of page fee will be charged for making Dated: February 20, 2014. Oklahoma (AEP/PSO) Northeastern photocopies of documents. On the day Helen Goff Foster, Power Station in Rogers County, of the visit, please check in at the EPA Oklahoma. The revisions also address Region 6 reception area on the seventh Deputy Assistant Secretary for Privacy, Transparency, and Records. the requirements of the Clean Air Act floor at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, (CAA) concerning non-interference with Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. [FR Doc. 2014–04946 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] programs to protect visibility in other BILLING CODE 4830–01–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. states. Terry Johnson (214) 665–2154, email DATES: This final rule will be effective [email protected]. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION April 7, 2014. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY ADDRESSES: EPA has established a Throughout this document whenever docket for this action under Docket ID ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 40 CFR Part 52 No. EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0227. All EPA. [EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0227; FRL–9906–93– documents in the docket are listed in Table of Contents Region 6] the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some I. What is the background for this action? Approval and Promulgation of Air information is not publicly available, II. What final action is EPA taking? Quality Implementation Plans; e.g., Confidential Business Information III. Response to Comments Oklahoma; Regional Haze and or other information the disclosure of IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Interstate Transport Affecting which is restricted by statute. Certain Visibility; State Implementation Plan other material, such as copyrighted I. What is the background for this Revisions; Revised BART material, will be publicly available only action? Determination for American Electric in hard copy. Publicly available docket The background for today’s final rule Power/Public Service Company of materials are available either is discussed in detail in our August 21, Oklahoma Northeastern Power Station electronically in http:// 2013 proposal (see 78 FR 51686). The Units 3 and 4 www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at comment period was open for 30 days, AGENCY: Environmental Protection the Air Planning Section (6PD–L), and 273 comments were received, Agency (EPA). Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 including five comment letters opposed ACTION: Final rule. Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas to the proposed action. 75202–2733. The file will be made II. What final action is EPA taking? SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection available by appointment for public Agency (EPA) is taking final action to inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review We are approving Oklahoma’s June approve revisions to the Oklahoma State Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. 20, 2013 SIP revision submittal Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal (‘‘Oklahoma RH SIP revision’’), which by the Oklahoma Department of holidays. Contact the person listed in provides a revised BART determination Environmental Quality (ODEQ) to EPA the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for Units 3 and 4 of AEP/PSO’s on June 20, 2013, which address revised paragraph below or Mr. Bill Deese at Northeastern Power Station with Best Available Retrofit Technology 214–665–7253 to make an appointment. accompanying enforceable (BART) requirements for sulfur dioxide If possible, please make the documentation. This revised SO2 BART (SO2) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) for appointment at least two working days determination includes the following Units 3 and 4 of the American Electric in advance of your visit. A 15 cent per emission control requirements and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12945

compliance schedules: (1) By January lb/MMBtu on a 30-day rolling average justified will also be counted. Finally, if 31, 2014, the facility will comply with basis with an additional limit of 716 lb/ necessary, additional emissions an interim SO2 emission limit of 0.65 lb/ hr on a 30-day rolling average basis and reductions shall be obtained via MMBtu at each unit individually on a a cap of 3,137 tpy on a 12-month rolling enforceable emission limits or control 30-day rolling average basis, with an basis. ODEQ also submitted an equipment requirements where additional SO2 limit of 3,104 lb/hr per enforceable agreement containing the necessary and submitted to EPA as a SIP unit on a 30-day rolling average basis; accelerated compliance schedule. For revision as expeditiously as practicable, (2) by December 31, 2014, the facility the revised NOX BART determination, but in no event later than the end of the will comply with a reduced interim SO2 therefore, we also are approving the first full Oklahoma legislative session emission limit of 0.60 lb/MMBtu per ‘‘PSO Regional Haze Agreement, DEQ occurring subsequent to AEP/PSO’s unit on a 12-month rolling average Case No. 10–025 (February 10, 2010),’’ submission of the evaluation and report basis, with an additional 25,097 tpy as amended by the ‘‘First Amended required by Paragraph 1(f) of combined cap for Units 3 and 4 on a 12- Regional Haze Agreement, DEQ Case Attachment A of the AEP/PSO month rolling basis; (3) the facility will No. 10–025 (March 2013),’’ because it Settlement Agreement presented in shut down one of the subject units makes enforceable the NOX BART Appendix I of the Oklahoma RH SIP (either Unit 3 or Unit 4) no later than emission limitations and schedules for revision. Moreover, any additional April 16, 2016; (4) the facility will AEP/PSO’s BART-subject units in reductions that are obtained prior to the install and operate a dry sorbent Oklahoma. 2018 Regional Haze SIP revision injection (DSI) system on the unit that In addition to approving Oklahoma’s required by 40 CFR 51.308(f) but not remains in operation past April 16, revised enforceable SO2 BART accounted for in the above-referenced 2016; (5) the unit remaining in determination for AEP/PSO modeling will be identified in the 2018 operation will comply with an SO2 Northeastern Power Station Units 3 and revision. emission limit of 0.40 lb/MMBtu on a 4, we are also taking final action to We have made the determination that 30-day rolling average basis from April approve that portion of the Oklahoma the Oklahoma RH SIP revision is 16, 2016 through December 31, 2026, RH SIP revision concerning Oklahoma’s approvable because the revision was with additional limits of 1,910 lb/hr on interstate transport obligations. With the adopted and submitted as a SIP revision a 30-day rolling average basis and 8,366 approval of this revised BART in accordance with the CAA and EPA tpy on a 12-month rolling basis (this determination for AEP/PSO regulations regarding the regional haze limit may be lowered pursuant to the Northeastern Power Station Units 3 and program and meets the CAA provisions results of an optimization study to be 4, the enforceable RH Agreement, and concerning non-interference with conducted by AEP/PSO); and (6) the an enforceable commitment, we find programs to protect visibility in other facility will incrementally decrease that the Oklahoma RH SIP as a whole states. We are taking this final action capacity utilization for the remaining addresses the requirements of the today under section 110 and part C of unit between 2021 and 2026, interstate transport provisions of CAA the CAA. As explained in our August 21, 2013 culminating with the complete section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) as applied to proposal (see 78 FR 51686), as a result shutdown of the remaining unit no later this source and its associated impacts of today’s approval action we are taking than December 31, 2026. The state’s on other states’ programs to protect action to amend the regional haze revised enforceable SO BART visibility in Class I Areas. The ODEQ’s 2 Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for requirements for Units 3 and 4 of the enforceable commitment is found in the SIP Narrative at page 10. Oklahoma at 40 CFR 52.1923. The Northeastern Power Station are Implementation of the enforceable action to amend the FIP is in a separate contained in the submitted ‘‘First commitment is only necessary if the action contained in today’s Federal Amended Regional Haze Agreement, Northeastern Power Station is not able Register. Upon the effective date of the DEQ Case No. 10–025 (March 2013)’’ to achieve the equivalent of 0.3 lbs SO2/ Federal Register notice amending the that revises the previously submitted million Btu through a combination of FIP, Units 3 and 4 of AEP/PSO’s ‘‘PSO Regional Haze Agreement, DEQ unit shutdowns and implementation of Northeastern Power Station will no Case No. 10–025 (February 10, 2010). DSI, as this level of reduction was longer be covered by the FIP. Consequently, we are approving the assumed in the multistate modeling ‘‘PSO Regional Haze Agreement, DEQ performed by the Central Regional Air III. Response to Comments Case No. 10–025 (February 10, 2010),’’ Planning Association (CENRAP) that We received a total of 273 comments, as amended by the ‘‘First Amended provided the basis for Oklahoma’s and including five comments in opposition Regional Haze Agreement, DEQ Case other Midwestern States’ SIPs. The to our proposed approval of the No. 10–025 (March 2013).’’ enforceable commitment obligates Oklahoma RH SIP revision that were We are also taking final action to ODEQ to ‘‘obtain and/or identify submitted by U.S. Representative Jim approve the following accelerated NOX additional SO2 reductions within the Bridenstine, the Oklahoma Attorney BART compliance schedule included in State of Oklahoma to the extent General, the Consumer Coalition of the submitted revised BART necessary to achieve the anticipated Oklahoma, the Oklahoma Industrial determination for Northeastern Power visibility benefits estimated’’ by the Energy Consumers, and the Quality of Station Units 3 and 4: (1) By December CENRAP. For example, any additional Service Coalition, and 268 comments in 31, 2013, the facility will comply with SO2 emissions reductions that can be support from the Sierra Club and its an emission limit of 0.23 lb/MMBtu on obtained or identified from the members in Oklahoma. Copies of the a 30-day rolling average basis with an northeast quadrant of the State will be comments are available in the docket for additional limit of 1,098 lb/hr per unit presumed to count toward the emission this rulemaking. A summary of the on a 30-day rolling average basis and a reductions necessary to achieve the issues raised in the comment letters, 9,620 tpy combined cap for both units; anticipated visibility benefits associated and our responses, follows: and (2) the unit that remains in with a 0.30 lb/MMBtu emission limit at Comment: We received several operation shall undergo further control Northeastern Power Station. Emissions comment letters containing claims that system tuning and by April 16, 2016, reductions obtained outside the ODEQ’s revised BART determination for comply with an emission limit of 0.15 northeast quadrant that are technically the AEP/PSO Northeastern Power

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12946 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Station did not consider true energy energy impacts of the various control switch, but rather because we found that impacts. These comment letters options. the installation of more stringent generally assert that ODEQ did not make We also note that AEP/PSO offered controls constituted BART. Although a reasonable BART determination the BART determination in question to EPA’s regulations do not require states because it relied upon AEP/PSO’s BART ODEQ as an alternative to our FIP, to consider a fuel switch or a shutdown analysis, which they claim failed to which indicates that the company found of an existing unit as part of their BART consider the true energy impacts of the alternative more economical, analyses, a state can certainly include compliance and the costs of compliance flexible, or consistent with its business such options in its analysis where a under the Settlement Agreement.1 The strategy. AEP/PSO’s decision to retire company voluntarily offers such commenters claim that overlooking these aging units by dates certain is one measures as a strategy for reducing that involves a variety of considerations these costs of compliance led to an emissions. that lie outside the BART analysis, Comment: We received comments incorrect determination of cost- including increasing costs of that our proposed action abandoned the effectiveness of the SO2 emissions maintenance, economics of fuels, and unit-by-unit approach to analyzing controls attributable to the early costs of compliance with non-air quality BART. These commenters reference our retirements under the Settlement requirements. Given the broad range of Technical Support Document for the Agreement. The commenters submit factors that affect a utility’s decisions proposed approval of the Oklahoma RH that early retirement of the two coal- regarding the make-up of its power SIP revision, which states that BART fired units at issue constitutes at least an plant fleet, it would not be reasonable should be a unit-by-unit analysis, and indirect energy impact that is ‘‘unusual for EPA to second-guess decisions assert that in proposing to approve or significant’’ and quantifiable and regarding the remaining useful life of ODEQ’s BART determination, EPA has therefore should have been considered facilities. Consequently, we believe that, abandoned the unit-by-unit analysis and in ODEQ’s BART analysis. The in addition to its evaluation of energy instead compared the ODEQ’s BART commenters further assert that ODEQ impacts, the State also appropriately determination involving the shutdown has concluded that the revised BART considered the remaining useful life of of a generating unit against our FIP’s determination is cost-effective based on the AEP/PSO units in determining proposed emissions control an analysis that does not include BART. technologies and related emissions replacement capacity and energy costs Regarding potential unemployment of limits. The commenters claim that in so that AEP/PSO would be required to AEP/PSO Northeastern Power Station doing, EPA has inappropriately incur due to the mandated early workers, however, we received one evaluated the closure of a unit as a retirement of the two units. Finally, comment that notes that AEP/PSO has ‘‘technology’’ and analyzed two units these commenters also submit that extraordinary resources to redeploy its together. Another commenter takes the ODEQ and EPA should have considered Northeastern Power Station employees opposite view, observing that ‘‘EPA has in their energy impacts analyses the affected by the Settlement Agreement not taken the approach of comparing the ‘‘significant economic disruption or and proposed SIP revision, and has SIP Revision to the FIP. Appropriately, unemployment’’ that will result from committed to doing so. EPA has simply reviewed ODEQ’s the Oklahoma RH SIP revision and cite Comment: We received several BART analysis for consistency with the comment letters suggesting that the the risk of rate shock resulting from Clean Air Act and the BART proposed SIP revision is a fuel switch natural gas price fluctuations, risk of Guidelines.’’ masquerading as BART. These reduction of electric grid reliability, and Response: As we noted in our commenters point out that BART, by its proposal, while BART determinations potential for increased unemployment. very nature, must be a ‘‘retrofit are typically made on a unit-by-unit Response: We disagree with these technology.’’ They note that the BART basis, we believe that ODEQ’s decision commenters. The BART Guidelines only Guidelines set forth the five basic steps to evaluate BART on a facility-wide require states to consider the direct of a case-by-case BART analysis, which basis is a reasonable way to take into energy consumption of the various are centered on the evaluation and account the visibility and energy and control options under consideration, not identification of ‘‘available emission non-air quality environmental benefits indirect energy impacts.2 While the retrofit control technologies.’’ These associated with unit shutdowns. While BART guidelines do allow states to commenters assert that inclusion of a we believe ODEQ’s facility-wide consider indirect impacts if they would facility closure as part of a BART approach to BART is reasonable, we be ‘‘unusual or significant,’’ there is no determination necessarily results in a also analyzed BART on a unit by unit indication that Oklahoma ignored any fuel switch, as the subject utility must basis.3 We then conducted our own such impacts here. The commenters acquire replacement capacity. In their unit-by-unit analysis to confirm the allege that retirement of the AEP/PSO view, EPA will have directed a switch State’s conclusions, including the units will lead to ‘‘significant economic in fuel forms—the direct opposite of the consideration of a scenario not disruption or unemployment’’ or rate agency’s stated intent in the BART considered by ODEQ, in which the unit shock, but provide no evidence to Guidelines. that remains in operation after April 16, support such assertions. Consequently, Response: We disagree with the 2016 would install dry flue gas we believe the State acted reasonably by commenters that a BART analysis is desulfurization/spray dryer absorber focusing its BART analysis on the direct limited to the consideration of options (DFGD/SDA) rather than DSI. We also that require the installation of controls. made adjustments to ODEQ’s cost and We note that both AEP/PSO and visibility calculations to take into 1 The state of Oklahoma and AEP/PSO filed petitions for review of EPA’s FIP, and the parties Oklahoma Gas and Electric (OG&E) have account more recent information have separately entered into a settlement agreement voluntarily adopted fuel switching in regarding the facility’s baseline that includes a timeline for preparing and the past as a strategy to address BART ‘‘uncontrolled’’ emissions and the processing the Oklahoma RH SIP revision that is the when they switched to low sulfur coal. remaining useful life of the facility. The subject of today’s action. A copy of the Settlement Agreement may be found in Appendix I of the Although EPA disagreed that low sulfur adjustments were necessary to properly Oklahoma RH SIP revision. coal constituted BART, it was not 2 40 CFR Part 51, app. Y, at IV.D.4.h.2. because the option represented a fuel 3 78 FR 51692

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12947

assess the cost and visibility factors on consideration of system reliability on a substantial number of small a unit-by-unit basis. impacts, rate impacts, or any other entities. Moreover, due to the nature of Comment: We received several impacts on AEP/PSO customers. These the Federal-State relationship under the comments concerning our costs of commenters assert that regulatory issues Clean Air Act, preparation of a compliance analysis. The commenters associated with the retirements have flexibility analysis would constitute believe that we underestimated the costs never been considered by the OCC, Federal inquiry into the economic of compliance associated with ODEQ’s which has the specialized expertise and reasonableness of a State action. The revised BART determination for AEP/ appropriate jurisdiction to consider Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its PSO’s units. One of the several such issues. actions concerning SIPs on such commenters that believed we Response: We are not usurping the grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. underestimated the costs of compliance OCC’s authority by approving a SIP EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42 conducted an independent analysis and revision submitted from the State of U.S.C. 7410(a)(2). believes that estimates prepared by Oklahoma that requires the closure of Comment: We received one comment AEP/PSO benefit from ‘‘accounting any of AEP/PSO’s facilities. On the concerning compliance with Executive gimmicks.’’ This commenter states that contrary, we are carrying out our Order (EO) 12866 and OMB review of its analysis demonstrates that the statutory obligations to review the the proposed action. The commenter Oklahoma RH SIP revision will cost Oklahoma RH SIP revision. We are states that the costs reviewed by ODEQ $529 million more in net present value required to approve a SIP revision that and EPA related only to plant and $3 billion more in nominal dollars complies with the applicable modifications and equipment to achieve than the FIP currently in place. We also requirements of the CAA and our the suggested regional haze and received a comment in support of our implementing regulations. 42 U.S.C. interstate transport reductions. The costs of compliance analysis, which 7410(k). Here, ODEQ made a revised commenter notes that Executive Order states that it would not be legally sound BART determination for Units 3 and 4 12866, section 1(11) states that ‘‘each for ODEQ to have considered the costs at the Northeastern Power Station that agency shall tailor its regulations to of replacement power or any other costs relied on retirement dates proposed and impose the least burden on society, beyond those of emission controls in its agreed to by the facility’s owner, AEP/ including individuals, business of revised BART analysis. PSO. We have reviewed ODEQ’s revised differing sizes, and other entities Response: Unfortunately, we cannot BART determination and concluded (including small communities and respond to the commenters’ assertions, that it satisfies all applicable governmental entities), consistent with because the commenter failed to provide requirements of the CAA, the Regional obtaining the regulatory objectives, any details concerning its cost analysis. Haze Rule, and the BART Guidelines. taking into account, among other things, We note, however, that regardless of the Therefore, we are required to approve and to the extent practicable, the costs cost of the State’s BART determination, the Oklahoma SIP revision. of cumulative regulations.’’ The EPA cannot disapprove a SIP measure Comment: We received one comment commenter asserts that the societal simply because the measure will be that our proposed action triggers impacts of EPA’s proposed approval of more costly than controls required in a requirements of the Regulatory the Oklahoma RH SIP revision should FIP. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 Flexibility Act (RFA). This commenter have been considered and that the U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. claims that the proposed action will proposed action should have undergone 7410(a)(2). have significant adverse economic OMB review. Comment: We received one comment impact on small entities, including Response: Under EO 12866, an action in support of the proposed action, small commercial and industrial is economically significant if it is likely which indicated that the Oklahoma RH customers of PSO, contrary to EPA’s that it may ‘‘[h]ave an annual effect on SIP revision submittal satisfies EPA’s certification otherwise, and that the economy of $100 million or more or and ODEQ’s obligations under the Clean requirements of the Regulatory adversely affect in a material way the Air Act. The commenter notes that the Flexibility Act are thus triggered. economy, a sector of the economy, CAA instructs states to contemplate the Response: Courts have interpreted the productivity, competition, jobs, the remaining useful life of the source and RFA to require a regulatory flexibility environment, public health or safety, or the BART Guidelines acknowledge that analysis only when small entities will State, local, or tribal governments or a company may agree to shut down a be subject to the requirements of the communities.’’ EO 12866 allows OMB to unit prior to the statutory deadline for agency’s action. See, e.g., Michigan v. review actions that fall within this BART controls. The commenter asserts EPA, 213 F.3d 663 (D.C. Cir. 2000); Mid- category. This action was not reviewed that ODEQ acted properly in taking into Tex Elec. Co-op, Inc. v. FERC, 773 F.2d by OMB because our rule is not account AEP/PSO’s enforceable 327 (D.C. Cir. 1985). The EPA’s action economically significant. It is merely an commitment to retire one unit by 2016 here would not establish requirements approval under section 110 of the Clean when comparing costs. Likewise, the applicable to small entities. In our Air Act. It does not create any Commenter believes that EPA’s proposal, we certified that our rule will additional requirements but merely conclusion that DSI is more cost- not have a significant economic impact approves an existing state rule. Thus, effective than DFGD/SDA is correct, as on a substantial number of small entities our rule would not result in costs over demonstrated by the agency’s unit-by- in compliance with the RFA. We $100 million or adversely affect in a unit analysis and taking into account reached this decision because our SIP material way the economy, a sector of the remaining useful life of the plant. approval under section 110 of the Clean the economy, productivity, competition, Response: We thank the commenter Air Act does not itself create any new jobs, the environment, public health or for the support and agree with the requirements but simply approves safety, or State, local, or tribal commenter’s conclusions. Oklahoma’s existing State rule. Our governments or communities. Comment: We received two comments action does not place additional Comment: We received several asserting that EPA and ODEQ have regulatory burdens on any entity comments concerning tribal usurped the authority of the Oklahoma including AEP ratepayers. Therefore, we consultation issues and compliance Corporation Commission (OCC) and properly certified that this action will with Executive Order 13175. These ordered the closure of a facility without not have a significant economic impact commenters believe that the energy

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12948 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

impacts of the revised BART 13175. Therefore, EPA was not required Units 3 and 4 at Northeastern Power determination, in particular significant to prepare a tribal impact summary Station. rate increases, will have tribal statement. Response: The CAA requires a state to implications and impose substantial Comment: We received one comment provide an opportunity to request a direct compliance costs on tribal that our proposed action does not public hearing on any proposed SIP governments. One commenter notes that comply with our own policy on tribal revision before it is adopted. 42 U.S.C. AEP/PSO’s service territory covers consultation. The commenter suggests 7410(a)(2) and 7410(l). Additionally, 40 portions of at least 13 federally that we should suspend this rulemaking CFR 51.102(a) spells out these public recognized Indian tribes and that the until we have engaged in consultation hearing requirements; however, the Choctaw Nation recently participated in with affected tribes in Oklahoma. The regulation is silent concerning the AEP/PSO’s energy efficiency program. commenter notes that AEP/PSO serves a location of any public hearing that is These commenters question whether portion of the Osage Indian Reservation held, and multiple public hearings are our proposed action complies with EO in northeast Oklahoma, and that the not required. For SIP revisions, the 13175 and request that we prepare a following tribal nations have casinos hearing requirement is appropriately tribal impact summary statement. within AEP/PSO’s service territory: the assigned to the states because the state Response: Executive Order 13175, Choctaw Nation in Broken Arrow and agencies, rather than the EPA, are entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination McAlester; the Osage Nation in Tulsa, adopting the substantive requirements with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR Bartlesville, and Sand Springs; and the of the SIP and have the ability to amend 67249, November 9, 2000), directs Muscogee (Creek) Nation in Okmulgee. the proposed SIP revision in response to agencies to develop an accountable Response: Consistent with the EPA comments received. The ODEQ fulfilled process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and Policy on Consultation and this requirement with the public hearing timely input by tribal officials in the Coordination with Indian Tribes, Region it conducted in Oklahoma City on May development of regulatory policies that 6 provided information concerning this 20, 2013. When promulgating a FIP, such as have tribal implications.’’ EO 13175 action at a regular meeting of the Tribal EPA’s proposed FIP for BART at NGS in section (5)(a). Consistent with EO Environmental Coalition in Oklahoma 13175, the 1984 EPA Policy for the Arizona referenced by the commenter, that was held at the Sac and Fox Administration of Environmental EPA is required to provide an Learning Center on July 16, 2013 and Programs on Indian Reservations, and opportunity for public hearing. 42 offered an opportunity to engage in the May 4, 2011 EPA Policy on U.S.C. 7607(d)(1)(B) and (5). Likewise, government-to-government consultation Consultation and Coordination with in the process of promulgating our FIP with Regional Tribal management. Indian Tribes, Region 6 provided for BART in Oklahoma, we conducted Additionally, Region 6 provided information concerning this action at a two hearings in 2011 in Oklahoma City information and updates at quarterly regular meeting of the Tribal and Tulsa. However, today’s action does Regional Tribal Operations Committee Environmental Coalition in Oklahoma not promulgate a FIP, but rather (RTOC) meetings. No Tribes provided that was held at the Sac and Fox approves the State’s submittal to revise Learning Center on July 16, 2013 and comments to EPA or requested its RH SIP. Neither the CAA nor the also offered an opportunity to engage in government-to-government consultation Administrative Procedures Act (APA) government-to-government consultation on this action. requires EPA to provide a public with Regional Tribal management. Comment: We received several hearing for actions on SIPs. Additionally, Region 6 provides comments regarding opportunities for In taking action on this SIP submittal, information and updates at quarterly public participation associated with this EPA has complied with the applicable Regional Tribal Operations Committee proposed action, in particular statutory requirements for public (RTOC) meetings. To date, no Tribes concerning the number and location of participation under the Administrative have provided comments to EPA or public hearings. These commenters Procedure Act, which does not require requested government-to-government point out that the only public hearing an opportunity for public hearing. 5 consultation with the Region on this on the Oklahoma RH SIP revision was U.S.C. 553(c). While a public hearing is action. conducted by ODEQ in Oklahoma City not statutorily required for SIP actions, EO 13175 section (5)(b) states that no in May 2013, and that no public EPA recognizes that the EPA retains agency may promulgate any regulation hearings have been conducted by EPA discretion to offer public hearings. EPA that has tribal implications, imposes or conducted within the affected AEP/ elected not to conduct a public hearing substantial direct compliance costs on PSO service territories, which cover the for this SIP action for several reasons. Indian tribal governments, and is not northeastern and southwestern corners EPA may conduct a discretionary public required by statute unless the direct of the state. The commenters request hearing when it is necessary to glean costs of compliance with the proposed that additional public hearings be additional information from the public; rule are paid by the Federal government conducted by EPA within the AEP/PSO however, we did not feel that it was or the agency consults with tribes, service territories to allow potentially necessary here. We believe the provides the Director of OMB a tribal affected citizens a better opportunity to opportunities for public participation summary impact statement, and makes provide meaningful comments on EPA’s during ODEQ’s rulemaking process, available to the Director of OMB any proposed approval of the Oklahoma RH including the State’s public hearing, written communication tribal officials SIP revision. One commenter references along with the opportunity to provide submitted to the agency. Our approval EPA’s proposed FIP for BART at the written comments to EPA on our of the Oklahoma RH SIP revision does Navajo Generating Station (NGS) in proposed approval of the Oklahoma RH not directly apply since the facility is Arizona for which EPA has committed SIP revision provided significant not located in Indian country. Moreover, to conduct several public hearings opportunity for affected citizens in the facilities that will incur the direct throughout Arizona. Two of the Oklahoma to participate in this costs of compliance are not tribally commenters additionally note that no rulemaking. In response to the Federal owned or operated. The possibility that hearing was conducted for the Register notice, we received 273 a tribe, as a consumer, may be affected Settlement Agreement associated with comments on our proposed approval of by a rate change, does not implicate EO ODEQ’s revised BART determination for the Oklahoma RH SIP revision, all of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12949

which are given full consideration in and PM, the Oklahoma RH SIP revision Rule (CSAPR/CAIR), and carbon this final action. In our view, this will result in reductions of controls for existing power plants under demonstrates that the public had approximately 210 pounds of mercury the President’s climate change initiative. sufficient opportunity to participate in emissions per year. The commenter Response: We agree with the this rulemaking. observes that the environmental benefits commenter’s conclusions and note that Finally, the CAA requires EPA to of the Oklahoma RH SIP revision are not an AEP/PSO representative made provide a 30-day public comment limited to air quality but also include similar comments in recent testimony period before EPA enters any proposed reductions in toxic coal ash that before the OCC. settlement agreement; however, this threaten to contaminate local ground Comment: We received one comment requirement is limited to written water resources and reduced waste in support of the proposed action comments. 42 U.S.C. 7413(g). EPA met water discharges containing pollutants. concerning the Oklahoma RH SIP this requirement when it published a Response: We agree with the revision’s consistency with the State 30-day notice in the Federal Register commenter’s conclusions that the Energy Plan. The commenter notes that, (77 FR 67814, November 14, 2012) and Oklahoma RH SIP revision will have although not directly relevant to considered comments received on the additional environmental benefits ODEQ’s statutory obligations or EPA’s proposed Settlement Agreement. EPA beyond reducing regional haze. review, the Oklahoma RH SIP revision was not required to offer a public Comment: We received one comment is consistent with the State of hearing for the Settlement Agreement in support of the proposed action that, Oklahoma’s energy plan, which associated with ODEQ’s BART in addition to promoting clean air and prioritizes the increased use of determination. reducing regional haze, the Oklahoma Oklahoma’s energy resources such as Comment: We received numerous RH SIP revision will conserve wind and natural gas, and protection of comments that the Oklahoma RH SIP Oklahoma’s water resources. The public health and the environment. The revision will result in significant commenter notes that EPA has correctly commenter notes that Oklahoma is visibility improvements. These recognized that the Oklahoma RH SIP currently an exporter of both natural gas commenters conclude that overall, the revision submittal will reduce water and wind power, but a major importer Oklahoma RH SIP revision is the less usage at the Northeastern Power Station of coal. polluting option compared to the FIP and that this incidental benefit is Response: We thank the commenter currently in place and will result in important in light of the extreme for the support. significant visibility improvements and drought conditions facing Oklahoma. tangible economic benefits. One The commenter states that in response Comment: We received several commenter believes that these visibility to its data requests in proceedings comments concerning the potential of improvements are likely understated in before the OCC, AEP/PSO has estimated the Oklahoma RH SIP revision submittal analyses conducted by EPA and ODEQ, that the increase in water consumption to hurt or help overall reliability of the even for the first five years. For at the Northeastern Power Station, if it power grid. Several commenters claim example, the commenter notes that the were to add dry scrubbers to both units, that the Oklahoma RH SIP revision Oklahoma RH SIP revision will result in would be 65 times greater than with a submittal will result in lower reliability of the grid by reducing the percentage earlier NOX reductions than would have retrofit of activated carbon injection occurred under ODEQ’s original SIP or (ACI) and DSI at just one unit, pursuant of power generated by coal combustion EPA’s FIP, and that neither agency to the Oklahoma RH SIP revision. and increasing reliance on electricity evaluated the likely reductions in Furthermore, the commenter notes, generated by natural gas combustion, visibility impairment as the second unit water currently consumed by the units which is subject to more price and ramps down capacity between 2016 and will be released for other uses upon the availability fluctuations. Another 2026. retirement of the units in 2016 and commenter suggests that the Oklahoma Response: We acknowledge these 2026. RH SIP revision submittal will result in commenters’ support and agree that Response: We agree with the improved reliability of the grid. This there are additional visibility benefits commenter that there are non-air quality commenter notes that as the amount of associated with the Oklahoma RH SIP co-benefits associated with the wind power in Oklahoma and the that were not fully analyzed. Oklahoma RH SIP revision. Southeast Power Pool rises, fossil Comment: We received numerous Comment: We received one comment generation will be required to ramp comments that the Oklahoma RH SIP in support of the proposed action production up and down more revision will result in significant concerning the cost-effectiveness of the frequently, and to shut down for various reductions in harmful air pollutants. Oklahoma RH SIP revision. The periods of time during high wind One commenter states that the commenter concludes that the production. The commenter asserts that Northeastern Power Station’s NOX Oklahoma RH SIP revision is more cost- switching to natural gas and emissions, and their contribution to effective than the FIP currently in place implementing energy efficiency and ozone, are particularly problematic for and less costly overall. The commenter demand response programs will result the region’s efforts to maintain healthy cites AEP/PSO’s $942/ton SO2 removed in resources better suited than coal-fired air quality levels. This commenter also cost-effectiveness estimate and notes units to integrate with variable wind explains that the plant’s SO2 emissions that the Oklahoma RH SIP revision will generation. threaten to cause exceedances of federal allow AEP/PSO to avoid potentially Response: We cannot comment on air quality standards. This commenter significant compliance costs associated speculative impacts on the reliability of notes that both it and EPA Region 6 with other upcoming regulations, electrical grid in Oklahoma that may or have conducted air dispersion modeling including: the Mercury Air Toxics may not result from this revised BART indicating that the plant’s emissions Standards (MATS), disposal of coal determination for Units 3 and 4 at contribute to ambient SO2 levels that combustion residuals, effluent Northeastern Power Station. Issues exceed the 1-hour SO2 National limitations guidelines, a revised regarding grid reliability are more Ambient Air Quality Standards (lowered) ozone NAAQS, the 1-hour properly addressed by the Oklahoma (NAAQS). The commenter further notes primary SO2 NAAQS, Cross-State Air Corporation Commission and the that in addition to reduced NOX, SO2 Pollution Rule and Clean Air Interstate electricity providers such as AEP/PSO.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12950 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

In addition to the comments emissions. States must also include in capacity and energy arising from the submitted directly to EPA, some their regional haze SIPs a commitment mandated retirement of the second unit commenters also incorporated by to update this inventory periodically. no later than 2026. reference the following comments from Arizona did not satisfy this requirement Response: We concur with ODEQ’s Oklahoma Industrial Energy Consumers because it failed to include the 2008 response to this comment. ODEQ did and Quality of Service Coalition that emission inventory when it submitted not, in fact, mandate the early were submitted to ODEQ during its its regional haze SIP in 2011. Oklahoma, retirement or capacity restrictions on public comment period on the state- however, did satisfy this requirement either unit. Rather, AEP/PSO proposed proposed SIP revision, which ended in because ODEQ included its most recent these planned activities in its air quality May 2013. These comments and our emission inventory as Appendix 4–1 of operating permit application submitted responses follow below: its original regional haze SIP submittal. as a revision to their previous submittal Comment: The commenters state that This requirement is unrelated to the under ODEQ’s BART requirements rule. ODEQ did not rely on an updated requirements for a BART determination See OAC 252:100–8–76 . Subsequently, emissions inventory in its revised BART and is not relevant to this action. ODEQ entered into an administrative determination and assert that an Comment: The commenters state that order with AEP/PSO to make these updated emissions inventory is essential AEP/PSO Northeastern Power Station planned activities enforceable and to the overall determination of BART- Units 3 and 4 currently provide a therefore eligible to be relied upon in eligible sources in Oklahoma and to the significant percentage of all energy the BART review. Regarding the determination of sources required to supplied to AEP/PSO customers and consideration of replacement energy install BART, and that ODEQ is required cite low fuel cost associated with costs, see our prior response. to consider and address the anticipated operation of those facilities as the Comment: Citing the Regional Haze net effect on visibility resulting from reason for the high energy contribution Rule and the BART Guidelines, the changes projected in point, area, and from Units 3 and 4. The commenters commenters assert that the State cannot mobile source emissions by 2018. The express concern that replacement mandate the early retirement of an commenters also reference an Arizona energy may be supplied by more electric generating unit as part of a Department of Environmental Quality expensive natural gas-fueled facilities. BART determination. (ADEQ) regional haze submission, in The commenters assert that the need for Response: We disagree with this which EPA required ADEQ to provide replacement energy is quantifiable, the comment. While it is true that the the most recent emissions inventory estimated cost of that replacement Regional Haze Rule and BART data available. energy is quantifiable, and that ODEQ Guidelines do not contemplate unit Response: The determination of should have factored these costs into its retirements as a potential BART option, subject-to-BART sources was based on determination of a reasonable progress neither rule prohibits states or EPA from modeling of maximum actual emissions goal. considering a shutdown as part of a during the baseline period of 2001– Response: As ODEQ noted in its BART determination if the strategy is 2003, and EPA has already approved response to comments, the Oklahoma proposed by the owner of a BART- ODEQ’s determinations of BART- RH SIP revision does not include any eligible source. Moreover, the CAA and eligible and subject-to-BART sources. changes to the Chapter IX of the SIP, EPA’s implementing regulations require An updated emission inventory would which concerns reasonable progress states to consider the remaining useful have no impact on these determinations goals. The SIP revision submittal does, life of a source when determining that have already been acted upon. however, identify further reasonable BART. Here, ODEQ did not unilaterally Furthermore, the visibility modeling progress actions that are expected to mandate the retirement of Units 3 and performed to determine sources subject- further these goals. This action does not 4. Rather, AEP/PSO made a business to-BART and to inform BART address the approvability of Oklahoma’s decision regarding the remaining useful determinations consists of single-source reasonable progress plan which will be life of these units and proposed that modeling utilizing CALPUFF and addressed in a separate action. In ODEQ include the corresponding requires only the pre-control and post- addition, as we explained in an earlier shutdown dates as a feature of its control emission rates of the source response, ODEQ appropriately revised BART determination. To allow being evaluated. This action and the considered the direct energy impacts of AEP/PSO to take credit for the emission Oklahoma RH SIP revision only address the various control options. reductions associated with its chosen the requirements for a BART Consideration of the speculative costs of retirement dates, ODEQ appropriately determination for a subject-to-BART replacement energy that may or may not issued an administrative order that source. We have already approved the be required once Units 3 and 4 retire is made the shutdown dates enforceable modeling and emission inventories for not required by the BART Guidelines and included these dates in the the first regional haze planning period, and would not be required by the four- Oklahoma RH SIP revision. and these requirements do not have to factor analysis required for reasonable Comment: The commenters argue that be revisited until the next planning progress. ODEQ did not demonstrate that the period. Comment: The commenters imply Oklahoma RH SIP revision meets the With respect to the Arizona regional that ODEQ mandated the early requirement that alternatives to BART haze SIP revision referenced by the retirements of Units 3 and 4 and further must achieve greater reasonable commenters, 40 CFR 51.308(d)(4)(v) state that ODEQ did not consider costs progress than would be achieved requires a statewide inventory of of replacement energy and capacity as through the installation and operation of emissions of pollutants that are existing units are retired, including the BART (i.e., DFGD/SDA). The reasonably anticipated to cause or cost of replacement capacity and energy commenters note that on page 11 of the contribute to visibility impairment in arising from the mandated retirement of Revised BART Report (attachment to the any mandatory Class I Federal area. This one of the units in 2016, the cost of Oklahoma RH SIP revision), it is inventory must include emissions for a replacement energy arising from the acknowledged that DFGD/SDA ‘‘would baseline year, emissions for the most capacity restrictions which are imposed provide improvements in visibility recent year for which data are available, on the second unit during the period above that achieved with the DSI and estimates of future projected 2021–2026, and the cost of replacement system’’ but that such improvements

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12951

would not be perceptible. The technology to satisfy the BART that would be produced by gas-fired commenters assert that this conclusion requirements will provide additional generation or purchased power sources clearly indicates that the revised BART confidence that the facility will be able that AEP/PSO would have to acquire to determination does not meet the greater to comply with the MATS rule. replace Units 3 and 4 after they are reasonable progress standard with Comment: The commenters claim that retired in 2016 and 2026. Additionally, regard to visibility improvement. the Oklahoma RH SIP revision fails to the commenters state that it was Response: We concur with ODEQ’s meet the requirement at 40 CFR assumed that, if retrofitted with DFGD/ response to this comment. The 51.308(e)(2)(iii) that all necessary SFA, Units 3 and 4 would operate for regulation cited by the commenters, 40 emission reductions take place during another 30 years (i.e., until 2046), which CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i), addresses the period of the first long-term strategy is inconsistent with AEP/PSO testimony alternative measures states may adopt in for regional haze, which ends in 2018, to the OCC indicating that the units lieu of requiring sources subject to because the level of SO2 emissions would likely be retired by 2030, only13 BART to install, operate, and maintain under the state-proposed SIP revision is years after the retrofits are implemented. BART. The Oklahoma RH SIP revision expected to be significantly higher than The commenters conclude that if the currently under review is not an emissions under the EPA’s FIP until emissions reductions associated with alternative to BART. Rather, it is a well after 2018. the Oklahoma RH SIP revision were revision of the State’s BART Response: We concur with ODEQ’s recalculated to reflect a shorter determination for the AEP/PSO response to this comment. The remaining useful life of Units 3 and 4, Northeastern Power Station. Therefore, Oklahoma RH SIP revision is a revision and to account for NOX emissions the cited section of the Regional Haze of the State’s BART determination for produced from sources that replace Rule is not applicable. As ODEQ the AEP/PSO Northeastern Power Units 3 and 4, they would be indicated, it is not necessary that the Station and is not a proposal for an significantly reduced. BART determination in the Oklahoma alternative to BART. Therefore, the Response: We concur with ODEQ’s RH SIP revision achieve greater timing requirements of 40 CFR response to this comment. As explained visibility improvement than the EPA’s 51.308(e)(2)(iii) do not apply. in previous responses, consideration of BART determination in the FIP. Rather, Comment: The commenters question speculative replacement energy sources the CAA and Regional Haze Rule the statement on page 12 of the Revised is not required by the BART Guidelines. require only that a source-specific BART BART Report that cumulative SO2 and We further agree with ODEQ’s determination be based on a reasoned NOX emissions from Units 3 and 4 are assessment that any replacement energy analysis of the five statutory BART expected to be approximately 36% of is unlikely to be procured from a source factors analysis in accordance with the the emissions level that would result with environmental impacts comparable procedures in the BART Guidelines. from EPA’s FIP. The commenters state to or greater than those of Units 3 and Comment: Citing further concerns that the underlying details of the 4, which are coal-fired. This is due to over compliance with greater reasonable analysis supporting the expected SO2 the fact that BART addresses a very progress requirements, the commenters and NOX reductions were not provided specific group of large existing sources state that a significant portion of the with the Revised BART Report and that, that were placed in operation before emissions reductions attributed to the absent back-up documentation, these many of the current national air quality Oklahoma RH SIP revision could also be projected emissions reductions are programs were in place. Replacement achieved by switching to ultra-low unreliable and cannot be used to justify energy would in all likelihood come sulfur coal, as required by the original the Oklahoma RH SIP revision. from a newer source subject to the Best Oklahoma RH SIP, and by installing DSI Response: We concur with ODEQ’s Available Control Technology (BACT) control technology to meet requirements response to this comment. ODEQ’s requirements of the Prevention of of the MATS rule. They conclude that calculation of projected emissions Significant Deterioration (PSD) by including emissions reductions reductions was not a significant factor permitting program. arising from DSI and by ignoring in its revised BART determination for Furthermore, regarding the life-span reductions which could be achieved Units 3 and 4. However, the projected of Units 3 and 4 under the FIP scenario, through switching to ultra-low sulfur reductions did provide ODEQ with a EPA recognizes that the cost of coal, the Oklahoma RH SIP revision reasonable comparison of the results of scrubbers is significant and that if a overstates the emissions reductions that the FIP with those of the Oklahoma RH source makes such an investment, it are attributable to the revised BART SIP revision. As ODEQ explained in its will likely make other necessary determination, which are surplus to response, the capital recovery factor investments to extend operation to reductions that would be achievable used to establish the annualized costs of recoup the costs. Thus, consistent with through other control measures or by the DFGD/SDA option assumed a our standard practices for conducting implementing measures to meet CAA lifespan of 30 years. Because the FIP BART determinations and cost- requirements that existed as of the does not restrict capacity utilization, no effectiveness analyses we assumed a 30- baseline date of the state-proposed SIP such restrictions were assumed in this year useful life for the wet scrubber revision. calculation. Consequently, the total systems and responded to comments on Response: We concur with ODEQ’s emissions attributable to the FIP were this issue when we took final action in response to this comment. As ODEQ calculated by multiplying the SO2 and promulgating our FIP. The BART noted in responses to similar comments, NOX emission rates by full load heat guidelines do allow for consideration of the Oklahoma RH SIP revision is a input, assuming continuous operation the remaining useful life of facilities revision of the State’s BART for 30 years. In contrast, the total when considering the costs of potential determination for the AEP/PSO emissions associated with the Oklahoma BART controls. Any claims regarding Northeastern Power Station and is not a RH SIP revision factored in the shorter the remaining useful life of a facility or proposal for an alternative to BART. lifespan of the units and reduced a source have to be secured by an Therefore, the greater reasonable capacity utilization. enforceable requirement. AEP/PSO did progress requirements do not apply. We Comment: The commenters contend not claim any such restrictions on the also agree with ODEQ’s conclusion that that the Oklahoma RH SIP revision operation of Units 3 and 4 of installation of the DSI control ignores the additional NOX emissions Northeastern Power Station when we

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12952 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

promulgated our FIP. Consequently, we freedom to reduce emissions by safety risks subject to Executive Order assumed a remaining useful life of 30 alternative methods so long as the BART 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); years in our BART analysis. We emission limit is met: ‘‘[E]mission limits • is not a significant regulatory action indicated in our responses to comments may also be met with reconfiguration of subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR that if AEP/PSO were to decide the the units to burn natural gas, the 28355, May 22, 2001); units in question have a shorter useful companies themselves are free to • is not subject to requirements of life such that installing scrubbers is no determine whether this option best Section 12(d) of the National longer cost effective, and would be responds to future customer needs and Technology Transfer and Advancement willing to accept an enforceable preferences, including any potential Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because requirement to that effect, a revised impact on rates.’’ This statement application of those requirements would BART analysis could be submitted by remains true within the restrictions be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; the plant(s) in question and our FIP and imposed by the Oklahoma RH SIP • could be re-analyzed accordingly. revision. ODEQ also correctly notes that does not provide EPA with the Similarly, we indicated that we could the Oklahoma statute referenced in the discretionary authority to address, as also review a revised SIP submitted by comment, 27A O.S. § 2–5–107(4), only appropriate, disproportionate human ODEQ. Ultimately, AEP/PSO did seek applies to the considerations required health or environmental effects, using an enforceable commitment to limit the by the Air Quality Advisory Council in practicable and legally permissible remaining useful life of Units 3 and 4 of deciding whether to recommend a rule methods, under Executive Order 12898 Northeastern Power Station, and ODEQ or rule amendment to the (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). subsequently submitted its RH SIP Environmental Quality Board. The In addition, this rule does not have revision that is the subject of this action. revised BART determination for tribal implications as specified by Comment: The commenters assert that Northeastern Power Station Units 3 and Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, the BART analysis supporting the state- 4, and the associated Oklahoma RH SIP November 9, 2000), because the SIP is proposed SIP revision is based on AEP/ revision, are not rules. Therefore 27A not approved to apply in Indian country PSO long-term planning studies that are O.S. § 2–5–107(4) does not apply. located in the state, and EPA notes that no longer valid. The commenters note it will not impose substantial direct that AEP/PSO informed the OCC that it IV. Statutory and Executive Order costs on tribal governments or preempt will need to revise its Integrated Reviews tribal law. The Congressional Review Act, 5 Resource Plan (IRP) to reflect previously Under the CAA, the Administrator is U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small unanticipated increases in near-term required to approve a SIP submission Business Regulatory Enforcement peak demand due to recent significant that complies with the provisions of the Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides growth in oil and gas production Clean Air Act and applicable Federal that before a rule may take effect, the activities on its system. The commenters regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR agency promulgating the rule must assert that these changes will increase 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submit a rule report, which includes a replacement energy costs for Units 3 submissions, EPA’s role is to approve copy of the rule, to each House of the and 4 and also increase future SO2 and state choices, provided that they meet Congress and to the Comptroller General NOX emissions, thus significantly the criteria of the Clean Air Act. of the United States. EPA will submit a altering the results of the state’s BART Accordingly, this action merely report containing this action and other analysis. The commenters conclude that approves state law as meeting Federal required information to the U.S. Senate, the state-proposed SIP revision requirements and does not impose the U.S. House of Representatives, and rulemaking activities should be additional requirements beyond those the Comptroller General of the United postponed until the revised AEP/PSO imposed by state law. For that reason, States prior to publication of the rule in IRP is approved by the OCC and then this action: the ODEQ can revise its BART the Federal Register. A major rule • is not a ‘‘significant regulatory determination to take these changes into cannot take effect until 60 days after it action’’ subject to review by the Office account and go back to proposal. is published in the Federal Register. of Management and Budget under Response: We concur with ODEQ’s This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, response to this comment. As discussed defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). October 4, 1993); in responses to previous comments, • Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean consideration of replacement energy does not impose an information Air Act, petitions for judicial review of and associated emissions is not required collection burden under the provisions this action must be filed in the United by the BART Guidelines. of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 States Court of Appeals for the Comment: The commenters state that U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); appropriate circuit by May 6, 2014. • the ODEQ’s proposed revised BART is certified as not having a Filing a petition for reconsideration by determination for Units 3 and 4 and its significant economic impact on a the Administrator of this final rule does proposed SIP revision do not take into substantial number of small entities not affect the finality of this action for account potential impacts on AEP/PSO under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 the purposed of judicial review nor does customers. Citing EPA’s Federal U.S.C. 601 et seq.); it extend the time within which a • Register notice taking final action does not contain any unfunded petition for judicial review may be filed, promulgating the FIP (76 FR 81749) and mandate or significantly or uniquely and shall not postpone the effectiveness Oklahoma statute 27A O.S. 2–5–107(4), affect small governments, as described of such rule or action. This action may the commenters assert that in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act not be challenged later in proceedings to consideration of such economic impacts of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); enforce its requirements. (See section • is required. does not have Federalism 307(b)(2).) Response: We concur with ODEQ’s implications as specified in Executive response to this comment. As ODEQ Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 correctly points out, the Federal 1999); Environmental protection, Air Register reference citation provided by • is not an economically significant pollution control, Incorporation by the commenters addresses AEP/PSO’s regulatory action based on health or reference, Intergovernmental relations,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12953

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Subpart LL—Oklahoma end of the table for ‘‘Revision to the Regional haze, Reporting and Regional haze SIP concerning Units 3 recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur ■ 2. Amend § 52.1920 by: and 4 of the American Electric Power/ ■ dioxide, and Visibility. a. Amending in paragraph (d) the table Public Service Company of Oklahoma titled ‘‘EPA Approved Oklahoma (AEP/PSO) Northeastern plant’’ and Dated: February 7, 2014. Source-Specific Requirements’’ by ‘‘Enforceable commitment for visibility Ron Curry, adding a new entry at the end of the concerning Units 3 and 4 of the AEP/ Regional Administrator, Region 6. table for ‘‘Units 3 and 4 of the American PSO Northeastern plant.’’ 40 CFR Part 52 is amended as follows: Electric Power/Public Service Company of Oklahoma (AEP/PSO) Northeastern The revisions and additions read as PART 52—APPROVAL AND plant’’. follows: PROMULGATION OF ■ b. Amending in paragraph (e) the first IMPLEMENTATION PLANS table titled ‘‘EPA Approved § 52.1920 Identification of plan. Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi- * * * * * ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 Regulatory Measures in the Oklahoma (d) * * * continues to read as follows: SIP’’ by revising the entry for Regional Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. haze SIP and adding new entries at the

EPA APPROVED OKLAHOMA SOURCE-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

State submittal Name of source Permit No. date EPA approval date Explanation

*******

Units 3 and 4 of the American PSO Regional Haze Agreement, 6/20/2013 3/7/2014 [Insert citation of Electric Power/Public Service Case No. 10–025 (February publication]. Company of Oklahoma (AEP/ 2010) and Amended Regional PSO) Northeastern plant. Haze Agreement, DEQ Case No. 10–025 (March 2013).

(e) * * *

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

Applicable geographic or non- Name of SIP provision attainment area State submittal EPA approval date Explanation

*******

Regional haze SIP: ...... Statewide ...... 2/17/2010 3/7/2014 [Insert citation of Core requirements of 40 (a) Determination of baseline and publication]. CFR 51.308. Initial ap- natural visibility conditions. proval 12/28/2011, 76 (b) Coordinating regional haze FR 81728. and reasonably attributable visibility impairment. (c) Monitoring strategy and other implementation requirements. (d) Coordination with States and Federal Land Managers. (e) BART determinations except for the following SO2 BART determinations: Units 4 and 5 of the Oklahoma Gas and Electric (OG&E) Muskogee plant; and Units 1 and 2 of the OG&E Sooner plant.

*******

Revision to the Regional haze Rogers County ...... 6/20/2013 3/7/2014 [Insert citation of Revised BART determina- SIP concerning Units 3 and 4 publication]. tion. of the American Electric Power/ Public Service Company of Oklahoma (AEP/PSO) North- eastern plant.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12954 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE OKLAHOMA SIP—Continued

Applicable geographic or non- Name of SIP provision attainment area State submittal EPA approval date Explanation

Enforceable commitment for visi- Rogers County ...... 6/20/2013 3/7/2014 [Insert citation of If a SO2 emission limit of bility concerning Units 3 and 4 publication]. 0.3 lb/MMBtu is not met of the AEP/PSO Northeastern the State will obtain plant. and/or identify additional SO2 reductions within Oklahoma to the extent necessary to achieve the anticipated visibility benefits estimated by the Central Regional Air Planning Association (CENRAP).

* * * * * ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DATES: This final rule will be effective AGENCY April 7, 2014. ■ 3. Amend § 52.1928 by revising ADDRESSES: EPA has established a paragraph (c) and adding paragraph (d) 40 CFR Part 52 to read as follows: docket for this action under Docket ID [EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0227; FRL–9906–81– No. EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0227. All § 52.1928 Visibility protection. OAR] documents in the docket are listed in * * * * * the http://www.regulations.gov index. Approval and Promulgation of Air Although listed in the index, some (c) The SO2 BART requirements for Quality Implementation Plans; information is not publicly available, Units 4 and 5 of the Oklahoma Gas and Oklahoma; Regional Haze and e.g., Confidential Business Information Electric (OG&E) Muskogee plant, and Interstate Transport Affecting Visibility or other information the disclosure of Units 1 and 2 of the OG&E Sooner plant; State Implementation Plan Revisions; which is restricted by statute. Certain the deficiencies in the long-term Withdrawal of Federal Implementation other material, such as copyrighted strategy for regional haze; and the Plan for American Electric Power/ material, will be publicly available only requirement for a plan to contain Public Service Company of Oklahoma in hard copy. Publicly available docket adequate provisions to prohibit materials are available either AGENCY: Environmental Protection electronically in http:// emissions from interfering with Agency (EPA). measures required in another state to www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at ACTION: Final rule. protect visibility are satisfied by the Air Planning Section (6PD–L), § 52.1923. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas (d) The revision to the Regional Haze Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 75202–2733. The file will be made plan submitted on June 20, 2013 amend a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for Oklahoma that became available by appointment for public concerning Units 3 and 4 of the inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review American Electric Power/Public Service effective on January 27, 2012, as it applies to Units 3 and 4 of the Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. Company of Oklahoma (AEP/PSO) and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal Northeastern plant is approved. For this Northeastern Power Station in Rogers County, Oklahoma, which is operated holidays. Contact the person listed in source the plan addresses requirements the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for BART and adequate provisions to by the American Electric Power/Public Service Company of Oklahoma (AEP/ paragraph below or Mr. Bill Deese at prohibit emissions from interfering with PSO). We are removing the FIP 214–665–7253 to make an appointment. measures required in another state to requirements for AEP/PSO because, in a If possible, please make the protect visibility. As called for in the separate action being published in appointment at least two working days plan if a SO2 emission limit of 0.3 lb/ today’s Federal Register, we are taking in advance of your visit. A 15 cent per MMBtu is not met the State will obtain final action to approve revisions to the page fee will be charged for making and/or identify additional SO2 Oklahoma State Implementation Plan photocopies of documents. On the day reductions within Oklahoma to the (SIP), submitted by the Oklahoma of the visit, please check in at the EPA extent necessary to achieve the Department of Environmental Quality Region 6 reception area on the seventh anticipated visibility benefits estimated (ODEQ) to EPA on June 20, 2013, which floor at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, by the Central Regional Air Planning address revised Best Available Retrofit Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Association (CENRAP). Technology (BART) requirements for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. [FR Doc. 2014–03854 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] sulfur dioxide (SO2) and oxides of Terry Johnson (6PD–L), Air Planning Section, Environmental Protection BILLING CODE 6560–50–P nitrogen (NOX) for Units 3 and 4 of AEP/PSO’s Northeastern Power Station Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue in Rogers County, Oklahoma. The (6PD–L), Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202– revisions (collectively, the ‘‘Oklahoma 2733. The telephone number is (214) SIP revisions’’) also address the 665–2154. Mr. Johnson can also be requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) reached via electronic mail at concerning non-interference with [email protected]. programs to protect visibility in other SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: states. Throughout this document whenever

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12955

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 3 and 4 of AEP/PSO’s Northeastern rulemaking requirements unless the EPA. Power Station, as well as an enforceable agency certifies that the rule will not commitment to address any shortfall have a significant economic impact on Table of Contents that may occur with respect the a substantial number of small entities. I. What is the background for this action? emission reductions relied upon in the Small entities include small businesses, II. What final action is EPA taking? IT SIP. EPA has made the determination small not-for-profit enterprises, and III. Responses to Comments Received that the Oklahoma RH SIP revision is small governmental jurisdictions. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews approvable because the plan’s For purposes of assessing the impacts I. What is the background for this provisions meet all applicable of today’s rule on small entities, small action? requirements of the CAA and EPA entity is defined as: (1) A small business implementing regulations. as defined by the Small Business The Oklahoma regional haze (RH) and EPA is finalizing this action under Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 interstate transport (IT) FIP being section 110 and part C of the Act. CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental amended by this action was jurisdiction that is a government of a promulgated in order to address certain III. Responses to Comments Received city, county, town, school district or deficiencies in Oklahoma’s BART We received a total of 273 comments special district with a population of less determinations concerning the concerning our proposed action. The than 50,000; and (3) a small appropriate level of control of SO2 issues raised in those comment letters organization that is any not-for-profit emissions for Units 3 and 4 of AEP/ are summarized, along with our enterprise which is independently PSO’s Northeastern Power Station, as response to each, in the separate notice owned and operated and is not well as Units 4 and 5 of Oklahoma Gas being published in today’s Federal dominant in its field. and Electric’s (OG&E) Muscogee Plant Register that approves the Oklahoma This rule withdraws the FIP for AEP/ and Units 1 and 2 of the OG&E’s Sooner SIP revisions. Copies of the comments PSO’s Northeastern Power Station, Plant. On December 28, 2011, EPA are available in the docket for this which is not a small entity, and does not disapproved the SO2 BART rulemaking. (Please see Docket No. create any new requirements. After determinations for all six units and EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0227 in the considering the economic impact of this simultaneously issued a FIP containing regulations.gov Web site). rule on small entities, I certify that this a more stringent SO2 BART action will not have a significant determination (76 FR 81728). In the IV. Statutory and Executive Order economic impact on a substantial same action, EPA approved the Reviews number of small entities. This final rule Oklahoma IT SIP, except to the extent Withdrawal of the Oklahoma RH and will not impose any requirements on that it relied on the disapproved SO2 IT FIP as it applies to AEP/PSO small entities. BART determinations for the six units Northeastern Power Station means that D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act mentioned above. The FIP containing the Federal plan no longer applies to the more stringent SO2 BART this facility. This FIP withdrawal action for AEP/ determinations also satisfied EPA’s FIP PSO’s Northeastern Power Station obligation arising from the disapproval A. Executive Order 12866—Regulatory contains no Federal mandates under the of the IT SIP. Planning and Review and Executive provisions of Title II of the Unfunded The background for this final rule and Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), the separate action also being published Regulatory Review 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538 for State, local, or today that approves the Oklahoma SIP This FIP withdrawal action for AEP/ tribal governments or the private sector. revisions is discussed in detail in our PSO’s Northeastern Power Station is not This action imposes no enforceable duty August 21, 2013 proposal (see 78 FR a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under on any State, local or tribal governments 51686). The comment period was open the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 or the private sector. Therefore, this for 30 days, and we received 273 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is action is not subject to the requirements comments in response to our proposed therefore not subject to review under of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. action. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 This FIP withdrawal action for AEP/ PSO’s Northeastern Power Station is II. What final action is EPA taking? FR 3821, January 21, 2011). also not subject to the requirements of We are withdrawing the Oklahoma B. Paperwork Reduction Act section 203 of UMRA because it RH and IT FIP at 40 CFR 52.1923, as it This FIP withdrawal action for AEP/ contains no regulatory requirements that applies to Units 3 and 4 of AEP/PSO’s PSO Northeastern Power Station does might significantly or uniquely affect Northeastern Power Station. Therefore, not impose an information collection small governments. This action removes as of the effective date of this final rule, burden under the provisions of the a Federal plan for AEP/PSO’s the Oklahoma RH and IT FIP will no Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Northeastern Power Station. Small longer apply to AEP/PSO Northeastern 3501 et seq. because this FIP governments are not impacted. Power Station. The Oklahoma RH and amendment under section 110 and part E. Executive Order 13132—Federalism IT FIP provisions applicable to OG&E’s C of the Clean Air Act will not in-and- Muscogee and Sooner plants are of itself create any new information This FIP withdrawal action for AEP/ unaffected by this action and remain in collection burdens. Because this final PSO Northeastern Power Station does place. action does not impose an information not have federalism implications. It will As explained in our August 21, 2013 collection burden, the Paperwork not have substantial direct effects on the proposal (see 78 FR 51686), this action Reduction Act does not apply. States, on the relationship between the is made possible because of our separate national government and the State, or action being published in today’s C. Regulatory Flexibility Act on the distribution of power and Federal Register to approve the The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) responsibilities among the various Oklahoma SIP revisions, which update generally requires an agency to conduct levels of government, as specified in the Oklahoma RH and IT SIP to include a regulatory flexibility analysis of any Executive Order 13132. The CAA a revised BART determination for Units rule subject to notice and comment establishes the scheme whereby states

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12956 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

take the lead in developing SIPs practices) that are developed or adopted reference, Intergovernmental relations, including SIPs to attain the NAAQS and by voluntary consensus standards Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, to meet other applicable CAA bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide Regional haze, Reporting and requirements including the Best Congress, through OMB, explanations recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur Available Retrofit requirements in CAA when the Agency decides not to use dioxide, Visibility, and Volatile organic section 169(b)(2)(A) and the Visibility available and applicable voluntary compounds. Impairment requirements in CAA consensus standards. This FIP Dated: February 7, 2014. section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). This action withdrawal action for AEP/PSO’s Gina McCarthy, will not modify this relationship. Thus, Northeastern Power Station does not Administrator. Executive Order 13132 does not apply involve technical standards. Therefore, to this action. EPA did not consider the use of any Title 40, chapter I, of the Code of voluntary consensus standards. Federal Regulations is amended as F. Executive Order 13175—Consultation follows: and Coordination With Indian Tribal J. Executive Order 12898—Federal Governments Actions To Address Environmental PART 52—APPROVAL AND This FIP withdrawal action for AEP/ Justice in Minority Populations and PROMULGATION OF PSO’s Northeastern Power Station does Low-Income Populations IMPLEMENTATION PLANS not have tribal implications, as specified This final rule does not provide EPA ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, with the discretionary authority to continues to read as follows: November 9, 2000). In this action, EPA address, as appropriate, is not addressing any Tribal disproportionate human health or Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Implementation Plans. This action is environmental effects, using practicable ■ 2. Section 52.1923 is amended by limited to the withdrawal of the and legally permissible methods, under revising the section heading, and Oklahoma RH and IT FIP for AEP/PSO’s Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, paragraphs (a), (c), and (e)(1) to read as Northeastern Power Station. Thus, February 16, 1994). follows: Executive Order 13175 does not apply K. Congressional Review Act to this action. § 52.1923 Best Available Retrofit The Congressional Review Act, 5 Requirements (BART) for SO2 and Interstate G. Executive Order 13045—Protection of U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small pollutant transport provisions; What are the Children From Environmental Health Business Regulatory Enforcement FIP requirements for Units 4 and 5 of the Risks and Safety Risks Oklahoma Gas and Electric Muskogee Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides plant; and Units 1 and 2 of the Oklahoma EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 that before a rule may take effect, the Gas and Electric Sooner plant affecting (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as agency promulgating the rule must visibility? applying only to those regulatory submit a rule report, which includes a (a) Applicability. The provisions of actions that concern health or safety copy of the rule, to each House of the this section shall apply to each owner risks, such that the analysis required Congress and to the Comptroller General or operator, or successive owners or under section 5–501 of the executive of the United States. EPA will submit a operators, of the coal burning order has the potential to influence the report containing this action and other equipment designated as: Units 4 or 5 of regulation. This action is not subject to required information to the U.S. Senate, the Oklahoma Gas and Electric EO 13045 because EPA is withdrawing the U.S. House of Representatives, and Muskogee plant; and Units 1 or 2 of the the Oklahoma RH and IT FIP for AEP/ the Comptroller General of the United Oklahoma Gas and Electric Sooner PSO’s Northeastern Power Station, as States prior to publication of the rule in plant. authorized by the CAA. the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it * * * * * H. Executive Order 13211—Actions is published in the Federal Register. (c) Definitions. All terms used in this Concerning Regulations That This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as part but not defined herein shall have Significantly Affect Energy Supply, defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). the meaning given them in the CAA and Distribution, or Use in parts 51 and 60 of this chapter. For This FIP withdrawal action for AEP/ L. Petitions for Judicial Review the purposes of this section: PSO’s Northeastern Power Station is not Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 24-hour period means the period of subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Air Act, petitions for judicial review of time between 12:01 a.m. and 12 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not this action must be filed in the United midnight. a significant regulatory action under States Court of Appeals for the Air pollution control equipment Executive Order 12866. appropriate circuit by May 6, 2014. includes selective catalytic control Filing a petition for reconsideration by units, baghouses, particulate or gaseous I. National Technology Transfer and the Administrator of this final rule does scrubbers, and any other apparatus Advancement Act not affect the finality of this action for utilized to control emissions of Section 12(d) of the National the purposes of judicial review nor does regulated air contaminants that would Technology Transfer and Advancement it extend the time within which a be emitted to the atmosphere. Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– petition for judicial review may be filed, Boiler-operating-day means any 24- 113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs and shall not postpone the effectiveness hour period between 12:00 midnight EPA to use voluntary consensus of such rule or action. This action may and the following midnight during standards in its regulatory activities not be challenged later in proceedings to which any fuel is combusted at any time unless to do so would be inconsistent enforce its requirements. (See section at the steam generating unit. with applicable law or otherwise 307(b)(2).) Daily average means the arithmetic impractical. Voluntary consensus average of the hourly values measured standards are technical standards (e.g., List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 in a 24-hour period. materials specifications, test methods, Environmental protection, Air Heat input means heat derived from sampling procedures, and business pollution control, Incorporation by combustion of fuel in a unit and does

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12957

not include the heat input from SUMMARY: NMFS reduces the weight, trip limit will remain in effect preheated combustion air, recirculated commercial trip limit for vermilion until July 1, 2014, or until the quota is flue gases, or exhaust gases from other snapper in or from the exclusive reached and the commercial sector sources. Heat input shall be calculated economic zone (EEZ) of the South closes, whichever occurs first. in accordance with 40 CFR part 75. Atlantic to 500 lb (227 kg), gutted Owner or Operator means any person weight. This trip limit reduction is Classification necessary to protect the South Atlantic who owns, leases, operates, controls, or The Regional Administrator, supervises any of the coal burning vermilion snapper resource. Southeast Region, NMFS, has equipment designated as: DATES: This rule is effective 12:01 a.m., determined this temporary rule is (i) Unit 4 of the Oklahoma Gas and local time, March 11, 2014, until 12:01 necessary for the conservation and Electric Muskogee plant; or a.m., local time, July 1, 2014. management of South Atlantic (ii) Unit 5 of the Oklahoma Gas and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: vermilion snapper and is consistent Electric Muskogee plant; or Catherine Hayslip, telephone: 727–824– with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the (iii) Unit 1 of the Oklahoma Gas and 5305, email: Catherine.Hayslip@ Electric Sooner plant; or noaa.gov. FMP, and other applicable laws. (iv) Unit 2 of the Oklahoma Gas and This action is taken under 50 CFR SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Electric Sooner plant. snapper-grouper fishery includes 622.191(a)(6) and is exempt from review Regional Administrator means the vermilion snapper in the South Atlantic under Executive Order 12866. Regional Administrator of EPA Region 6 and is managed under the Fishery These measures are exempt from the or his/her authorized representative. Management Plan for the Snapper- procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility Unit means one of the coal fired Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic boilers covered under paragraph (a) of Act because the temporary rule is issued Region (FMP). The FMP was prepared this section. without opportunity for prior notice and by the South Atlantic Fishery comment. * * * * * Management Council and is This action responds to the best (e) * * * implemented under the authority of the (1) No later than the compliance date Magnuson-Stevens Fishery available scientific information recently in paragraph (b) of this section, the Conservation and Management Act obtained from the fishery. Pursuant to 5 owner or operator shall install, calibrate, (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Assistant maintain and operate Continuous at 50 CFR part 622. Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) The commercial ACL (commercial (AA), finds good cause to waive the for SO2 on Units 4 and 5 of the quota) for vermilion snapper in the requirements to provide prior notice Oklahoma Gas and Electric Muskogee South Atlantic is divided into two 6- and the opportunity for public comment plant; and Units 1 and 2 of the month time periods, and is 401,874 lb on this temporary rule. Such procedures Oklahoma Gas and Electric Sooner plant (182,287 kg), gutted weight (446,080 lb are unnecessary because the rule itself in accordance with 40 CFR 60.8 and (202,338 kg), round weight), for the has already been subject to notice and 60.13(e), (f), and (h), and Appendix B of January 1 through June 30, 2014, fishing comment, and all that remains is to Part 60. The owner or operator shall season, and 401,874 lb (182,287 kg), notify the public of the trip limit comply with the quality assurance gutted weight (446,080 lb (202,338 kg), reduction. procedures for CEMS found in 40 CFR round weight), for the July 1 through Allowing prior notice and part 75. Compliance with the emission December 31, 2014, fishing season, as opportunity for public comment is limits for SO2 shall be determined by specified in 50 CFR 622.190(a)(4)(i)(B) using data from a CEMS. and (ii)(B), respectively. contrary to the public interest because * * * * * Under 50 CFR 622.191(a)(6)(ii), NMFS of the need to immediately implement [FR Doc. 2014–03857 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] is required to reduce the commercial this action to protect vermilion snapper BILLING CODE 6560–50–P trip limit for vermilion snapper from because the capacity of the fishing fleet 1,000 lb (454 kg), gutted weight (1,110 allows for rapid harvest of the ACL lb (503 kg), round weight), to 500 lb (quota). Prior notice and opportunity for DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (227 kg), gutted weight (555 lb (252 kg), public comment for this trip limit round weight), when 75 percent of the reduction would require time and National Oceanic and Atmospheric fishing season quota is reached or would result in the trip limit reduction Administration projected to be reached, by filing a not being implemented, and increase notification to that effect with the Office the probability that the commercial ACL 50 CFR Part 622 of the Federal Register, as implemented (commercial quota) will be exceeded. [Docket No. 130312235–3658–02] by the final rule for Regulatory For the aforementioned reasons, the Amendment 18 (78 FR 47574, August 6, AA also finds good cause to waive the RIN 0648–XD117 2013). Based on current statistics, NMFS 30-day delay in the effectiveness of this has determined that 75 percent of the action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of available commercial quota for the Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper- January 1 through June 30, 2014, fishing Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Grouper Resources of the South season, for vermilion snapper will be Dated: March 4, 2014. Atlantic; Trip Limit Reduction reached on or before March 11, 2014. Emily H. Menashes, Accordingly, NMFS is reducing the AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and commercial trip limit for vermilion snapper to 500 lb (227 kg), gutted Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), [FR Doc. 2014–04991 Filed 3–4–14; 4:15 pm] Commerce. weight (555 lb (252 kg), round weight), in or from the South Atlantic EEZ at BILLING CODE 3510–22–P ACTION: Temporary rule; trip limit 12:01 a.m., local time, on March 11, reduction. 2014. This 500-lb (227-kg), gutted

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12958 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE thereby requiring a quota transfer to and Aleutian Islands Management Area account for an increase in Virginia’s (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific National Oceanic and Atmospheric landings that would have otherwise Fishery Management Council under Administration accrued against the North Carolina authority of the Magnuson-Stevens quota. The Regional Administrator has Fishery Conservation and Management 50 CFR Part 648 determined that the criteria set forth in Act. Regulations governing fishing by [Docket No. 121009528–2729–02] § 648.102(c)(2)(i) have been met. The U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP revised summer flounder commercial appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 RIN 0648–XD116 quotas for calendar year 2014 are: North and 50 CFR part 679. Carolina, 2,993,041 lb (1,357,621 kg); The A season apportionment of the Fisheries of the Northeastern United and Virginia, 2,560,571 lb (1,161,455 2014 Pacific cod total allowable catch States; Summer Flounder Fishery; kg). (TAC) specified for vessels using jig gear Quota Transfer in the BSAI is 1,905 metric tons (mt) as Classification AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries established by the final 2014 and 2015 Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and This action is taken under 50 CFR harvest specifications for groundfish in Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), part 648 and is exempt from review the BSAI (79 FR 12108, March 4, 2014). Commerce. under Executive Order 12866. The Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, (Regional Administrator) has ACTION: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Temporary rule; quota transfer. determined that jig vessels will not be Dated: March 4, 2014. SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the able to harvest 1,700 mt of the A season State of North Carolina is transferring a Emily H. Menashes, apportionment of the 2014 Pacific cod portion of its 2014 commercial summer Acting Director, Office of Sustainable TAC allocated to those vessels under flounder quota to the Commonwealth of Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. § 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(A)(1). Therefore, in Virginia. NMFS is adjusting the quotas [FR Doc. 2014–04993 Filed 3–4–14; 4:15 pm] accordance with § 679.20(a)(7)(iv)(C), and announcing the revised commercial BILLING CODE 3510–22–P NMFS apportions 1,700 mt of Pacific quota for each state involved. cod from the A season jig gear apportionment to the annual amount DATES: Effective March 4, 2014, through DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE specified for catcher vessels less than 60 December 31, 2014. feet (18.3 meters(m)) length overall FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: National Oceanic and Atmospheric (LOA) using hook-and-line or pot gear. Carly Bari, Fishery Management Administration The harvest specifications for Pacific Specialist, 978–281–9224. cod included in the final 2014 harvest SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 50 CFR Part 679 specifications for groundfish in the Regulations governing the summer [Docket No. 131021878–4158–02] BSAI (79 FR 12108, March 4, 2014) are flounder fishery are in 50 CFR part 648, revised as follows: 205 mt to the A and require annual specification of a RIN 0648–XD160 season apportionment and 1,474 mt to commercial quota that is apportioned the annual amount for vessels using jig among the coastal states from North Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic gear, and 6,218 mt to catcher vessels Carolina through Maine. The process to Zone Off Alaska; Reallocation of less than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA using set the annual commercial quota and the Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and hook-and-line or pot gear. percent allocated to each state are Aleutian Islands Management Area Classification described in § 648.102. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries The final rule implementing Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and This action responds to the best Amendment 5 to the Summer Flounder, Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), available information recently obtained Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Commerce. from the fishery. The Assistant Management Plan, which was published Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA ACTION: Temporary rule; reallocation. on December 17, 1993 (58 FR 65936), (AA), finds good cause to waive the provided a mechanism for summer SUMMARY: NMFS is reallocating the requirement to provide prior notice and flounder quota to be transferred from projected unused amount of Pacific cod opportunity for public comment one state to another. Two or more states, from vessels using jig gear to catcher pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 under mutual agreement and with the vessels less than 60 feet (18.3 meters) U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is concurrence of the Administrator, length overall using hook-and-line or impracticable and contrary to the public Greater Atlantic Region, NMFS pot gear in the Bering Sea and Aleutian interest. This requirement is (Regional Administrator), can transfer or Islands management area. This action is impracticable and contrary to the public combine summer flounder commercial necessary to allow the A season interest as it would prevent NMFS from quota under § 648.102(c)(2). The apportionment of the 2014 total responding to the most recent fisheries Regional Administrator is required to allowable catch of Pacific cod to be data in a timely fashion and would consider the criteria in § 648.102(c)(2)(i) harvested. delay the reallocation of Pacific cod to evaluate requests for quota transfers specified from jig vessels to catcher or combinations. DATES: Effective March 4, 2014, through vessels less than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA North Carolina has agreed to transfer 2400 hours, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), using hook-and-line or pot gear. Since 132,788 lb (60,232 kg) of its 2014 December 31, 2014. the fishery is currently open, it is commercial quota to Virginia. This FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: important to immediately inform the transfer was prompted by summer Obren Davis, 907–586–7228. industry as to the revised allocations. flounder landings of a number of North SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS Immediate notification is necessary to Carolina vessels that were granted safe manages the groundfish fishery in the allow for the orderly conduct and harbor in Virginia due to mechanical Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) efficient operation of this fishery, to failure and hazardous weather between according to the Fishery Management allow the industry to plan for the fishing January 1, 2014, and January 31, 2014, Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea season, and to avoid potential

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12959

disruption to the fishing fleet as well as Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Regulatory Area of the GOA. NMFS was processors. NMFS was unable to Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North unable to publish a notice providing publish a notice providing time for Pacific Fishery Management Council time for public comment because the public comment because the most under authority of the Magnuson- most recent, relevant data only became recent, relevant data only became Stevens Fishery Conservation and available as of March 3, 2014. available as of March 3, 2014. Management Act. Regulations governing The AA also finds good cause to The AA also finds good cause to fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance waive the 30-day delay in the effective waive the 30-day delay in the effective with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 date of this action under 5 U.S.C. date of this action under 5 U.S.C. CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon Regulations governing sideboard the reasons provided above for waiver of the reasons provided above for waiver of protections for GOA groundfish prior notice and opportunity for public prior notice and opportunity for public fisheries appear at subpart B of 50 CFR comment. comment. part 680. This action is required by § 679.20 This action is required by § 679.20 The A season allowance of the 2014 and is exempt from review under and is exempt from review under Pacific cod total allowable catch (TAC) Executive Order 12866. apportioned to catcher/processors using Executive Order 12866. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. hook-and-line gear in the Western Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulatory Area of the GOA is 2,436 Dated: March 4, 2014. Dated: March 4, 2014. metric tons (mt), as established by the Emily H. Menashes, Emily H. Menashes, final 2013 and 2014 harvest Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Acting Director, Office of Sustainable specifications for groundfish of the GOA Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. (78 FR 13162, February 26, 2013) and [FR Doc. 2014–04994 Filed 3–4–14; 4:15 pm] [FR Doc. 2014–04992 Filed 3–4–14; 4:15 pm] inseason adjustment (79 FR 601, January BILLING CODE 3510–22–P BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 6, 2014). In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), the Administrator, Alaska Region, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NMFS (Regional Administrator) has determined that the A season allowance National Oceanic and Atmospheric National Oceanic and Atmospheric of the 2014 Pacific cod TAC Administration Administration apportioned to catcher/processors using hook-and-line gear in the Western 50 CFR Part 679 50 CFR Part 679 Regulatory Area of the GOA will soon [Docket No. 131021878–4158–02] [Docket No. 120918468–3111–02] be reached. Therefore, the Regional Administrator is establishing a directed RIN 0648–XD158 RIN 0648–XD157 fishing allowance of 2,406 mt and is setting aside the remaining 30 mt as Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic bycatch to support other anticipated Zone Off Alaska; Reallocation of Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by groundfish fisheries. In accordance with Pollock in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Catcher/Processors Using Hook-and- § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional Islands Line Gear in the Western Regulatory Administrator finds that this directed Area of the Gulf of Alaska AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries fishing allowance has been reached. Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and directed fishing for Pacific cod by Commerce. catcher/processors using hook-and-line Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), ACTION: Temporary rule. Commerce. gear in the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA. After the effective date of this ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. SUMMARY: NMFS is reallocating the closure the maximum retainable projected unused amounts of the Aleut SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed amounts at § 679.20(e) and (f) apply at Corporation’s pollock directed fishing fishing for Pacific cod by catcher/ any time during a trip. allowance and the Community processors using hook-and-line gear in Classification Development Quota from the Aleutian the Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf Islands subarea to the Bering Sea of Alaska (GOA). This action is This action responds to the best subarea directed fisheries. These actions necessary to prevent exceeding the A available information recently obtained are necessary to provide opportunity for season allowance of the 2014 Pacific from the fishery. The Assistant harvest of the 2014 total allowable catch cod total allowable catch apportioned to Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA of pollock, consistent with the goals and catcher/processors using hook-and-line (AA), finds good cause to waive the objectives of the Fishery Management gear in the Western Regulatory Area of requirement to provide prior notice and Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea the GOA. opportunity for public comment and Aleutian Islands Management Area. pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 DATES: Effective 1200 hours, Alaska U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local local time (A.l.t.), March 4, 2014, impracticable and contrary to the public time (A.l.t.), March 7, 2014, until 2400 through 1200 hours, A.l.t., June 10, interest. This requirement is hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2014. 2014. impracticable and contrary to the public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh interest as it would prevent NMFS from Steve Whitney, 907–586–7269. Keaton, 907–586–7228. responding to the most recent fisheries SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS data in a timely fashion and would manages the groundfish fishery in the manages the groundfish fishery in the delay the directed fishing closure of BSAI exclusive economic zone GOA exclusive economic zone Pacific cod by catcher/processors using according to the Fishery Management according to the Fishery Management hook-and-line gear in the Western Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12960 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

and Aleutian Islands Management Area As of March 4, 2014, the percent). The 2014 pollock incidental (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, catch allowance remains at 38,770 mt. Fishery Management Council (Council) (Regional Administrator) has As a result, the harvest specifications for under authority of the Magnuson- determined that 7,750 mt of Aleut pollock in the Aleutian Islands subarea Stevens Fishery Conservation and Corporation’s DFA and 1,900 mt of included in the final 2014 and 2015 Management Act. Regulations governing pollock CDQ in the Aleutian Islands harvest specifications for groundfish in fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance subarea will not be harvested. the BSAI (79 FR 12108, March 4, 2014) with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 Therefore, in accordance with are revised as follows: 7,350 mt to Aleut CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. § 679.20(a)(5)(iii)(B)(4), NMFS Corporation’s DFA and 0 mt to CDQ reallocates 7,750 mt of Aleut pollock. Furthermore, pursuant to In the Aleutian Islands subarea, the Corporation’s DFA and 1,900 mt of § 679.20(a)(5), Table 3 of the final 2014 portion of the 2014 pollock total pollock CDQ from the Aleutian Islands and 2015 harvest specifications for allowable catch (TAC) allocated to the subarea to the 2014 Bering Sea subarea Aleut Corporation’s directed fishing allocations. The 1,900 mt of pollock groundfish in the BSAI (79 FR 12108, allowance (DFA) is 15,500 metric tons CDQ is added to the 2014 Bering Sea March 4, 2014) is revised to make 2014 (mt) and the Community Development CDQ DFA. The remaining 7,750 mt of pollock allocations consistent with this Quota (CDQ) is 1,900 mt as established pollock is apportioned to the AFA reallocation. This reallocation results in by the final 2014 and 2015 harvest Inshore sector (50 percent), AFA adjustments to the 2013 Aleut specifications for groundfish in the catcher/processor sector (40 percent), Corporation and CDQ pollock BSAI (79 FR 12108, March 4, 2014). and the AFA mothership sector (10 allocations established at § 679.20(a)(5).

TABLE 3—FINAL 2014 AND 2015 ALLOCATIONS OF POLLOCK TACS TO THE DIRECTED POLLOCK FISHERIES AND TO THE CDQ DIRECTED FISHING ALLOWANCES (DFA) 1 [Amounts are in metric tons]

2014 A season 1 2014 B 2015 A season 1 2015 B 1 1 season 2015 season Area and sector 2014 SCA SCA Allocations A season B season Allocations A season harvest B season DFA harvest DFA limit 2 DFA limit 2 DFA

Bering Sea subarea1,276,650 n/a n/a n/a 1,258,000 n/a n/a n/a CDQ DFA ...... 128,600 51,440 36,008 77,160 125,800 50,320 35,224 75,480 ICA 1 ...... 38,770 n/a n/a n/a 38,495 n/a n/a n/a AFA Inshore...... 554,640 221,856 155,299 332,784 546,853 218,741 153,119 328,112 AFA Catcher/Proc- essors 3 ...... 443,712 177,485 124,239 266,227 437,482 174,993 122,495 262,489 Catch by C/Ps ...... 405,996 162,399 n/a 243,598 400,296 160,118 n/a 240,178 Catch by CVs 3 ...... 37,716 15,086 n/a 22,629 37,186 14,874 n/a 22,312 Unlisted C/P Limit 4 .. 2,219 887 n/a 1,331 2,187 875 n/a 1,312 AFA Motherships..... 110,928 44,371 31,060 66,557 109,371 43,748 30,624 65,622 Excessive Harvesting Limit 5 ...... 194,124 n/a n/a n/a 191,398 n/a n/a n/a Excessive Proc- essing Limit 6 ...... 332,784 n/a n/a n/a 328,112 n/a n/a n/a

Total Bering Sea DFA ...... 1,109,280 443,712 310,598 665,568 1,093,705 437,482 306,237 656,223

Aleutian Islands subarea 1 ...... 9,350 n/a n/a n/a 19,000 n/a n/a n/a CDQ DFA ...... 0 0 n/a 0 1,900 760 n/a 1,140 ICA ...... 2,000 1,000 n/a 1,000 2,000 1,000 n/a 1,000 Aleut Corporation ..... 7,350 7,350 n/a 0 15,100 14,005 n/a 1,095

Bogoslof District ICA 7 ...... 75 n/a n/a n/a 75 n/a n/a n/a 1 Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A), the BS subarea pollock, after subtracting the CDQ DFA (10 percent) and the ICA (3.4 percent), is allocated as a DFA as follows: Inshore sector—50 percent, catcher/processor sector (C/P)—40 percent, and mothership sector—10 percent. In the BS subarea, 40 percent of the DFA is allocated to the A season (January 20–June 10) and 60 percent of the DFA is allocated to the B season (June 10–November 1). Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(iii)(B)(2)(i) and (ii), the annual AI pollock TAC, after subtracting first for the CDQ directed fishing allowance (10 percent) and second the ICA (2,000 mt), is allocated to the Aleut Corporation for a pollock directed fishery. In the AI subarea, the A season is allocated 40 percent of the ABC and the B season is allocated the remainder of the pollock directed fishery. 2 In the BS subarea, no more than 28 percent of each sector’s annual DFA may be taken from the SCA before April 1. 3 Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(4), not less than 8.5 percent of the DFA allocated to listed catcher/processors shall be available for harvest only by eligible catcher vessels delivering to listed catcher/processors. 4 Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(4)(iii), the AFA unlisted catcher/processors are limited to harvesting not more than 0.5 percent of the catcher/ processors sector’s allocation of pollock. 5 Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(6), NMFS establishes an excessive harvesting share limit equal to 17.5 percent of the sum of the non-CDQ pollock DFAs. 6 Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(7), NMFS establishes an excessive processing share limit equal to 30.0 percent of the sum of the non-CDQ pollock DFAs. 7 The Bogoslof District is closed by the final harvest specifications to directed fishing for pollock. The amounts specified are for ICA only and are not apportioned by season or sector. Note: Seasonal or sector apportionments may not total precisely due to rounding.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12961

Classification DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE directed fishing season for sablefish managed under the IFQ Program be This action responds to the best National Oceanic and Atmospheric specified by the Administrator, Alaska available information recently obtained Administration Region, and announced by publication from the fishery. The Assistant in the Federal Register. This method of Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA 50 CFR Part 679 season announcement was selected to (AA), finds good cause to waive the [Docket No. 111207737–2141–02 and facilitate coordination between the requirement to provide prior notice and 1112113751–2102–02] sablefish season, chosen by the opportunity for public comment RIN 0648–XD159 Administrator, Alaska Region, and the pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 halibut season, adopted by the U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic International Pacific Halibut impracticable and contrary to the public Zone Off Alaska; Sablefish Managed Commission (IPHC). The directed interest. This requirement is Under the Individual Fishing Quota fishing season for sablefish with fixed impracticable and contrary to the public Program gear managed under the IFQ Program interest as it would prevent NMFS from will open 1200 hours, A.l.t., March 8, responding to the most recent fisheries AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 2014, and will close 1200 hours, A.l.t., data in a timely fashion and would November 7, 2014. This period runs delay the reallocation of AI pollock. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. concurrently with the IFQ season for Since the pollock fishery is currently Pacific halibut announced by the IPHC. ACTION: Temporary rule; opening. open, it is important to immediately The IFQ halibut season will be specified inform the industry as to the final SUMMARY: NMFS is opening directed by a separate publication in the Federal Bering Sea subarea pollock allocations. fishing for sablefish with fixed gear Register of annual management Immediate notification is necessary to managed under the Individual Fishing measures pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62. allow for the orderly conduct and Quota (IFQ) Program and the efficient operation of this fishery; allow Community Development Quota (CDQ) Classification the industry to plan for the fishing Program. The season will open 1200 This action responds to the best season and avoid potential disruption to hours, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), March available information recently obtained the fishing fleet as well as processors; 8, 2014, and will close 1200 hours, from the fishery. The Assistant and provide opportunity to harvest A.l.t., November 7, 2014. This period is Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, increased seasonal pollock allocations the same as the 2014 commercial (AA), finds good cause to waive the while value is optimum. NMFS was halibut fishery opening dates adopted requirement to provide prior notice and unable to publish a notice providing by the International Pacific Halibut opportunity for public comment time for public comment because the Commission. The IFQ and CDQ halibut pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 most recent, relevant data only became season is specified by a separate U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is available as of March 3, 2014. publication in the Federal Register of annual management measures. impracticable and contrary to the public The AA also finds good cause to DATES: Effective 1200 hours, A.l.t., interest. This requirement is waive the 30-day delay in the effective impracticable and contrary to the public date of this action under 5 U.S.C. March 8, 2014, until 1200 hours, A.l.t., November 7, 2014. interest as it would prevent NMFS from 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon responding to the most recent fisheries the reasons provided above for waiver of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Obren Davis, 907–586–7228. data in a timely fashion and would prior notice and opportunity for public delay the opening of the sablefish comment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Beginning in 1995, fishing for Pacific halibut and fishery thereby increasing bycatch and This action is required by § 679.20 sablefish with fixed gear in the IFQ regulatory discards between the and is exempt from review under regulatory areas defined in 50 CFR 679.2 sablefish fishery and the halibut fishery, Executive Order 12866. has been managed under the IFQ and preventing the accomplishment of Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Program. The IFQ Program is a the management objective for regulatory regime designed to promote simultaneous opening of these two Dated: March 4, 2014. the conservation and management of fisheries. NMFS was unable to publish Emily H. Menashes, these fisheries and to further the a notice providing time for public Acting Director, Office of Sustainable objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens comment because the most recent, Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. Fishery Conservation and Management relevant data only became available as [FR Doc. 2014–04995 Filed 3–4–14; 4:15 pm] Act and the Northern Pacific Halibut of March 3, 2014. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Act. Persons holding quota share receive The AA also finds good cause to an annual allocation of IFQ. Persons waive the 30-day delay in the effective receiving an annual allocation of IFQ date of this action under 5 U.S.C. are authorized to harvest IFQ species 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon within specified limitations. Further the reasons provided above for waiver of information on the implementation of prior notice and opportunity for public the IFQ Program, and the rationale supporting it, are contained in the comment. preamble to the final rule implementing This action is required by § 679.23 the IFQ Program published in the and is exempt from review under Federal Register, November 9, 1993 (58 Executive Order 12866. FR 59375) and subsequent amendments. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. This announcement is consistent with § 679.23(g)(1), which requires that the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12962 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Dated: March 4, 2014. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2014–04990 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:29 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM 07MRR1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 12963

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 45

Friday, March 7, 2014

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER limit standards identical for the exhausted before parties may file suit in contains notices to the public of the proposed Appalachian and Southeast orders: 25 court. Under Section 608c(15)(A) of the issuance of rules and regulations. The percent of deliveries to pool plants AMAA, any handler subject to an order purpose of these notices is to give interested during the months of January, February, may request modification or exemption persons an opportunity to participate in the July, August, September, October, and from such order by filing a petition with rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. November, and 35 percent in the the Department of Agriculture (USDA) months of March, April, May, June, and stating that the order, any provision of December; (3) Reduce touch-base the order, or any obligation imposed in DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE standards to one day each month for the connection with the order is not in Appalachian and Southeast orders; (4) accordance with the law. A handler is Agricultural Marketing Service Add January and February as months afforded the opportunity for a hearing when transportation credits are paid for on the petition. After a hearing, USDA 7 CFR Parts 1005, 1006 and 1007 the Appalachian and Southeast orders; would rule on the petition. The AMAA [AMS–DA–07–0059; AO–388–A22; AO–356– (5) Provide for the payment of provides that the district court of the A43 and AO–366–A51; Doc. No. DA–07–03] transportation credits in the United States in any district in which Appalachian and Southeast orders for the handler is an inhabitant, or has its Milk in the Appalachian, Florida and full loads of supplemental milk; (6) principal place of business, has Southeast Marketing Areas; Final Provide more flexibility in the jurisdiction in equity to review USDA’s Decision on Proposed Amendments to qualification requirements for ruling on the petition, provided a bill in Marketing Agreements and to Orders supplemental milk producers to receive equity is filed not later than 20 days transportation credits for the after the date of the entry of the ruling. AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, Appalachian and Southeast orders; and Regulatory Flexibility Act and USDA. (7) Increase the monthly transportation Paperwork Reduction Act ACTION: Proposed rule. credit assessment from $.20 per hundredweight (cwt) to $0.30 per cwt in In accordance with the Regulatory SUMMARY: This final decision proposes the Southeast order. This decision also Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), the to permanently adopt amendments that increases the maximum administrative Agricultural Marketing Service has adjust the Class I pricing surface of the assessment for the Appalachian, considered the economic impact of this Appalachian, Florida, and Southeast Florida, and Southeast orders from action on small entities and has certified Federal milk marketing orders. In $0.05 per cwt to $0.08 per cwt. that this proposed rule would not have addition, this decision seeks to adopt Increasing the maximum administrative a significant economic impact on a proposals that amend certain features of assessment was initially addressed in a substantial number of small entities. For the diversion limit, touch-base, and separate recommended decision (73 FR the purposes of the Regulatory transportation credit provisions for the 11062). Comments concerning the Flexibility Act, a dairy farm is Appalachian and Southeast milk recommended decision were requested considered a small business if it has an marketing orders. This decision also but none were received. Accordingly, annual gross revenue of less than proposes to adopt amendments that this document is the final decision on $750,000 and a dairy products increase the maximum administrative all proposals addressed in both the manufacturer is a small business if it assessment for the Appalachian, Florida tentative final decision (73 FR 11194) has fewer than 500 employees. and Southeast marketing orders. The for items 1 through 7 above and the For the purposes of determining orders as amended are subject to recommended decision (73 FR 11062) which dairy farms are small businesses, approval by producers in the affected that were simultaneously published in the $750,000 per year criterion was used markets. Producer approval for this the Federal Register on February 25, to establish a marketing guideline of action will be determined concurrently 2008. 500,000 pounds per month. Although with amendments adopted in a separate This administrative action is governed this guideline does not factor in final decision that amends the by the provisions of Sections 556 and additional monies that dairy producers transportation balancing fund and other 557 of Title 5 of the United States Code receive, it should be an inclusive provisions of the Appalachian and and, therefore, is excluded from the standard for most small dairy farmers. Southeast milk marketing orders. requirements of Executive Order 12866. For purposes of determining a handler’s FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin The amendments to the rules size, if the plant is part of a larger Taylor, USDA/AMS/Dairy Programs, proposed herein have been reviewed company operating multiple plants that Order Formulation and Enforcement under Executive Order 12988, Civil collectively exceed the 500-employee Branch, STOP 0231-Room 2971, 1400 Justice Reform. They are not intended to limit, the plant will be considered a Independence Avenue SW., have a retroactive effect. If adopted, the large business even if the local plant has Washington, DC 20250–0231, (202) 720– amendments would not preempt any fewer than 500 employees. 7311, email address: state or local laws, regulations, or During May 2007, the time of the [email protected]. policies, unless they present an hearing, there were 2,744 dairy farmers SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final irreconcilable conflict with this rule. pooled on the Appalachian order (Order decision adopts amendments that: (1) The Agricultural Marketing 5), 2,924 dairy farmers pooled on the Adjust the Class I pricing surface in the Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 Southeast order (Order 7), and 283 dairy Appalachian, Florida, and Southeast U.S.C. 601–674) (AMAA), provides that farmers pooled on the Florida order marketing orders; (2) Make diversion administrative proceedings must be (Order 6). Of these, 2,612 dairy farmers

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12964 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

in Order 5 (or 95 percent), 2,739 dairy The adopted amendments revise the those handlers who incur the costs of farmers in Order 7 (or 94 percent), and Appalachian and Southeast orders by providing supplemental milk for the 153 dairy farmers in Order 6 (or 54 making the diversion limit standards for Appalachian and Southeast orders. The percent) were considered small the orders identical—not to exceed 25 amendments also expand the payment businesses. percent in each of the months of of transportation credits for During May 2007, there were a total January, February, and July through supplemental milk to include the full of 36 plants associated with the November, and 35 percent in each of the load of milk rather than the calculated Appalachian order (22 fully regulated months of March through June and for Class I portion and provide more plants, 10 partially regulated plants, 2 the month of December. Prior to their flexibility in the qualification producer-handlers, and 2 exempt interim adoption, the diversion limit requirements for supplemental milk plants). A total of 55 plants were standards of the Appalachian order for producers to receive transportation associated with the Southeast order (33 pool plants and cooperatives acting as credits. In addition, the maximum fully regulated plants, 9 partially handlers were not to exceed 25 percent monthly transportation credit regulated plants, 2 producer-handlers, in each of the months of July through assessment for the Southeast order is and 11 exempt plants). A total of 25 November, January, and February; and increased from $0.20 per cwt to $0.30 plants were associated with the Florida 40 percent in each of the months of per cwt on all milk assigned to Class I order (13 fully regulated plants, 9 December and March through June. For use. The transportation credit partially regulated plants, 1 producer- the Southeast order, prior to their provisions are applicable only to the handler, and 2 exempt plants). The interim adoption, the diversion limit Appalachian and Southeast orders, are number of plants meeting small standards for pool plants and applied in an identical fashion to both business criteria under the Appalachian, cooperatives acting as handlers were not large and small businesses, and will not Southeast, and Florida orders were 8 (or to exceed 33 percent in each of the have any different impact on those 22 percent), 18 (or 33 percent), and 11 months of July through December and businesses producing manufactured (or 44 percent), respectively. 50 percent in each of the months of milk products. The changes will not The adopted amendments in this final January through June. have a significant economic impact on decision provide for an increase in Class In addition, the adopted amendments a substantial number of small entities. I prices in the Appalachian, Southeast, establish identical touch-base standards The adopted amendments also allow and Florida orders. The minimum Class of at least one day’s milk production the Market Administrators of the I prices of the three southeastern orders, every month for a dairy farmer in the Appalachian, Southeast, and Florida as with all other Federal milk marketing Appalachian and Southeast orders. Prior orders to increase the administrative orders, are set by using the higher of an to their interim adoption, the assessment from the current $0.05 per advance Class III or Class IV price as Appalachian order had a touch-base cwt to $0.08 per cwt if necessary to standard of 6 days’ production in each maintain adequate funds for the determined by USDA and adding a of the months of July through December operation of the orders. Administrative location-specific differential, referred to and not less than 2 days’ production in assessments are charged without regard as a Class I differential. Minimum Class each of the months of January through to the size of any dairy industry or I prices charged to regulated handlers June. Prior to their interim adoption, the entity. Therefore, the proposed are applied uniformly to both large and Southeast order had a touch-base amendments will not have a significant small entities. At the time of the standard of not less than 10 days’ economic impact on a substantial hearing, the Department estimated that production in each of the months of July number of small entities. the proposed Class I price increases through December and not less than 4 The Agricultural Marketing Service is would generate higher marketwide pool days’ production in each of the months committed to complying with the E- values in all three southeastern orders of of January through June. Government Act, to promote the use of approximately $18–19 million for the The adopted amendments to the the Internet and other information Appalachian order, $17.5 million for the pooling standards serve to revise technologies to provide increased Southeast order, and $38 million for the established criteria that determine those opportunities for citizen access to Florida order, on a monthly basis. It was producers, producer milk, and plants Government information and services. estimated that monthly minimum prices that have a reasonable association with This action does not require paid to dairy farmers (blend prices) and are consistently serving the fluid additional information collection that would increase approximately $0.26 per needs of the Appalachian and Southeast needs clearance by the Office of cwt for the Appalachian order, $0.64 per marketing areas. Criteria for pooling are Management and Budget (OMB) beyond cwt for the Southeast order, and $1.20 established on the basis of performance currently approved information per cwt for the Florida order. levels that are considered adequate to collection. The primary sources of data The Class I price increases were meet the Class I needs and determine used to complete the forms are routinely implemented on an interim basis those producers who are eligible to used in most business transactions. effective May 1, 2008.1 As a result of share in the revenue that arises from the Forms require only a minimal amount of those increases, marketwide pool values classified pricing of milk. The criteria information that can be supplied were increased in 2011 by for pooling are established without without data processing equipment or a approximately $16 million in the regard to the size of any dairy industry trained statistical staff. Thus, the Appalachian order, $38 million in the or entity. The established criteria are information collection and reporting Florida order, and $16 million in the applied in an identical fashion to both burden is relatively small. Requiring the Southeast order. This resulted in an large and small businesses and do not same reports for all handlers does not increase in 2011 monthly minimum have any different economic impact on significantly disadvantage any handler prices paid to dairy farms of $0.25 per small entities as opposed to large that is smaller than the industry cwt for the Appalachian order, $1.25 per entities. average. cwt in the Florida order, and $1.25 per The adopted amendments add Interested parties were invited to cwt in the Southeast order. January and February to the months of submit comments on the probable July through December as months when regulatory and informational impact of 1 73 FR 14153. transportation credits may be paid to this proposed rule on small entities.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12965

Prior Documents in This Proceeding in Class I prices and the Class I pricing represents a modest tightening of the Notice of Hearing: Issued May 3, surface in the three southeastern orders; diversion limit standards for the 2007; published May 8, 2007 (72 FR and for the Appalachian and Southeast Appalachian order and a significant 25986). orders, more stringent diversion limit tightening of the diversion limit Partial Tentative Final Decision: standards, lower touch-base standards, standards for the Southeast order. and other specific changes to the This decision adopts identical touch- Issued February 25, 2008; published transportation credit balancing fund base standards of at least 1 day’s milk February 29, 2008 (73 FR 11194). provisions. This final decision also production per month for a dairy farmer Partial Recommended Decision: adopts proposals, published in the to be considered a producer under each Issued February 25, 2008; published hearing notice as Proposals 4, 5, and 6, respective order’s Producer milk February 29, 2008 (73 FR 11062). for increasing the maximum definition and for making a producer’s Interim Final Rule: Issued March 12, administrative assessment rate on milk eligible for diversion to nonpool 2008; published March 17, 2008 (73 FR producer milk from the current $0.05 plants. This represents a significant 14153). per cwt to $0.08 per cwt for the change from the touch-base standards Correcting Amendments: Issued May Appalachian, Southeast, and Florida for the Appalachian and Southeast 6, 2008; published May 9, 2008 (73 FR orders. orders. Prior to their interim adoption, 26513). While the summary of testimony is the Appalachian order touch-base Preliminary Statement presented as four separate material standard was 6 days’ production in each issues, the discussion and findings on of the months of July through December A public hearing was held upon all material issues are provided after the and not less than 2 days’ production in proposed amendments to the marketing summary of comments and exceptions. each of the months of January through agreement and the orders regulating the The minimum Class I prices of the June. For the Southeast order, the touch- handling of milk in the Appalachian, three southeastern orders, as with all base standard was not less than 10 days’ Florida and Southeast marketing areas. other Federal milk marketing orders, are production in each of the months of July The hearing was held, pursuant to the set by using the higher of an advance through December and not less than 4 provisions of the Agricultural Marketing Class III or Class IV price as determined days’ production in each of the months Agreement Act of 1937 (AMAA), as by USDA and adding a location-specific of January through June. amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), and the differential, referred to as a Class I Currently, of the three southeastern applicable rules of practice and differential. The Class I differentials are orders, only the Appalachian and procedure governing the formulation of location-specific by county and parish Southeast orders contain provisions for marketing agreements and marketing for all States of the 48 contiguous a transportation credit to partially offset orders (7 CFR Part 900). United States. These Class I differentials handler costs of transporting The proposed amendments set forth are specified in 7 CFR 1000.52. supplemental milk for Class I use during below are based on the record of a The diversion limit standards of the certain times of the year from producers public hearing held in Tampa, Florida, Appalachian and Southeast milk orders located outside of the two marketing on May 21–23, 2007, pursuant to a are described in the Producer milk areas. These producers are not part of notice of hearing issued May 3, 2007, definition of the orders (7 CFR 1005.13 the regular and consistent supply of published May 8, 2007 (72 FR 11194). and 7 CFR 1007.13, respectively). The Class I milk to the Appalachian and Upon the basis of the evidence standards specify the maximum volume Southeast marketing areas. introduced at the hearing and the record of milk that may be diverted to a Transportation credit balancing funds thereof, USDA issued a Tentative Final nonpool plant and still pooled and were first established for the Decision and a Recommended Decision priced under each respective order. Appalachian and Southeast (or on February 25, 2008, containing notice Prior to their interim adoption, the predecessor orders) in 1996 and operate of the opportunity to file written diversion limit standards of the independently of the producer exceptions thereto. Appalachian order for cooperatives settlement funds. A monthly per cwt The materials issues on the hearing acting as handlers (and pool plant assessment is charged to Class I record relate to: operators that are not cooperatives) were handlers on a year-round basis on the 1. Class I Prices—adjustments and not to exceed 25 percent in each of the volume of milk assigned to Class I use pricing surface. months of July through November and at a rate of $0.15 per cwt in the 2. Producer milk—diversion limit and the months of January and February. Appalachian order and, prior to its touch-base standards. Those limits changed to 40 percent in interim adoption, $0.20 per cwt in the 3. Transportation credit balancing each of the months of March through Southeast order. Payments from the fund provisions. June as well as the month of December. transportation credit balancing fund are 4. Administrative assessment Prior to their interim adoption for the made during the months of July through provisions. Southeast order, the diversion limit December (when milk supplies are standards for cooperatives acting as tightest) in both orders to those handlers Findings and Conclusions handlers (and pool plant operators that that incur the costs of providing This final decision proposes to adopt are not cooperatives) were not to exceed supplemental milk. The transportation proposals, published in the hearing 33 percent in each of the months of July credit balancing fund provisions were notice as Proposals 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, through December and 50 percent in amended in a separate rulemaking and seeking to make various changes to the each of the months of January through made effective on an interim basis on Appalachian, Southeast, and Florida June. As adopted herein, the diversion December 1, 2006 (71 FR 62377), and milk marketing orders (hereinafter these limit standards of both orders are made were again amended by this rulemaking marketing areas and marketing orders identical—not to exceed 25 percent for proceeding on an interim basis effective will collectively be referred to as the the months of January, February, and March 18, 2008 (73 FR 14153). southeastern marketing areas or orders each of the months of July through Changes proposed in this final as appropriate). These amendments November, and 35 percent for each of decision to the Appalachian and form a package of changes that the months of March through June and Southeast order transportation credit simultaneously provide for an increase for the month of December. This balancing fund provisions continue the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12966 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

previous amendments that were According to the witness, DCMA Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee adopted on an interim basis (73 FR consists of nine Capper-Volstead have collectively increased by 8.4 14153). The amendments: (1) Extend the cooperative members that include percent from 2000 to 2006, while the number of months that transportation Arkansas Dairy Cooperative population of the U.S. as a whole credit balancing funds may be paid from Association, Damascus, AR; Cooperative increased 6.2 percent. the current months of July through Milk Producers Association, Inc., Using market administrator statistics December to include the months of Blackstone, VA; Dairy Farmers of on in-area milk production for the three January and February, with the option America (DFA), Kansas City, MO; southeastern marketing order areas, the of the month of June if requested and Dairymen’s Marketing Cooperative, Inc., DCMA witness contrasted population approved by the market administrator; Mt. Grove, MO; Lone Star Milk growth to the region’s milk production (2) expand the payment of Producers, Inc., Windthorst, TX; to demonstrate that the dairy industry is transportation credits for supplemental Maryland & Virginia Milk Producers in serious decline. The witness said that milk to include the entire load of milk Cooperative Association, Inc. (MD–VA), during 2006 milk was delivered into the rather than the current calculated Class Reston, VA; Select Milk Producers, Inc., three southeastern orders from at least I utilization; (3) provide more flexibility Artesia, NM; Southeast Milk, Inc. (SMI), 27 States. The witness explained that in the qualification requirements for Belleview, FL; and Zia Milk Producers, local in-area milk production (milk supplemental milk producers to receive Inc., Roswell, NM. The witness testified produced within the geographic transportation credits; and (4) increase that each of the DCMA members marketing area boundaries) during 2006 the monthly transportation credit marketed and pooled milk in one or for both the Appalachian and Southeast assessment rate from the current $0.20 more of the three southeastern milk areas supplied the entire Class I needs per cwt to $0.30 per cwt for the marketing order areas during 2006. of these two areas only 4 months of the Southeast order. According to the DCMA witness, year and Florida’s in-state milk The final decision also recommends during December 2006 members of production was insufficient to supply DCMA pooled more than 87 percent of the Class I needs in every month of adoption of three proposals published cooperative and non-member producer 2006. The witness estimated that the in the hearing notice as Proposals 4, 5, milk on the Appalachian order, more Appalachian and Southeast marketing and 6 seeking to increase the maximum than 87 percent of the cooperative and areas are able to supply only about 76 administrative assessment rates of the non-member producer milk on the percent of the milk necessary to meet Appalachian, Southeast, and Florida Southeast order, and more than 96 Class I, Class II, and reserve demands, orders. Specifically, the maximum percent of the cooperative and non- while in Florida in-area producers are administrative assessment rates member producer milk on the Florida able to supply only about 66 percent of collected on pooled producer milk in order. the milk necessary to meet Class I and the Appalachian, Southeast, and Florida The DCMA witness testified that their reserve demands annually. The DCMA orders will be increased from the proposed changes to the Class I pricing witness asserted that minimum Federal current maximum administrative surface better reflect the actual cost of order Class I prices have increased only assessment rate of $0.05 per cwt to transporting milk and the pattern in twice in the past 22 years—as a part of $0.08 per cwt. Proposal 4 was submitted which milk produced outside of the the 1985 Farm Bill and as part of by the Appalachian Market marketing areas moves into the three Federal milk order reform made Administrator and Proposals 5 and 6 marketing areas. According to the effective in January 2000. Specifically, were submitted by the Market witness, the cost of procuring milk for the witness related that the Class I Administrator for the Southeast and fluid use for the southeast region has differential for Atlanta increased from Florida orders. These proposals were increased because local production is in $2.30 to $3.08 per cwt in 1985 but was addressed in a separate recommended serious decline and continues to decline increased by only $.02 to $3.10 in decision that solicited comments and at an increasing rate. The witness noted January 2000. According to the witness, exceptions to the proposed assessment that the three southeastern orders under Federal order reform, some Class rate increase. No comments or collectively import more than one-third I differentials in distant milk surplus exceptions to the recommended of the region’s milk supply during the areas were increased more than in the decision were received. most deficit months of the year to cover milk-deficit regions of the southeast. 1. Class I Prices—Adjustments and the fluid milk needs. Fluid demand The DCMA witness was also of the Pricing Surface exceeds 300 million pounds of milk opinion that changes to the Class I price each month in the three southeastern surface resulted in a flattened price A witness appearing on behalf of the marketing areas, the witness said. The surface and narrowed producer blend proponents, Dairy Cooperative witness characterized the economic price differences between orders. The Marketing Association (DCMA) testified situation of the dairy industry in the witness testified that such changes in support of temporarily increasing region as dire and marketing conditions diminished the economic incentives to minimum Class I prices in the three as disorderly. The witness asserted that move milk within the southeastern southeastern milk marketing orders. The producers currently experience marketing areas as well as to move milk witness testified that all elements of inequitable prices for their milk, that into the deficit southeastern region of their proposals are offered as a ‘‘single handlers have unequal costs, and that the U.S. According to the witness, package’’ to address the needs of all the there are insufficient economic minimum Class I price differences and southeastern region’s dairy industry incentives for the procurement of milk returns to producers are simply not high stakeholders. It was the opinion of the supplies. enough to move milk into these deficit witness that the supply of milk for fluid The DCMA witness characterized the markets without substantial over-order use in these marketing areas is southeastern region as having rapid premiums. threatened and that several population growth. The witness The DCMA witness explained that simultaneous changes to the provisions indicated that the U.S. Census Bureau since 1986 diesel fuel prices have risen of the three orders are needed to attract population growth estimates for the more rapidly than Class I differentials a sufficient quantity of milk to meet the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, (and thus Class I prices) in the fluid needs of the markets. Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana, North southeastern region. Relying on data of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12967

the Energy Information Administration marketing areas would not be changed. The DCMA witness characterized the (EIA) of the U.S. Department of Energy, The witness was of the opinion that the proposed adjustments to the calculated the witness noted that the U.S. average proposed Class I price adjustments are Class I price surface as being the result diesel fuel price increased by 187 reasonably aligned with Class I prices in of ‘‘smoothing.’’ The witness explained percent from 1986 and 2006 (from $0.94 adjoining marketing areas. Through an that deviation from the calculated Class per gallon to $2.07 per gallon.) The analysis of plant-to-plant movements of I price adjustment represents the witness compared this increase to the packaged milk, the witness indicated incorporation of best professional 0.64 percent or $0.02 per cwt increase that DCMA’s proposed Class I pricing judgment in assuring that plants located in the Class I differential for Atlanta structure provides pricing adjustments near each other have the same Class I since 1986. that are reasonable and improves the price adjustment and the need to The DCMA witness testified that the slope of the Class I price surface. maintain alignment with Class I prices slope of the Class I pricing surface The DCMA witness explained that in adjoining marketing areas. should be changed to progressively both a most distant demand point and According to the DCMA witness, the increase Class I prices as milk moves to several supply locations were identified proposed adjustments for plant the east and south within the three in developing the proposed Class I price locations regulated by the Appalachian marketing areas. The witness was of the surface. The witness indicated that order would increase in the range of opinion that changing the slope of the Miami, FL, was identified as the most $0.10 per cwt to $1.00 per cwt; plants Class I price surface inside the three distant demand point in the regulated by the Southeast order would marketing areas in this way would southeastern region from any alternative increase in the range of $0.10 per cwt better encourage milk to move within milk supply area. According to the to $1.15 per cwt; and plants regulated the marketing areas. Additionally, the witness, the five possible major supply by the Florida order would increase witness was of the opinion that pricing locations and their distance to Miami between $1.30 per cwt to $1.70 per cwt. signals to producers would direct their were also identified. These locations Relying on market administrator data, supplies to the most milk-deficit included: Wayne County, OH; Jasper the DCMA witness concluded that the portions of the region. In this regard, the County, IN; Hopkins County, TX; proposed Class I price increases would witness added that simply raising Class Lancaster County, PA; and Franklin generate higher marketwide pool values I prices uniformly throughout the three County, PA. in all three southeastern orders. marketing areas would not result in The witness indicated that of the five According to the witness, the estimated improved pricing signals to producers. possible supply sources, Wayne County, annual increase of the Appalachian The DCMA witness explained that in OH, was determined as the least cost order pool for 2004, 2005, and 2006 developing the proposed Class I price supply location with a calculated Class resulting from the proposed Class I structure and adjustments to current I price adjustment of $6.14 per cwt at prices alone would have totaled $19.3 Class I price levels, DCMA considered Miami, FL. The witness testified that million, $18.6 million, and $18.3 two alternatives. According to the Class I price adjustments were million, respectively. For the Southeast witness, in one pricing alternative all progressively adjusted to smaller and order, the witness said, the annual pool the Class I price relationships between smaller values as plant location values value increase would have totaled $16.8 plants in the three southeastern orders in the southeastern region were adjusted million, $17.1 million, and $17.7 could be retained. However, under this by their distance from the supply million, respectively. For the Florida alternative, the witness explained, the locations. order, the witness said, the annual Class I prices for the plants on the outer According to the DCMA witness, the increase in pool value would have edges of the Appalachian and Southeast plant-to-plant cost of moving packaged totaled $36.4 million, $38.3 million, and marketing area boundaries would milk was analyzed. The witness testified $39.2 million, respectively. In increase considerably, resulting in that successive movements of packaged estimating the impact on minimum significant changes in price fluid milk from the outer edge of the prices paid to dairy farmers, the witness relationships between those plants and Appalachian and Southeast marketing said that average annual minimum plants regulated by adjoining Federal areas towards Miami, FL, were uniform prices (as announced at current orders. analyzed. As with bulk milk locations) would have increased by Alternatively, the DCMA witness said movements, the witness explained, at approximately $0.25 per cwt to $0.26 that the slope of the Class I price surface each plant location the minimum cost of per cwt for the Appalachian order, within the three marketing areas could moving packaged milk was determined approximately $0.64 per cwt higher for be altered to minimize plant-to-plant and compared to the minimum costs of the Southeast order, and $1.19 per cwt Class I price relationship changes. The moving bulk milk. The witness to $1.22 per cwt higher for the Florida witness testified that this approach concluded that the bulk and plant-to- order. would result in a pricing structure that plant packaged milk movements were The DCMA witness acknowledged better reflected actual milk movements very similar. and explained that changes in Class I from within and outside of the The DCMA witness testified that the price relationships between plant marketing areas. The witness pointed calculated Class I pricing adjustments locations resulting from any changed out that in either approach, plant-to- were re-adjusted so that plants located Class I price surface would be plant price relationships would change near each other would have a similar inevitable. In this regard, the witness and that the method they chose Class I price adjustment. The witness asserted that the price adjustment provided the least change in plant-to- also acknowledged that the proposed differences between plant locations plant price relationships. pricing structure could not maintain under the DCMA proposal would not The DCMA witness also stressed the current Class I price relationships exceed the cost of moving Class I fluid need for the proposed Class I price because the current Class I price surface milk products and therefore would not adjustments to remain aligned with the does not reflect actual hauling costs. result in the uneconomic movement of Class I price structure in adjoining According to the witness, the west-to- milk. marketing areas. The witness said that east proposed increase in Class I price The DCMA witness concluded by the proposed Class I price surface adjustments reflects higher hauling testifying that orderly marketing would outside of the three southeastern costs. be improved with a Class I price

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12968 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

structure that is more reflective of the organizations that were part of the on how the proposals would impact true hauling costs to supply the milk- Southeast Producers Steering NDH’s wholesale packaged milk sales. deficit southeastern region. The witness Committee (SPSC), whose members The witness also suggested that issues urged that the proposed Class I price include North Carolina Dairy Producers discussed at the hearing could be adjustments and pricing surface be Association, Georgia Milk Producers addressed by utilizing a point-of-sale or adopted immediately. The witness Association, Upper South Milk plant-point pricing method. reiterated that the proposed Class I price Producers Association, Kentucky Dairy A witness appearing on behalf of the adjustments be temporarily adopted Development Council (KDDC), North Kroger Company (Kroger) testified in pending any system-wide changes to the Carolina Department of Agriculture and opposition to the proposed Class I price Class I differential level and pricing Consumer Services, and the North adjustments for the Appalachian and surface. Carolina Farm Bureau Federation. All Southeast marketing orders. According A total of 11 dairy farmers whose milk four witnesses were of the opinion that to the witness, Kroger operates four is pooled on at least 1of the 3 the proposed Class I price adjustments fluid distributing plants regulated by the southeastern orders testified at the would not be adequate to increase Appalachian and Southeast orders hearing in support of DCMA’s package prices paid to dairy farmers in order to (Winchester Farms, Westover Dairy, of proposals, but suggested stem the decline of milk production in Heritage Farms Dairy, and Centennial modifications on how the package the southeastern region. The witnesses Farms Dairy). The opinion of the should be changed. were of the opinion that additional witness was that the proposed Class I Three of the dairy farmers who efforts should be made to enhance local price adjustments would disrupt testified were cooperative members of milk production. One dairy farmer traditional pricing relationships, which MD–VA, DFA, and SMI (cooperatives witness testifying on behalf of the KDDC were established by the 1985 Farm Bill, previously described as member said that other adjustments needed to be and would generate competitive organizations of DCMA). These made to the proposed Class I price discrepancies with adjoining markets. witnesses testified that the dairy adjustments because Kentucky dairy The Kroger witness testified that the industry in the southeastern region is in farmers would benefit less from the proposed Class I price adjustments need of changes to the three marketing proposed adjustments than dairy would place their plants in an orders to respond to the decline in farmers located in the Southeast and unacceptable competitive situation with regional milk production. Their Florida marketing areas. Another North each other in the Appalachian and testimonies joined that of the DCMA Carolina dairy farmer witness offered witness supporting the DCMA Southeast marketing areas. Specifically, the opinion that Appalachian producers the witness requested that the Class I proposals. would need to receive at least a $1.00 A dairy farmer whose milk is price adjustments for Louisville, KY; to $1.50 per cwt increase in their marketed on the Southeast and Florida Lynchburg, VA; Murfreesboro, TN; and mailbox price to stimulate local milk marketing orders testified on behalf of Atlanta, GA be unchanged. The witness production. A third North Carolina Cobblestone Milk Producers, Inc. and also suggested that Winchester, KY, be Mountain View Farms of Virginia in dairy farmer witness stressed that more increased by no more than $0.10 per cwt limited support of the Class I price emphasis should be made on increasing in order to maintain competitive milk surface feature of DCMA’s package of local milk production rather than procurement price relationships with proposals provided certain seeking better ways to import milk into other plants located in the Cincinnati modifications were made. This witness the region. Another dairy farmer, also area of the Mideast milk marketing area. agreed with proponents concerning the from North Carolina, expressed concern The witness opposed the proponent’s decline of milk production in the that over-order premiums might fall position that the proposal be considered southeastern region and the need to because of the proposed Class I prices on an emergency basis. import supplemental milk supplies. adjustments. In addition, an SPSC A witness appearing on behalf of the According to the witness, lower witness, as well as others, called for a Milk Industry Foundation (MIF) producer pay prices in the southeastern comprehensive study to identify testified in opposition to the Class I region have led to rapidly declining problems and alternatives to the price adjustments of DCMA’s package of production that is not being replaced by proposals regarding the decline of milk proposals. According to the witness, new farms or the expansion of existing production in the southeastern region. MIF is a member organization of the farms. It was the opinion of this witness A witness appearing on behalf of International Dairy Foods Association that the projected increases in producer National Dairy Holdings (NDH) testified (IDFA) which represents 115 member pay prices arising from the proposed in limited opposition to the Class I price companies that market approximately increase in Class I prices would not be adjustments of the DCMA package. 85 percent of the nation’s milk and enough to affect production trends in According to the witness, NDH is a dairy products. The witness testified the southeastern region. The witness national dairy processor with facilities that the proposed changes are not expressed concern that Class I located throughout the United States. necessary because an adequate of processors would demand their over- The witness indicated no specific supply of milk already exists for the order premiums be lowered to opposition to Class I price increases but Appalachian, Southeast, and Florida compensate for increases in the three conditioned such increases on the fair orders. The witness stated that because orders’ minimum Class I prices. The distribution of the revenue to producers the Federal order system is a national witness requested that the proposed in the southeastern region. While the market, milk is available from anywhere Class I price adjustments for the witness testified that NDH has no in the country. The witness noted over- Appalachian and Southeast marketing difficulty procuring milk for its plants order premiums compensate those areas be increased but did not offer located in the southeastern region, the entities who supply the deficit regions. specific amounts. witness acknowledged other testimony The witness was of the opinion that Four dairy farmers from North that identified milk production declining milk production in the Carolina testified in general support of problems of the southeastern region and southeastern region has been occurring the proposed Class I price adjustments. that the region’s producers are in need for many years and as such does not Three of the witnesses represented of relief. The witness expressed concern warrant an increase in Class I prices.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12969

Accordingly, the witness said, transported increases at a constant rate], lower diversion limit standards relative emergency action is not warranted. but that the cost of hauling packaged to orders with substantial reserve milk The MIF witness was of the opinion milk was nonlinear. Accordingly, the supplies. The witness testified that that Class I prices cannot be changed in Dean witness argued that the proposed while the Appalachian and Southeast one region of the country without Class I pricing changes could give order diversion limit standards affecting milk marketings in other distributing plants located outside the generally reflect their milk-deficit regions. The witness said that the marketing areas incentive to change marketing conditions, they are in need proposed Class I price adjustments their route dispositions in order to of tightening. Specifically, the DCMA would change the competitive become regulated on one of the three witness proposed that the diversion relationships between plants located marketing orders. limit standards be 25 percent during within and outside of the three According to the Dean witness, each of the months of January, February, southeastern marketing areas. The distributing plants located outside the and July through November, and 35 witness argued that Class I sales would area could become regulated at the percent for each of the months of March be discouraged because all Class I plants expense of plants located in the area. As through June and for the month of in the three marketing areas would be a result, the witness concluded, Class I December. required to pay a higher price for milk. revenue generated by out-of-area In explaining the analysis conducted The witness requested a comprehensive distributing plants would be returned to in arriving at the proposed new analysis of the national market before dairy farmers located far outside of the diversion limit standards for the adopting the proposed Class I price three southeastern marketing areas. The Appalachian and Southeast orders, the adjustments. witness offered that perhaps the greatest DCMA witness testified that daily A witness appearing on behalf of beneficiaries of the proposed Class I producer milk receipts by distributing Dean Foods Inc. (Dean) testified in pricing changes could be producers plants regulated by the two orders from opposition to the proposed Class I price located as far away as Illinois and January 2004 through December 2006 adjustments of DCMA’s package of Indiana. were compared to the day of the month proposals. The witness agreed with The Dean witness also criticized when daily receipts at distributing testimony of other witnesses indicating reliance on Wooster, OH, (located in plants were the greatest. The witness the deficit milk supply conditions in the Wayne County) as a supply area for the explained that the differences between three southeastern marketing areas and southeastern region and being a basis of the day of the greatest receipts and each the need to increase prices paid to the DCMA’s proposed Class I price day’s actual receipts for the month at region’s local dairy farmers. adjustments. The witness noted while distributing plants were then summed. The Dean witness was of the opinion DCMA identifies Wooster, OH, as a According to the witness, the resulting that a comprehensive analysis of the supply area for the southeastern region, value represents the amount of potential impacts of changing the Class a Pennsylvania State proceeding held in additional milk that would need to be I price surface in the three marketing 2006 indicated the testimony of a DFA pooled as reserve milk to be able to areas had not been conducted. The witness saying that milk was not satisfy Class I demands at a distributing witness characterized DCMA’s package available in the Wooster, OH, area to plant on the day of their greatest need. of proposals as containing ‘‘too many supply Pennsylvania. The witness stated that the analysis moving parts’’ that make it difficult to The Dean witness offered nine showed that an additional milk volume evaluate the impact of the proposed modifications to DCMA’s package of of 12 to 13 percent of distributing plant Class I price adjustment features. The proposals. The witness explained that receipts would be the minimum reserve witness was of the opinion that their proposed modifications to the necessary to cover daily fluctuations in Appalachian and Southeast marketing package of proposals would not seek to the demand for fluid milk at distributing area dairy farmers are in greater need of provide higher Class I prices or change plants. On an annual basis, the higher producer prices than dairy the Class I pricing surface. According to minimum average reserve needed as farmers in the Florida marketing area the witness, the Appalachian and calculated is about 22 percent, the and noted that the proposed Class I Southeast marketing orders’ pooling witness said. price adjustments would benefit provisions should be identical to those The witness explained that the Appalachian and Southeast marketing of the Florida marketing order proposed diversion limit standards of 25 area producers the least. In this regard, (discussed further below). percent for both orders for each of the the witness worried that the prices months of January, February, and July received by dairy farmers across the 2. Producer Milk—Diversion Limit and through November, are based on the southeastern region would be unfairly Touch-Base Standards analysis described above and the need distributed if the proposed Class I price The DCMA witness testified that the to provide for an additional reserve in changes were adopted. diversion limit standards of the the tightest supply months. The witness The Dean witness was of the opinion Appalachian and Southeast orders explained that the proposed diversion that the proposed Class I price surface should be identical. According to the limit standards of 35 percent for each of and Class I pricing adjustments would witness, diversions to nonpool plants the months of March through June and change how milk moves to and between allows for the pooling of milk that is the month of December accommodate plants located within and outside of the transferred from pool to nonpool plants seasonal fluctuations in supply. The three marketing areas. The Dean witness without milk first needing to be witness explained that this standard testified that the assumptions used by delivered to pool plants. In setting a would allow regular producers who DCMA in laying the foundation for the reasonable limit, the witness was of the supply the Class I needs of the proposed Class I price adjustments and opinion that diversion limit standards marketing areas in the tight supply Class I pricing structure are flawed. In must take into account reserve supplies months to pool all of their additional this regard, the witness noted that the needed for Class I use, the balancing production in the flush months and USDA 1999 Final Decision on Federal needs of the markets, and the accommodate the regular decline in milk order reform indicated that the cost seasonality of production. Class I sales that occurs when schools of hauling raw milk was linear [cost The DCMA witness testified that close for the summer months. According increases as the distance milk is milk-deficit Federal orders tend to have to the witness, Class I plants also

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12970 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

temporarily close or severely limit their testified that lowering the touch-base approximately 22 percent of total milk receiving operations over the holiday standard would prevent local milk pooled on the order. The witness period in December resulting in already supplying the markets’ Class I contrasted this with October 2004 when substantial surplus milk. needs from being displaced by milk the ‘‘needed’’ reserve was Relying on market administrator data, produced farther from the marketing approximately 7 percent. In this regard, the DCMA witness estimated that the areas, which is shipped in simply to the witness suggested that diversion impact on the minimum uniform prices meet pooling standards. According to limits could be reduced below that from lowering the diversion limit the witness, requiring producers to proposed by DCMA. According to the standards alone would raise blend deliver more days to pool plants when witness, if made too low, the market prices approximately $0.02 per cwt and the milk is not truly needed results in administrator has the authority to $0.07 per cwt annually for the increasing the cost of supplying the change the diversion limit standards if Appalachian and Southeast orders, Class I needs of the two markets. warranted. respectively. The witness indicated that Eight dairy farmers testified in general The Dean witness opposed DCMA’s a change in the blend price for any support of DCMA’s proposed changes to proposed one day per month touch-base particular producer would vary based the two orders’ diversion limit and standard if DCMA’s proposed diversion on where the producer’s milk was touch-base standards. Some were of the limit standards are adopted. The delivered. general opinion that the regular reserve witness was of the opinion that The DCMA witness stressed that the supply for the Appalachian and inefficient movements of milk would proposed changes in the two orders’ Southeast marketing areas should be result if the one day touch-base standard diversion limit standards do not fully pooled when not delivered to Class I were adopted. However, the witness capture the true volume of milk likely plants. While all supported the pooling indicated support for a two-day touch- to no longer be eligible to be pooled on of milk that regularly supplies the Class base standard provided the diversion the two orders. The witness explained I needs of the two marketing areas, limit standards of the Florida order are that if the volume of producer milk several dairy farmers expressed caution simultaneously adopted. delivered to pool plants were the same that the diversion limits were not being The Dean witness explained that each month, then the volume of lowered enough while touch-base when touch-base requirements are low, producer milk no longer pooled and standards were needlessly being locally produced milk can be displaced priced by the orders would drop about lowered. According to these witnesses, by milk located far from the marketing 6.67 percent and 29.72 percent on the this would encourage pooling milk not area because it needs to be transported Appalachian and Southeast orders, truly supplying the markets and result to the marketing area fewer times to respectively. The witness further in lower blend prices paid to local dairy qualify for pooling and receiving a explained that lowering the diversion farmers. The dairy farmers testifying higher blend price. The witness was of limit standards also should result in supported adopting needed changes on the opinion that only milk that is increasing minimum order blend prices an emergency basis. necessary to serve the Class I needs of paid to producers. According to the A witness representing Dean testified the market should be delivered to that witness, proposed changes to the that the proposed changes to the market. According to the witness, diversion limit standards of the orders, diversion limit and touch-base reserve milk supplies located far from together with expected increases in standards would not be sufficient to the market should not be pooled on the revenue arising from Class I price deter the uneconomic movement of milk market if they are not delivered to the adjustments and Class I pricing surface, or to enhance producer prices in the market. will likely encourage local milk Appalachian and Southeast marketing 3. Transportation Credit Provisions production, the movement of milk into areas. According to the witness, current the region from distant sources, or some diversion limit standards are in excess The DCMA witness explained that on combination of both. of the markets’ balancing needs and September 1, 2006, the Secretary issued The DCMA witness testified that the should be lowered immediately. a tentative partial decision (71 FR package of proposals also includes the The Dean witness characterized the 54118) which amended the lowering of the touch-base standards of Appalachian and Southeast orders as transportation credit provisions of the the Appalachian and Southeast orders being very similar to the Florida order Appalachian and Southeast orders. and makes them identical. According to in terms of milk consumption and Specifically, the witness noted that the the witness, this would discourage production. The witness was of the decision established a fuel cost adjuster uneconomic movements of milk and opinion that the pooling standards of to determine a variable mileage rate offer operational savings for the Florida order work well and pooling factor used to compute the payout of cooperatives supplying the Class I needs milk not consistently serving the transportation credits and higher of the marketing area. market’s Class I needs rarely occurs. The maximum transportation credit The DCMA witness explained that witness specifically proposed that assessments on Class I milk for the because of the continuing decline in diversion limit standards be changed to Appalachian and Southeast orders. To local milk production, an increasing 15 percent for each of the months of accompany these adopted changes that amount of milk that is produced further December through February, 20 percent were implemented on December 1, from the marketing areas is becoming a for each of the months of March through 2006, (71 FR 62377) the witness regular part of the supply of Class I June, and 10 percent for each of the proposed four other changes to the milk. The witness characterized this months of July through November. transportation credit provisions that are milk of distant dairy farmers as the According to the Dean witness, dairy part of the package of changes proposed reserve supply needed for balancing the farmers will receive higher blend prices for the two southeastern orders. Class I needs of the two marketing areas. if diversion limits are made even lower According to the DCMA witness, the The DCMA witness was of the than proposed by DCMA. Relying on four additional changes to the opinion that reducing the touch-base market administrator data, the witness transportation credit provisions for both standard to one day each month in both stated that January 2004 had shown the orders include: (1) extending the orders is necessary for the efficient highest ‘‘need’’ of reserve milk during months during which transportation pooling of reserve supplies. The witness 2004–2006 for the Southeast order at credits may be paid to include the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12971

months of January and February with the Producer provision under the two payment months would tend to increase June being an optional transportation orders during more than two of the transportation credit payouts. credit payment month; (2) expanding immediately preceding months of Relying on market administrator data, the payment of transportation credits to February through May, and not more the DCMA witness estimated that for the apply to the full load of milk, rather than 50 percent of the dairy farmer’s months of July through December 2006 than the current calculated Class I milk production during those two the Southeast order transportation credit portion of milk loads; (3) providing months, in aggregate, can be received as payments would total $15,704,872 as a greater flexibility for supplemental milk producer milk under the order during result of their proposal, and January and producers to be eligible to receive those 2 months. February 2006 payments would total transportation credit payments; and (4) The DCMA witness was of the approximately $2,900,000, resulting in raising the maximum monthly opinion that the requirements for an overall amount of approximately transportation credit assessment for the transportation credit payment eligibility $18,604,872. At the current assessment Southeast order from the current $0.20 should be changed to provide flexibility rate of $0.20 per cwt, the witness per cwt to $0.30 per cwt. in meeting the criteria while limiting concluded that transportation credit According to the DCMA witness, the the receipt of transportation credits to balancing funds would not have been need for supplemental milk in the only that milk which is truly sufficient to pay all transportation credit Appalachian and Southeast orders has supplemental and that is not part of the claims in 2006. At the proposed $0.30 increased during the months of January consistent and regular supply of milk per cwt assessment rate, the witness was and February. The witness offered serving the Class I needs of the two of the opinion that sufficient revenue evidence showing that during January markets. Specifically, the witness would be generated to satisfy all 2004 through December 2006, January proposed that: (1) A dairy farmer must transportation credit claims. and February are months with not meet the Producer definition on the Relying on market administrator data increasing Class I use in the orders in more than 45 of the 92 days for the Appalachian order, the witness Appalachian and Southeast orders. The in the months March through May, or said that during July 2006 through witness claimed that during January and (2) a dairy farmer must have less than January 2007, transportation credit February, local milk is not sufficient to 50 percent of their producer milk payments would have totaled supply the Class I milk needs. It is this pooled on the orders during those 3 approximately $4,073,312. According to combination of Class I need and months combined. The witness argued the witness, February 2006 would have available local producer supplies that that limiting the producer association included a payment of approximately show January and February as being with the orders to no more than half the $313,000, bringing the total estimated more like the current transportation time or to no more than half their milk transportation credit payments to credit payment months of July through production is sufficient to identify a $4,383,312. According to the witness, December than the flush months of dairy farmer as a supplemental supplier the current $0.15 per cwt assessment March through May, the witness of milk to the marketing areas. These rate for the Appalachian order would concluded. According to the witness, changes, the witness asserted, offer have been sufficient and no increase in adding January and February as substantial cost savings to cooperatives the assessment rate would be needed. transportation credit payment months that bear the burden of sourcing and The DCMA witness supported would give suppliers of supplemental supplying the supplemental milk needs continuing to provide for market milk an opportunity to recoup a portion of the markets from distant locations. administrator discretion in setting the of the hauling costs to supply the The DCMA witness testified that the transportation credit assessment rates at marketing areas with milk for fluid use. maximum transportation credit less than the maximum allowed. The In explaining this proposed change, assessment for the Southeast order witness was of the opinion that doing so the DCMA witness said, in part, current needs to be increased from the current will prevent the needless collection of transportation credit payment $0.20 per cwt to $0.30 per cwt given the revenue when the transportation credit provisions result in reimbursements that proposed expansion of the balancing funds are sufficient to meet are much lower than the real cost of transportation credit payments on full claims. hauling. The witness explained that the loads of milk to Class I distributing Four dairy farmers testified in support cost of hauling milk to Class I plants is plants regulated by the two orders. The of DCMA’s proposal to provide the same regardless of the plant’s use or witness was of the opinion that additional flexibility in determining the Class I utilization of the market. The otherwise the current assessment rate which producers are supplying witness was of the opinion that would be insufficient to cover supplemental milk to the two marketing expanding the transportation credit anticipated shortfalls in the areas. As with other features of DCMA’s payments to full loads of milk delivered transportation credit balancing fund. proposals, these dairy farmers only to pool distributing plants would While the DCMA witness proposed a supported adoption of these proposed enhance orderly marketing and better higher transportation credit assessment changes on an emergency basis. ensure that sufficient supplemental milk rate for the Southeast order only, the The witness appearing on behalf of is delivered to pool distributing plants. witness projected that the proposed Dean expressed support for adding the The witness supported continuing changes to Class I prices and the Class months of January and February as transportation credit payments on I pricing surface in the Appalachian and transportation credit payment months supplemental milk deliveries to pool Southeast orders would lessen for the Appalachian and Southeast distributing plants only. payments from the transportation credit orders on the condition that tighter The DCMA witness proposed balancing funds. The witness explained diversion limits be adopted. The simplifying the process for determining this may occur because of the greater witness said these months should be what supplemental milk is eligible for positive differences (increases) from considered as payment-eligible months transportation credit payments. The adopting the proposed Class I price because the tentative decision witness noted that currently, a dairy adjustments and Class I pricing surface. implemented in December 2006 farm must be located outside either the The witness did acknowledge that the eliminated the ability to divert milk on Appalachian or the Southeast marketing additions of the months of January and loads of milk seeking the payment of a areas, the dairy farmer must not meet February as transportation credit transportation credit. However, the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12972 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

Dean witness opposed expanding the order averaged 525 million pounds the order, gains in efficiency cannot transportation credit payment eligibility per month and in 2006, producer milk make up for revenue lost due to a to entire loads of milk. In this regard, pooled on the order averaged 520 reduction in milk volumes. the witness expressed concern that this million pounds per month. The witness The Assistant Market Administrator would essentially result in Class I sales also compared the first 4 months of for the Appalachian order concluded by funding the supply of supplemental 2007 to the first 4 months of 2006 and emphasizing that increasing the milk in lower-valued Class II uses. stated that producer milk pooled on the maximum administrative assessment order was down 3.45 percent. rate to $.08 per cwt would be the 4. Administrative Assessment Rate The Assistant Market Administrator maximum rate allowable and not According to the Assistant Market for the Appalachian order explained necessarily the rate assessed. The Administrator for the Appalachian that about $215,000 is needed each witness said the actual rate assessed order, Proposal 4 was offered to ensure month to cover basic operating would only be as high as determined by that sufficient funds are available for expenses. By keeping the assessment the market administrator with approval administering the Appalachian order. rate of $.04 per cwt, the witness said by the Dairy Programs Deputy The witness added that Proposal 4 538 million pounds of producer milk Administrator. would amend section 1005.85 (7 CFR would be needed each month to cover According to the Market 1005.85) to provide for all of the monthly order expenses. The witness Administrator for the Southeast and administrative assessment language further explained that the Appalachian Florida orders, Proposals 5 and 6 were pertinent to the Appalachian order order was in an operating deficit in offered to ensure that there are sufficient provisions and would discontinue the 2003, 2004, and 2006 and had a funds to carry out administration of the reference to section 1000.85 (7 CFR balanced budget in 2005. During 2003– orders. The witness said the proposals 1000.85). The witness explained that 2006, the witness said, the volumes of would amend sections 1006.85 (7 CFR administration and operating costs pooled producer milk did not generate 1006.85) and 1007.85 (7 CFR 1007.85) to include administrative, accounting, sufficient revenue to fund order provide for all of the administrative human resources, economic, pooling operations and lowered the mandated assessment language pertinent to the and audit staff expenses. operating reserves. Southeast and Florida orders, and The Assistant Market Administrator According to the Assistant Market would discontinue the reference to for the Appalachian order stated that the Administrator for the Appalachian section 1000.85 (7 CFR 1000.85). The market administrator is required to order, a decision effective December 1, witness explained that administration maintain a specific level of operating 2006 (71 FR 62377), established a zero and operating expenses of the order reserves. The reserve level, the witness diversion limit standard on Class I milk include pooling, auditing, and said, must be maintained in the event receiving transportation credits. The providing market information. that an order is terminated and would decision, the witness said, reduced the The Market Administrator for the fund the necessary costs for closing out amount of milk that could be pooled on Southeast and Florida orders explained an order, completing pools and audits the order and reduced the amount of that the order is required to maintain a and paying severance and leases. The assessment revenue collected during the specified level of operating reserves. reserve level is detailed in the MA period of July through December, when The reserve level, the witness said, is Instruction 207 that is issued by the those volumes of milk would be pooled. detailed in the MA Instruction 207 that Dairy Programs Deputy Administrator, In addition, the witness said that is issued by the Dairy Programs Deputy said the witness. Proposal 1, if adopted, would add Administrator. The witness said the The Assistant Market Administrator January and February as additional reserve level is kept to cover necessary for the Appalachian order said that the transportation credit payout months, costs of closing out an order, such as majority of the administrative further reducing the amount of milk that completing pools, audits, and paying assessment revenue comes from pooled could be pooled on the Appalachian severance and lease payments. producer milk. Additionally, the order. The witness stressed that The Market Administrator for the witness said, assessments are also tightening pooling provisions of the Southeast and Florida orders explained collected on other source receipts order impacts the amount of producer that the majority of the monthly assigned to Class I and certain route milk pooled on the order. The witness administrative assessment is collected disposition in the marketing area by expressed concern that less milk pooled from pooled producer milk. The witness partially regulated distributing plants. on the order would reduce added that additional assessments are The witness stated that although the administrative assessment revenue and also collected from other source receipts maximum administrative assessment the ability to fund order operations associated with Class I and certain route rate allowable on pooled producer milk while maintaining the mandated reserve disposition in the marketing area by is $0.05 per cwt, the rate currently level. partially regulated distributing plants. collected each month is $0.04 per cwt, The Assistant Market Administrator The witness stated that the market which has remained unchanged since for the Appalachian order said that the administrator largely depends on the January 2000. market administrator makes efforts to administrative assessment revenue to The Assistant Market Administrator control costs of carrying out order fund the operations of the orders. The for the Appalachian order said that operations. According to the witness, witness noted that since 2000, the during 2000–2002, producer milk cost control efforts include a reduction administrative assessments for both the pooled on the Appalachian order of office staff by 29 percent through Southeast and Florida orders have averaged 547 million pounds per attrition since January 2003, contracting contributed over 80 percent of the total month. According to the witness, the with outside computer services, income of the market administrator $0.04 per cwt assessment rate at this negotiating a telecommunications office. volume of milk created enough revenue contract, consolidating a field office, According to the Market to fund Appalachian order operations and reducing travel and mail expenses. Administrator for the Southeast and and maintain the mandated operating The witness stressed that regardless of Florida orders, the combined monthly reserve. The witness stated that from the market administrator’s efforts to average of pooled producer milk for the 2003–2005, producer milk pooled on control costs and efficiently administer two orders in 2000 was 862.8 million

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12973

pounds. In 2001, the witness said, the order operations. The witness also noted inevitably change as a result of its combined monthly average of producer a decision effective December 1, 2006, proposals, the Class I prices proposed milk pooled in both orders was 878.4 (71 FR 62337) that reduced allowable are strikingly similar to plant price million pounds and in 2002, the diversions by the volume of differences adopted in the 1999 Order combined monthly average was 885.0 transportation credit claims. The Reform final rule. The brief indicated million pounds. The witness said that witness also expressed concern that the that this is proof that its method of during 2000–2002, the assessment rates downward trend in Southeast milk developing the proposed Class I price charged in the Southeast and Florida production and marketing decisions adjustments and Class I pricing surface orders of $0.035 and $0.03 per cwt, made by handlers provides an increased is valid and meets the requirements of respectively, along with the volume of potential for variability in the revenue a regulated Class I price system. producer milk, were sufficient to fund available for order operations. The DCMA brief commented on the order operations and maintain the The Market Administrator for the method used in developing its Class I mandated reserve funds. Southeast and Florida orders concluded pricing proposals as deviating from a The Market Administrator for the that while the proposals seek to increase model developed by Cornell University Southeast and Florida orders said that the maximum assessment rate from that was relied upon in the adoption of in 2003, although producer milk in the $0.05 per cwt to $0.08 per cwt, the $0.08 current Class I pricing structure. The Florida order increased by 5 percent, per cwt would not necessarily be the brief addressed opponent arguments producer milk in the Southeast order rate charged. The witness stressed that that the cost of shipping bulk versus decreased 11 percent, resulting in a the assessed rate would only be high packaged milk follows distinct cost considerable decrease in assessment enough to cover operating expenses and equations and, therefore, different cost collections. According to the witness, maintain the mandated reserve level as curves. According to the brief, the during 2003, funds were drawn from the approved by the Deputy Administrator marginal costs involved in shipping operating reserves, reducing the reserve for Dairy Programs. bulk milk long distances (over 900 level near the mandated minimum. The miles) are still greater than zero and Post-Hearing Briefs witness said that as a result, effective subsequently do not invalidate their with January 2004 milk deliveries, the Post-hearing briefs were filed by: proposed pricing structure. The brief administrative assessment rates Dairy Cooperative Marketing characterized the proposed Class I increased by $0.01 to $0.045 and $0.04 Association (DCMA), Southeast pricing portion of the proposal package per cwt for the Southeast and Florida Producers Steering Committee (SPSC), as containing all the elements used by orders, respectively. Dean Foods Company and National the Department in the current Class I The Market Administrator for the Dairy Holdings (Dean/NDH), and the pricing structure. The brief also argued Southeast and Florida orders stated that Milk Industry Foundation (MIF). that DCMA’s proposals generate Class I in 2004, the monthly average pounds of The DCMA post-hearing brief echoed pricing relationships consistent with the producer milk pooled increased over the association’s support for adoption of objectives of marketing orders in 2003 by 1 percent and 5 percent in the their proposals on an emergency basis. assuring an adequate supply of milk for Southeast and Florida orders, The brief stated that its proposals were the three marketing areas, not respectively. The witness added that in developed as an integrated package and encouraging the uneconomic movement 2005, producer milk increased over that the package of proposals better of milk, and being reflective of the 2004 by 5 percent and 8.8 percent in the assures the Appalachian, Southeast, and supply and demand conditions for milk Southeast and Florida orders Florida milk orders’ ability to attract a within the marketing areas. respectively, and in 2006, producer milk sufficient quantity of milk for fluid use. The DCMA brief explained that increased over 2005 by 6.8 percent and The brief said this is accomplished by lowering the diversion limit standards stayed the same in the Southeast and increasing the Class I prices in the three in the Appalachian and Southeast Florida orders, respectively. milk marketing orders, lowering the orders would serve to enhance producer According to the Market diversion limit and touch-base blend prices while the decrease in the Administrator for the Southeast and standards, and modifying the producer touch-base standard would act Florida orders, the administrative transportation credit provisions. The to encourage more efficient milk assessments implemented in 2004, with brief reiterated the deficit milk supply movements and offer cost savings to the increase in producer milk during situation in the southeastern region. The milk suppliers. The brief maintained 2004–2006 and efforts to control costs, brief emphasized that procuring milk for that while some witnesses testified in have been sufficient to cover operating Class I use for the region is a major support of even lower (tighter) diversion expenses and build an adequate reserve challenge that is borne limits, no evidence to support such level. The witness added that they disproportionately by cooperative changes was presented. The brief added continue to take measures to control associations and their dairy farmer that diversion limit standards in both costs. The witness said that from 2000– members. orders will effectively be much lower 2006, cost control measures included a The DCMA brief explained that the than the proposed standards because no 15 percent reduction in staff through proposed Class I price adjustments and diversions may accompany attrition, increased use of technology to changes to the Class I pricing surface in supplemental milk pooled on the order hold meetings and conduct audits, a the Appalachian, Southeast, and Florida which receives a transportation credit reduction in travel expenses, and a orders would accomplish two needed payment. The brief also noted that decrease in communication costs. results. According to the brief, the DCMA’s proposal for extending The Market Administrator for the changes would likely encourage local transportation credit pay-out months Southeast and Florida orders explained producers to increase milk production also effectively lowers pooling milk by that Proposal 2 seeks to limit an average and provide pricing incentives for diversion. of 12.3 percent of allowable diversions producers located outside the marketing The DCMA brief stated that extending in the Southeast order which would areas to deliver milk to the three the payment of transportation credits to reduce the amount of milk pooled on marketing areas for fluid use. include the months of January and the order, as well as the value of The DCMA brief stated that, while February and to the entire loads of milk administrative assessments used to fund plant price relationships would would offer the suppliers of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12974 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

supplemental milk greater assurance who should bear the costs of compensated for their raw milk and that more of the actual costs of hauling maintaining reserve milk supplies for receive the blend price of the order they milk to the southeastern region would the Southeastern region. supply. However, the brief argued that be covered. According to the brief, The SPSC brief was of the opinion adopting the proposed Class I price simplifying the criteria that determines that record evidence also did not clearly adjustments and the Class I price if producers are supplemental suppliers indicate that the volume of milk pooled surface proposals is not supported by of milk to the marketing areas offers on the orders for other than Class I use record evidence or by rule of law and both administrative and marketing actually would be lowered by adopting should be denied. While the Dean/NDH efficiencies. Finally, the brief explained DCMA’s proposed diversion limit and brief expressed agreement that long- that the proposed increase in the touch-base standards. According to its term problems exist regarding the transportation credit assessment for the brief, the majority of the producer milk viability of the southeastern region dairy Southeast milk order will ensure that removed under the DCMA proposals industry, it doubted that correcting transportation credit payment claims are would be unavailable in only a few problems that have prevailed for 25 adequate to meet anticipated needs. months of the flush production months years could be solved overnight through The DCMA brief maintained that the for the Appalachian order and in the emergency rulemaking. record contains abundant evidence months of January and February for the According to the Dean/NDH brief, supporting the existence of emergency Southeast order. The brief expressed there is no evidence of an emergency conditions in the three marketing areas concern that milk could actually be that would warrant adopting the Class I affecting the ability to adequately added in both orders in the other price proposals by the omission of a supply fluid milk. The brief stressed months due to the decrease in the Recommended Decision. To the extent that providing adjustments for higher touch-base standard. The brief that conditions warrant the need to rely Class I prices and modifying the Class maintained that in-area producers and on milk orders to return higher prices to I pricing surface, if even on a temporary those who provide the primary supply dairy farmers, the brief asserted that an basis, is necessary immediately. The of milk for fluid use on a regular basis alternative method of returning higher brief indicated that milk production in should receive the greatest share of prices can be achieved by simply the Southeastern states during the first revenue attributable to that service. lowering the orders’ diversion limit quarter of 2007 declined at a faster rate According to the brief, pooling more standards. The Dean/NDH brief noted than the annual decline during 2006 milk than needed would only continue that Dean and NDH operate several fluid and 2005, and that this increasing rate to depress the income of Southeastern milk processing plants in the of milk production decline cannot be producers. Southeastern region and that other ignored. The brief reiterated the The SPSC brief found agreement with processors testifying at the hearing continuing increases in hauling costs Dean’s testimony that proposed a more opposed the Class I price adjustments and the longer distances milk must be aggressive lowering of diversion limit and Class I pricing surface changes. The shipped to provide sufficient supplies to standards for the Appalachian and brief argued that such changes may have meet fluid demands. Southeast orders. The brief agreed with unintended consequences which may A post-hearing brief was submitted on Dean’s position that tighter diversion worsen the situation in the southeastern behalf of SPSC. The SPSC brief limits would sharply reduce the region. According to the Dean/NDH indicated support for the Class I volumes of pooled milk in the two brief, adopting changes to Class I pricing portions of DCMA’s proposals but was orders and the relative impact on may create incentives for plants located not fully supportive of the proposed producer pay prices would be more outside the Appalachian and Southeast diversion limit standards, touch-base substantial. The brief indicated support marketing areas to direct their fluid milk standards, and transportation credit for continuing to provide discretionary sales in the marketing areas and become provisions. The brief agreed with the authority for the market administrators pooled on those orders. The brief argued DCMA proposals to increase Class I to tighten diversion limits and raise that while plants may gain in blend prices in the Appalachian, Southeast, touch-base standards if necessary and price changes by altering where they and Florida orders on an emergency without the need to resort to the formal become pooled, the price surface may basis because it would promote milk rulemaking process. not change for their competitors. The production within the three marketing The SPSC brief indicated conditioned brief also asserted that since January areas by enhancing local producer support for DCMA’s proposed changes 2000, Class I prices were intentionally income—the primary suppliers of fluid to the transportation credit provisions of linked nationwide as part of Federal milk for the three southeastern markets. the Appalachian and Southeast orders. milk order reform and concluded that The SPSC brief did express concern that However, the brief questioned the any change in Class I differentials or the even with expected higher blend prices proper role of transportation credits in Class I price surface, even at one price to producers accruing from higher Class both marketing orders. The brief location, would change the economic I prices, the current trend of lower local requested the Department consider the incentive nationwide to serve that milk production may not be slowed. proper levels of producer delivery day location. The brief therefore contended The SPSC brief indicated support to requirements, diversion limits, and that the entire national Class I price lower (tighten) diversion limit standards transportation credit provisions to surface needs to be evaluated. in the Appalachian and Southeast achieve the stated goals of the DCMA According to the Dean/NDH brief, orders. However, the brief expressed the package of proposals. DCMA’s Class I price proposals fail to opinion that diversion limit standards A post-hearing brief submitted on rely on accepted economic models and for both orders could and should be behalf of Dean and NDH (Dean/NDH) fail to follow the Department’s reduced more than that proposed by the agreed that the Southeastern region of established policies for making DCMA. The SPSC brief asserted that the U.S. is a deficit milk production adjustments to the Class I price surface. record evidence had not determined the region and that the deficit is growing. Specifically, the brief argued that the appropriate base and reserve milk The brief said that dairy farmers who economic calculations failed to take into supply volumes, the proper diversion regularly and consistently supply milk consideration ‘‘shadow pricing,’’ which limit and touch-base standards for the to fluid milk plants in the southeastern the brief characterized as how a market Appalachian and Southeast orders, or region should be appropriately could react to changes such that an

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12975

additional price change would alter basis and made identical to those of the cause inefficient movements of milk. distribution. The brief also argued that Florida order. The brief indicated that The brief asserted that transportation the Class I price proposals fail to the Florida order currently functions credits, not touch-base standards, give calculate unique prices for each location well by having lower diversion limit rise to inefficient movements of milk. by considering relevant reserve supply standards and this has supported the A post-hearing brief by MIF reiterated areas and fail to account for differences prevailing over-order premiums. The its opposition to adopting DCMA’s in raw milk movements versus packaged brief opined that because of the order’s proposals and asserted the absence of milk movements. tight pooling provisions, the need for emergency marketing conditions that According to the Dean/NDH brief, the transportation credits and the need for warrant emergency action. The brief rationale for setting a target price for holding numerous formal rulemaking noted awareness of declining milk Miami, FL, and then backing off that hearings has been avoided. According to production in the southeastern region price and ‘‘smoothing’’ the result is the brief, the Florida order’s tight but indicated this is not a sufficient arbitrary and capricious. The brief diversion limit standards have basis for the adoption of the proposals contended that determining Class I continually assisted that order in on an emergency basis. The brief further prices in this way applied non-uniform retaining strong blend prices paid to argued that no emergency exists to methodology and did not meet the dairy farmers and attracting sufficient warrant adoption of the proposals standards of the Administrative amounts of milk supplies. because the trends of declining milk Procedure Act. In addition, the brief The Dean/NDH brief asserted that production in the region and rising fuel noted that no evidence or economic data pool revenues should be shared only costs have existed for many years. backs up the ‘‘smoothing’’ process as among those producers who truly and The MIF brief stressed that the key described by DCMA testimony. regularly serve the Class I market and purpose of the Federal milk marketing The Dean/NDH brief asserted that that diversion limit standards of the order program is to ensure an adequate Wooster, OH, should not be identified Appalachian and Southeast orders are supply of milk for Class I needs. In this as a supply area because it has never not adequately identifying those true regard, the brief noted that no witnesses been relied upon as any kind of basing and regular suppliers. The brief asserted testified on the inability to procure milk point for pricing milk and doing so now that both orders can be made more for Class I use. The brief reiterated that would be specifically contrary to effective by requiring a genuine in a survey of its membership testimony given at a Pennsylvania State association of a milk supply with the conducted before the hearing, no hearing for a recent State of market as intended by the AMAA. member indicated difficulty securing Pennsylvania rulemaking. Accordingly, The Dean/NDH brief indicated that if milk for Class I needs in the three the brief contended that DCMA’s entire Dean’s proposal for adopting the southeastern marketing areas. The brief Class I pricing proposals should be diversion limit standards of the Florida also mentioned that over-order rejected. order for the Appalachian and Southeast premiums are paid by Class I handlers According to the Dean/NDH brief, orders is adopted, Dean would support to secure milk for fluid use and the although the Class I price changes the DCMA’s one-day per month touch- proponents testified that current over- sought are ‘‘temporary,’’ competitive base standard proposals. As Dean/NDH over premiums currently offset higher impacts of such changes can be long- does not consider DCMA’s proposed fuel costs. term and result in permanent harm to diversion limit standards as being any The MIF brief noted that some Class I handlers. The brief asserted that change at all, it opposed any change to southeastern dairy producers who any decision should be considered the touch-base standards of the testified at the hearing also participated permanent unless it has a specific Appalachian and Southeast orders. in a herd-removal program called sunset provision. According to the brief, The Dean/NDH brief opposed the Cooperatives Working Together (CWT). no specific sunset provision had been expansion of the payment of In this regard, the brief cited this as an proposed or discussed in the hearing transportation credits to include the example of misplaced concern for record. entire load of milk and stated that declining milk production in the The Dean/NDH brief pointed out that, payments should only be paid on Class southeastern region. at the time of the hearing, the dairy I milk as currently provided under the The MIF brief asserted Class I sales industry was also experiencing record Appalachian and Southeast orders. The would suffer if higher Class I prices high Class I prices for milk further brief expressed concern that adopting were adopted because higher raw milk demonstrating the lack of need for the proposed changes would create the costs would increase wholesale costs emergency action. The brief noted that wrong economic incentives. The brief and result in higher retail prices paid by the May 2007 uniform price for Fulton noted that suppliers of milk to a Class consumers. The brief noted that the County, GA, was $18.37 per cwt. I plant with a higher than market current, general structure of Class I According to the brief, this price is average of Class II use would be location differentials has been in place $1.37 per cwt higher than April 2007 receiving a larger economic benefit than for 22 years and that milk bottlers have and is $5.83 per cwt, or 45.3 percent, Class I plants with below market made significant investments in plants higher than in May 2006. The brief also average Class II use. According to the and equipment during this time. noted that the Class I price for June 2007 brief, this would be contrary to assuring According to the MIF brief, plants at Fulton County was $1.92 per cwt equal minimum milk prices among could be disadvantaged in the higher than May 2007, and the July 2007 similar handlers. marketplace solely because of increases price increased by $3.07 per cwt. The The Dean/NDH brief was of the in the Class I price relative to the Class brief indicated that even a proponent opinion that transportation credits have I price of its competitors. The brief witness acknowledged that such higher been a key factor in contributing to the argued that a $0.005 difference per prices were likely to continue through decline of the dairy industry in the gallon could result in lost customers for the fall 2007. southeastern region. In this regard, the a distributing plant and that a $0.025 The Dean/NDH brief agreed that brief noted the proponents increase is enough to lose a supermarket diversion limit standards for the acknowledgement that in some cases account. The brief asserted that Appalachian and Southeast orders current touch-base provisions in increasing a Class I price by $0.10 per should be lowered on an emergency conjunction with transportation credits cwt ($0.0086 per gallon) could yield

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12976 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

dire results for a Class I plant. The brief locations in Arkansas. AMSB requested and post-hearing brief to adjusting the indicated that an unexpected that the Class I differentials for Pulaski Class I price surface in the Appalachian, consequence could be that plants county be increased from $2.80 to $3.20 Southeast, and Florida Federal milk distant to the three orders could become per cwt, Sebastian county from $2.80 to marketing areas and USDA’s conclusion associated with one of the three orders $3.10 per cwt, and Washington and to implement the proposed changes on due to differences between Benton counties from $2.60 to $3.00 per an interim basis. According to MIF’s transportation costs and increased Class cwt. AMSB also proposed that the comments and exceptions, increasing I prices resulting in out-of-area plants touch-base standard be changed from 2 Class I prices and adjusting the Class I taking away sales from in-area plants. days for each of the months of July price surface will not solve the problem The MIF brief said that a through December and to 6 days for of covering procurement costs of fluid comprehensive study and analysis on a each of the months of January through milk. MIF asserted that over-order national scale of all potential June. According to AMSB, significant payments are already used to consequences and on demand for decreases in milk production in compensate cooperatives that bear the packaged milk was needed before any Arkansas, as well as in Mississippi and costs of balancing the supply and that changes to Class I pricing were adopted. Louisiana, are due, in part, to the increasing Class I prices will only The brief reasserted the opinion that Federal milk marketing orders. AMSB increase costs for processors, retailers Class I prices could not be changed in was of the opinion that their proposed and consumers and discourage Class I the southeastern region alone because changes are needed to stabilize dairy sales. that would change marketing conditions production in the State of Arkansas. No comments and exceptions were in all marketing areas. Comments and exceptions filed on received regarding the proposed A post-hearing brief submitted on behalf of the SPSC expressed support increase in the maximum administrative behalf of DCMA expressed support for for adjusting the Class I price surface in assessment for the Appalachian, the market administrator assessment each of the three marketing areas but Southeast, and Florida orders. increase for the Appalachian, Southeast, asserted that the price adjustment Discussion and Findings and Florida milk orders in Proposals 4, increases adopted in the tentative 5, and 6, respectively. partial decision will not sufficiently The record of this proceeding reveals that for many years milk production has Comments and Exceptions increase local milk production in the three marketing areas. SPSC reiterated a declined in the southeastern region and Comments and exceptions to the number of positions given in record supplying the region with supplemental tentative partial decision (73 FR 11194) testimony and brief: (1) lowering the milk has demanded the sourcing of milk were filed by Dairy Cooperative touch-base standards will have a supplies from ever farther distances Marketing Association, Inc. (DCMA), negative impact on milk prices and from the marketing areas. Not only has Arkansas Milk Stabilization Board production in the three marketing areas, the decline in milk production been in (AMSB), Southeast Producers Steering (2) changes to the transportation credit absolute terms, but when balanced with Committee (SPSC), Dean Foods balancing fund provisions will population increases, milk production Company and National Dairy Holdings encourage unnecessary milk movements in the region has failed to satisfy fluid (Dean/NDH), and the Milk Industry to the detriment of producer mailbox demands year-round. Foundation (MIF). prices in the Appalachian and Southeast The proposed amendments in this In comments and exceptions marketing areas, and (3) milk produced proceeding to the Appalachian, Florida, regarding the adopted Class I price on farms located far from the marketing and Southeast milk marketing orders surface, DCMA wrote that the amended areas will seek to capture higher aim to assure an adequate supply of Class I differentials will send transportation credit payments by taking milk for fluid use in the southeastern appropriate signals to maintain and advantage of the lower touch-base region of the U.S. As proposed by increase milk production within the standards along with the extension of DCMA, the amendments to the three three marketing areas, as well as create transportation credit eligibility on the marketing orders seek simultaneous incentives to increase the movement of full loads of milk. changes with the aim of providing supplemental milk to these areas when Comments and exceptions filed on incentives for assuring a reliable supply needed. DCMA also expressed behalf of Dean/NDH expressed of milk for fluid use. The amendments agreement that the Class I price surface opposition to the tentative partial integrate: (1) Higher regulated minimum changes will generate producer price decision by reiterating its positions prices for Class I milk, (2) changes to increases in all three marketing areas. given in record testimony and post- assure that the revenue accruing from DCMA reiterated that the reduction in hearing brief: (1) USDA has deserted higher minimum Class I prices will be the volume of diverted milk in the utilizing a nationally coordinated shared with those producers who Appalachian and Southeast marketing pricing surface for Class I milk; (2) regularly and consistently serve the areas should also lead to increased current economic conditions demand a region’s Class I needs of the region, (3) uniform prices in those marketing areas. nationally coordinated price surface; cost savings for entities who have made DCMA predicted that decreases in the and (3) abandonment of a nationally the commitment to supply the region, touch-base standard will offer greater coordinated Class I price surface does and (4) flexibility and incentives for flexibility in moving pooled milk and not follow the requirements of supplying the Appalachian and will offer cost savings on pooled reserve Administrative Procedure Act (APA) or Southeast marketing areas with supplies. Lastly, DCMA supported the Agricultural Marketing Agreement supplemental milk by offsetting the cost USDA’s decision to maintain and Act (AMAA). Similarly, Dean/NDH of transportation. update the transportation credit comments and exceptions also balancing fund provisions. continued to criticize the method used Class I Prices and Class I Price Surface Comments and exceptions filed on to create the Class I price surface Adjustments to the Class I prices for behalf of the AMSB expressed support adjustment. the three southeastern orders continue for the tentative partial decision, but Comments and exceptions filed on to be proposed for adoption in this final proposed additional changes to Class I behalf of the MIF reiterated its decision and result in a change to the price adjustments for certain county opposition given in record testimony Class I price surface. The changes are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12977

specified in the order language. implemented in December 2006. This resulting Class I price adjustments Assuming no other changes to the three factor is further reduced by 20 percent. would be under the cost analysis of southeastern orders, increasing Class I While this formed DCMA’s basic shipping packaged milk. Nevertheless, prices will continue to increase Class I foundation for adjusting Class I prices, the similarities between the adopted prices as provided for in the interim it is not the proposed Class I price Class I price adjustment and the cost rule and increase the value of each adjustments at all locations in the adjustment analysis of shipping order’s marketwide pool. The higher southeastern region. packaged milk are very similar. Since Class I prices also will attract milk to all The DCMA’s Class I price adjustments the Class I price adjustment at all locations and increase blend prices for differ from those calculated. What the locations does not exceed the value of dairy farmers whose milk is pooled on proponents have described as milk at alternative locations, in either the three southeastern milk marketing ‘‘smoothing’’ of the Class I price bulk or packaged form, the Class I price orders. adjustments is essentially price adjustments are reasonable. Despite The basic foundation for deriving the alignment. In this regard, it is clear that criticism in comments and exceptions, temporary adjustments to Class I prices the adopted Class I price adjustments this final decision continues to find that begins with DCMA’s identification of are different from strictly calculated this method of evaluating the Class I potential supply areas and reliance on values. The adopted Class I price pricing changes forms a rational basis to the areas to yield the lowest Class I adjustments provide reasonable conclude that the proposed changes to price adjustment based on the farthest alignment with the current Class I price Class I pricing are reasonable. The point of milk demand. The potential surface beyond the geographical adopted Class I price adjustments are supply point meeting these criteria was boundaries of the southeastern orders. presented in Figure 1. While the Class Similarly, DCMA’s Class I price Wooster, OH, and the farthest demand I differentials in the southeastern region adjustments differ from calculated point was identified as Miami, FL. After are not changed in this decision, the adjustments by adjusting calculated identification of the lowest cost supply Class I price adjustments are added to values to correspond to Class I and demand point, the distance between the current Class I differentials for processing plant locations. This these two points was relied upon to illustrative purposes. Figure 1 provides establishes pricing zones that are determine calculated price adjustments a graphic presentation of the combined conceptually identical to current pricing at all other county and parish locations value of Class I differentials plus the zones and assures that similarly situated within the marketing area boundaries of adjustment values adopted in this Class I handlers will have the same the three southeastern orders. The decision. selection of Miami as the farthest point minimum regulated Class I prices. of milk consumption is consistent with Providing similar regulated prices for On the basis of a pricing surface recognition in the current pricing similarly situated handlers is consistent alone, the adopted Class I price structure that Miami is the point with with the requirements of the AMAA. adjustments will not likely result in the the highest Class I differential resulting While conceptually identical, uneconomic movement of milk as in a Class I price designed to attract an maintaining price alignment with asserted by opponents. The adopted adequate supply of Class I milk. adjoining milk marketing orders pricing surface better reflects the As the proposal indicated, the together with pricing zones, the adopted economic conditions affecting the selection of Wooster, OH, (Wayne Class I price adjustments result in price supply and demand for milk in the three County) as a supply point is one of relationships that are different from southeastern marketing areas by several that were considered by the those that existed at the time of the providing greater pricing incentives proponents. The selection of Wooster hearing. Despite criticism that DCMA’s indicative of actual milk movements was made after consideration of other adjustments change price relationships and the cost of supplying milk from supply points because it would between plants of the same ownership, alternative locations. The adopted Class represent the least-cost point from the key requirement that similarly I price adjustments result in a steeper which a milk supply could potentially located plants have similar regulated Class I price surface that correlates with be sourced from locations in the minimum prices is maintained. the higher location value fluid milk has southeastern region. All other supply In an effort to examine both the level in the southeastern region. The location points considered would have resulted and the reasonableness of the Class I value of milk is higher because of the in much higher Class I price price adjustments that were zoned and cost involved in transporting milk to adjustments. aligned with adjoining orders, DCMA locations in the milk-deficit The Class I price adjustment evaluated the cost of shipping packaged southeastern region from alternative calculated for every county and parish milk. According to the record, there are milk-surplus locations. location relies upon a mileage rate factor some differences between what the BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12978 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 3410–02–C cooperative member organizations of provide the service of balancing the Opponents to DCMA’s Class I price DCMA who supply the majority of the three southeastern markets. adjustments assert that there is no Class I needs of the three marketing Opponents to DCMA’s Class I price reason to increase Class I prices because areas. In making the commitment to all Class I demands are being met. This adjustments noted that there is an supply the fluid needs of the markets, decision continues to find that DCMA’s adequate supply of milk to meet fluid the supplying cooperatives have largely proposed adjustments to the pricing demands. There is an adequate national reduced the burden on Class I handlers provisions of the three orders are supply of milk to meet the national reasonable and necessary. The record of to source their supply. Similarly, it is demands for fluid milk. However, in the this proceeding reveals that it is the the cooperative organizations that deficit areas of the southeastern

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP07MR14.001 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12979

marketing areas, there must be sufficient dairy herd. This decision rejects this month in order for a producer to be incentives provided by the orders to argument as it is not germane to the eligible to divert milk to nonpool plants. encourage the movement of milk from issues at hand. This decision is derived Based on record evidence, adoption of reserve areas to these deficit markets. In on the basis of record evidence which a one-day per month touch-base this regard, the location value of milk supports the adoption of the Class I standard for both orders and making the needs to consider local milk supplies, pricing surface. diversion limit standards of both orders local demand, and transportation costs. AMSB, in its comments and identical accomplishes three important After consideration of comments and exceptions, proposed additional Class I pooling standard objectives. exceptions, this decision continues to price surface changes for certain Specifically, the changes: (1) provide a find that the adopted Class I price counties in Arkansas with the aim of standard necessary to identify producers adjustments should provide the raising local milk production. This supplying the markets’ Class I needs, (2) additional incentives needed to offset decision rejects adoption of the provide the criteria to identify the milk some of the costs associated with the proposed increases for the Arkansas of producers who may be eligible for decreases in local supply, increases in county locations for two fundamental receiving a transportation credit in local demand, and increases in reasons. First, doing so would not result supplying supplemental milk for Class I transportation costs. in a reasonably aligned Class I price use, and (3) allows milk that is part of Opponents criticized DCMA’s Class I surface with the current national Class the milk supply which regularly and adjustments by identifying that other I price surface. Second, the proposed consistently services the markets’ Class means and methods are available which additional increases are based on the I needs to be pooled on the orders. would return greater revenue to dairy narrow objective of raising local Providing for the diversion of milk is farmers instead of increasing minimum Arkansas milk production. It is the a desirable and needed feature of an prices. Other changes adopted in this purpose of milk marketing orders to set order because it facilitates the orderly decision will, all other things being minimum prices that result in an and efficient disposition of milk when equal, tend to increase minimum adequate supply of milk for fluid uses. not needed for fluid use. When regulated prices paid to producers. In this regard, it is not important where producer milk is not needed by the However, these changes are founded on the milk is produced. A function of the market for Class I use, some provisions the very limited improvement gained minimum prices set by the orders is to should be made for that milk to be from lowering the diversion limit ensure that a sufficient supply of milk diverted to nonpool plants but remain standards of the Appalachian and will be delivered to where it is pooled and priced under the order. The Southeast orders. In light of the chronic demanded. While AMSB’s proposed lower diversion limits adopted in this milk deficit conditions of the additional Class I price increases for decision will likely reduce the volume southeastern region, only higher certain Arkansas counties would of milk eligible to be pooled by minimum regulated prices can provide an even greater incentive to diversion to a significant degree on the reasonably generate the additional deliver milk to those locations, the Southeast order and less so on the revenue needed to assure that the Class adjustments are justified with the goal Appalachian order. Assuming all other I needs of the region can be met of increasing local milk production. conditions being equal, the adopted continuously. According to market Accordingly, AMSB’s proposed Class I changes in diversion limit standards administrator analyses, the estimated pricing increases for certain Arkansas will result in higher blend prices paid annual increase of the Appalachian county locations cannot be deemed to producers. This is a desirable order pool for 2004, 2005, and 2006 superior to those of the DCMA proposal outcome, especially for the Southeast resulting from DCMA’s proposed Class that clearly seeks price increases order where there is the need to better I price adjustments would have been necessary to assure an adequate supply identify the milk of those producers $19.3 million, $18.6 million, and $18.3 of milk from any source while also who regularly and consistently service million, respectively. For the Southeast maintaining reasonable alignment with the Class I needs of the Southeast order, the annual pool value increase a nationally coordinated Class I price marketing area. An examination of the would have been $16.8 million, $17.1 surface. Southeast order’s utilization of milk million, and $17.7 million, respectively. belies the fact that the marketing area is Diversion Limit and Touch-Base For the Florida order, the annual chronically short of in-area milk Standards—Appalachian and increase in pool value would have been production to meet the Class I demand Southeast Orders $36.4 million, $38.3 million, and $39.2 of the marketing area. This can only be million, respectively. While alternative DCMA’s proposed diversion limit and the result of pooling much more milk on methods such as a tightening of pooling touch-base standards for the the order than is necessary as part of the standards will, among other things, tend Appalachian and Southeast orders legitimate reserve supply of milk to enhance producer revenue to those continue to be proposed for adoption in available to service the Class I needs of producers who regularly and this final decision. The proposed the market. consistently supply the market’s Class I changes make the diversion limit and The record reveals that according to needs, this alone will not establish touch-base standards of the two orders market administrator analyses, the minimum regulated prices high enough identical. Specifically, the proposed estimated impact on minimum order to attract an adequate supply for chronic diversion limit standards are: (1) 25 uniform prices of the proposed milk-deficit marketing areas from percent of deliveries to pool plants diversion limit standards in both orders alternative distant locations. during each of the months of January, would have average annual increases in Opponents expressed concern about February, July, August, September, uniform prices of $0.02 per cwt for the producers in the region being involved October, and November, and (2) 35 Appalachian order and $0.07 per cwt for with a voluntary producer-funded percent in each of the months of March, the Southeast order. Increased blend program known as the Cooperatives April, May, June, and December. Both prices will help to provide greater Working Together (CWT). CWT is a non- orders’ touch-base standards are incentives to maintain milk production government program that includes a amended to require at least one day’s from current producers and provide herd retirement program, which reduces milk production of a producer be greater economic incentives for dairy the number of cows in the national delivered to a pool plant during the farmers located outside of the marketing

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12980 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

area to be regular and consistent weekly, monthly, and seasonal needs, as uneconomic movement of milk solely suppliers of Class I milk to these two well as a modest margin for for the purpose of meeting a pooling marketing areas. unanticipated changes in the supply standard. The current touch-base Milk diverted to nonpool plants is and demand relationship for Class I standards of the two orders too often milk not physically received at a pool milk needs. Accordingly, the proposed result in the substitution of local milk plant. However, it is included as a part diversion standards for the orders are with the milk of more distant producers, of the total producer milk receipts of the reasonable and continue to be proposed thus displacing the milk of local diverting plant or cooperative entity for adoption in this final decision. producers supplying the market. The pooling milk for its own account. A Touch-base delivery standards define milk of local producers needlessly diversion limit establishes the amount the minimum number of days of milk incurs the cost of being transported to of producer milk that may be associated production each month that a dairy more distant locations. As a result of the with the integral milk supply of a pool farmer must supply a pool plant of an current touch-base standard, hauling plant or cooperative acting in its order to be associated with that market and marketing costs are needlessly capacity as a handler. With regard to the and thus qualify to have their milk higher and the supply of milk from pooling issues of the Southeast order, pooled by diversion. On the basis of the distant producers may still not be the record reveals that current diversion record evidence, this decision finds available to serve the Class I needs of limit standards contribute to the pooling reason to support adopting a 1 day the two marketing areas. of large volumes of milk on the order touch-base standard for both orders. Despite comments and exceptions that does not regularly and consistently Conditional supporters have voiced received by SPSC and AMSB and for the service Class I market needs. Therefore, concern for DCMA’s package of reasons discussed above, this decision lowering the diversion limit standard is proposed amendments that lower the continues to find that the diversion appropriate to better assure that only touch-base standards of the limit standards of the Appalachian and milk which regularly and consistently Appalachian and Southeast order Southeast orders at the time of the services the Class I market is pooled. because, they believe, it represents an hearing resulted in the pooling of more Associating more milk than is actually easing of a feature of the orders’ pooling milk than could reasonably be part of the legitimate reserve supply standards at a time when the opposite considered as actually serving the available for Class I use unnecessarily is needed to improve producer income markets’ Class I needs. Therefore, this reduces the potential blend price paid to in the two orders. While this concern final decision continues to support the dairy farmers who regularly and might be conceptually valid, it does not reduced diversion limits proposed by consistently service the Class I needs of consider that the volume of milk pooled DCMA. Additionally, the lowering of a marketing area. Not having reasonable on the two orders will be appropriately the touch-base standard, in light of the diversion limit standards weakens the restricted by the adopted diversion limit tightening of the diversion limit orders’ ability to provide for orderly standards. In part, because the diversion standards, does not compromise the marketing. Diversion limit standards limit standards of the orders are integrity of the orders’ pooling that are too high can open the door for tightened, an easing of the touch-base standards. Together with the adopted pooling more milk on the markets than standard can be made without fear of diversion limit standards, a lower necessary. The record supports pooling the milk of producers who are touch-base standard for the two orders concluding that a 33 percent diversion not part of the regular and consistent offers operational cost savings to limit for the Southeast order during supply of milk serving the Class I needs producers supplying the market with each of the months of January through of the two marketing areas. Class I milk while simultaneously June and 50 percent for each of the While diversion limit standards are a providing for identification of the milk months of July through December has key feature of the pooling standards of of those producers who regularly and not only resulted in lower blend prices an order for defining the total volume of consistently service the markets’ Class I harming local producers, but has also milk that can be pooled, an argument needs. resulted in Class I utilization rates that could be made that perhaps a touch- Until December 2006, the obscure that area as a deficit market. base standard is not necessary at all if transportation credit balancing For the Appalachian and Southeast other pooling standard features are provisions of the Appalachian and orders, the record reveals that since the appropriately tailored. However, a Southeast orders allowed supplemental average reserve requirements did not touch-base standard for the Appalachian milk loads to be used as a platform to differ greatly over the 36 month period and Southeast orders remains a critical pool additional milk on the order (January 2004 through December 2006), feature of both orders because some through the diversion process. Official having the same diversion limit criteria are needed to identify producers notice is taken of the tentative partial standards for both orders is justifiable. who are suppliers of supplemental milk decision concerning milk in the In addition, by having identical to the two marketing areas and who Appalachian and Southeast marketing diversion limit standards, the blend thereby may be eligible to receive a areas issued September 1, 2006, and prices paid to producers increase as transportation credit. published September 13, 2006, (71 FR milk is supplied to locations generally Record evidence indicates that by 54118) and the Interim Rule issued in an easterly and southern direction. reducing the touch-base standard to 1 October 19, 2006, and published To the extent that this diversion limit day per month, producers, especially October 25, 2006 (71 FR 62337). In standard may warrant future cooperative member producers who discussing the need for revised adjustments, the orders already provide bear the burden of supplying the vast diversion limit standards for the the market administrator authority to majority of milk to the southeastern Appalachian and Southeast orders it is adjust diversion standards as marketing marketing areas, would avoid the cost of necessary to consider the findings of conditions may warrant. Given the total delivering their milk to pool plants that decision. milk demands of the marketing areas when not necessarily needed. While a The September 2006 decision revealed by the record, a minimum of higher touch-base standard tends to referenced above established a zero about 12 to 13 percent of monthly pool support the integrity of the orders’ diversion limit standard on distributing plant receipts would be performance standards, the current supplemental milk supplies seeking a needed to meet the minimum daily, touch-base standards result in the transportation credit payment. An

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12981

important finding in that decision dispositions of Class I milk. The Appalachian order have decreased from regarding diversions associated with assessment rate adopted on an interim approximately 3.94 billion pounds in supplemental milk supplies was that basis through a separate rulemaking 2004 to about 3.77 billion pounds in pooling such diverted milk would proceeding (71 FR 62377, published 2006. For the Southeast order, milk provide additional revenue to help October 25, 2006) was $0.15 per cwt and marketings from in-area dairy farmers offset hauling costs not covered by the $0.20 per cwt for the Appalachian and declined from 5.0 billion pounds in transportation credit payments then in Southeast orders, respectively. At the 2004 to 4.76 billion pounds in 2006. place for the Appalachian and Southeast time of the hearing, transportation credit Furthermore, record evidence illustrates orders. The adoption of a variable payments were paid from each order’s that total milk production in the mileage rate factor that reimburses transportation credit balancing fund southeastern states of the U.S. has hauling costs on supplemental milk at a during the months of July through declined on average almost 2 percent level more reflective of actual costs was December to help offset the cost of each year since 1986 and has decreased found to diminish the need to seek and transporting such supplemental milk for a total of 34.6 percent since 1986—from generate such revenue to offset hauling Class I use. As a result of this 18.29 billion pounds in 1986 to 11.96 costs at the expense of the local proceeding, January and February were billion pounds in 2006. producers who are regularly and added on interim bases as transportation In each of the years of 2004, 2005, and consistently supplying milk for Class I credit payout months effective March 2006, the months of July through needs. This final decision adopts tighter 18, 2008 (73 FR 14153). The January were deficit in terms of monthly diversion limit standards, especially for transportation credit balancing funds in-area milk marketings (milk marketed the Southeast order. Together with operate independently from the by dairy farmers within the geographical providing for higher Class I prices, producer settlement funds of the two boundaries of the two marketing areas) tighter diversion limit standards should orders. Milk from producers located being consistently less than the monthly result in more orderly marketing outside of the two marketing areas who Class I producer milk pooled on the conditions. The ability to pool more are not part of the regular and consistent Appalachian and Southeast orders. The milk on the orders than the amount supply of Class I milk, is commonly in-area deficit in January for both orders needed to regularly and consistently referred to as supplemental milk. for all 3 years combined totaled 8.4 serve the Class I needs of the markets The record reveals that the seasonal million pounds. While February in-area needlessly lowers the blend price of swings in milk production lead to milk marketings for all 3 years exceeded producers who regularly and inadequate milk supplies for fluid use Class I demands, that surplus decreased consistently service such Class I needs. in certain months and surplus supplies from over 44 million pounds in 2004 to in other months. In the Appalachian just under 14 million pounds in 2006— Transportation Credit Balancing Fund and Southeast orders, the summer and a decrease of over 68 percent. Provisions fall (and sometimes winter) months are Record evidence reveals that the DCMA’s proposed changes to the generally considered those months with months of January and February are Appalachian and Southeast order inadequate (tight) milk supplies for likely to become months during which transportation credit balancing fund fluid use, while the spring months are local in-area milk marketings will no provisions continue to be proposed for generally characterized as having longer satisfy Class I demands and the adoption in this final decision. sufficient supplies of milk for fluid use. Appalachian and Southeast marketing Specifically, these changes include: (1) Transportation credits are used as a areas will need to increasingly rely on Extending the number of months that method to compensate handlers that supplemental milk supplies to satisfy transportation credit balancing funds provide supplemental milk during the Class I demands. Accordingly, this will be paid to include the months of tight supply months by offsetting some decision continues to find that January and February. The month of of the costs of transporting milk to the expanding the transportation credit June will continue to be a month for the two marketing areas. payment months to include the months payment of transportation credits if Prior to the interim final rule issued of January and February for the payment requested and approved by the market in this proceeding (73 FR 14153) the of transportation credits is reasonable. administrator; (2) Expanding the payment of transportation credits under June will continue to be an optional payment of transportation credits for the Appalachian and Southeast orders month for transportation credit supplemental milk to include the full was only made during the months of payments, if requested, to be reviewed load of milk; (3) Providing more July through December. A feature of and authorized by the market flexibility in determining the DCMA’s proposal seeks to extend such administrator. qualification requirements for payments to also include the months of Currently, transportation credits are supplemental milk producers to receive January and February. Record evidence paid on loads of milk at the lower of the transportation credit payments; and (4) demonstrates reliance on supplemental receiving plant’s Class I use or the Increasing the monthly transportation milk supplies for each order’s marketing marketwide Class I utilization. DCMA’s credit balancing fund assessment rate area during July through December and proposals seek to change these criteria for the Southeast order from $0.20 per the months of January and February by having the entire load of cwt to $0.30 per cwt. showing similar demand for supplemental milk eligible to receive a The transportation credit balancing supplemental milk supplies. transportation credit. The major fund provisions for both orders (and Declining local milk production in the justification offered by DCMA is that the predecessor orders) were established in southeastern region of the country is cost of transporting supplemental milk, 1996 as a result of the consistent need well-known and is a chronic problem. regardless of the plant’s use of that milk, to import supplemental milk for fluid Record evidence indicates milk is the same. This decision finds that a use during certain times of the year marketings from dairy farmers located supplier of supplemental milk sources when local production is not sufficient in both the Appalachian and Southeast and assembles milk demanded by to meet the markets’ fluid needs. marketing areas (pooled on any order) distributing plants for fluid uses, but no Specifically, the market administrator has continued to decrease since 2004. distributing plant disposes 100 percent applies a monthly transportation credit Specifically, evidence shows that of its milk receipts as Class I sales. The balancing fund assessment on all annual milk marketings pooled on the supplemental milk supplier does not

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12982 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

know how a receiving plant will use the therefore tends to be more distant from will tend to offset the payout on supplemental milk it receives. However, the marketing area than for the transportation credit claims resulting it is reasonable to conclude that plants Appalachian marketing area. from the adopted changes in Class I do not seek supplemental milk supplies The need to again raise the monthly pricing. without first having the demand for transportation credit assessment rate for An increase in the transportation Class I use. In other words, the need for the Southeast order is in part explained credit assessment rate for the supplemental milk supplies is fueled by by the continuing need of the Southeast Appalachian order was not requested Class I demands that cannot be satisfied marketing area to reach ever farther to because 100 percent of the in the absence of transportation credits. source milk supplies to satisfy fluid transportation credit requests were paid It is unlikely that supplemental milk demands. Additionally, expanding the in 2006 and in January 2007. Hearing suppliers would supply full milk loads payment of transportation credits on the record data indicates that even with to Class I plants if the demand for milk entire load of supplemental milk also adoption of the proposed Class I prices, was not at least equal to its Class I will likely increase the payment of pooling requirements and transportation disposition, even if it has some actual transportation credit claims. At the credit provisions, the transportation lower-valued use of milk. same time, payment of transportation credit assessment rate of $0.15 per cwt The current calculation of credit claims will be partially offset by in the Appalachian order should transportation credit payments in the the adopted changes to the Class I continue to be sufficient to pay future Appalachian and Southeast orders pricing surface because the calculation transportation credit requests. contain a number of features to prevent for determining payment considers the The record indicates that the actual offsetting the full cost of transporting change in Class I pricing values between transportation credits paid in 2006 for supplemental milk into the marketing the origin of supplemental milk and the the Appalachian order totaled areas. They also contain features to point where it is delivered. As $3,313,590. Had the current mileage rate prevent the pooling of milk on the discussed above, the need for factor (MRF) been in effect for all of orders that do not regularly and supplemental milk supplies is fueled by 2006, transportation credit payments for consistently supply the fluid needs of the marketing area’s Class I demand. the Appalachian order would have the two marketing areas. Most important The current transportation credit totaled $4,433,854, including the actual is the feature denying the ability to pool provisions provide precautionary payment for January 2007 and an milk by diversion on the basis of measures such that the rate of estimated payment for February. supplemental milk deliveries to plants assessments beyond actual handler Analysis suggests that with the current in the two orders. Current transportation claims is unlikely. The transportation MRF and proposed Class I prices in credit provisions prohibit pooling credit provisions provide the market place, the total transportation credits diverted milk on the Appalachian and administrators the authority to reduce or paid during 2006 would have been Southeast orders on loads of waive assessments as necessary to about $456,000 less than the actual total supplemental milk seeking a maintain sufficient fund balances to pay transportation credit payments. Using transportation credit and this the transportation credits claims. market administrator data with the prohibition is continued by its adoption Therefore, increasing the maximum variable MRF based on 2006 calculated in this decision. Since supplemental transportation credit assessment rates monthly averages ($0.044 per cwt per 10 milk can no longer form a basis from will not result in an accumulation of miles), paying of transportation credit which to pool milk through the funds beyond what is needed to pay claims on full loads of milk, and the diversion process, it is reasonable to transportation credit claims. proposed Class I price adjustments, the conclude that the marketwide Class I The record supports concluding that total transportation credits paid for 2006 utilization percentage of the orders will local milk production is expected to in the Appalachian order would have likely increase. However, this continue declining within both totaled $4,073,312. This is $360,000 less improvement alone will not likely result marketing areas. This will result in an than what would have been paid with in offsetting the costs incurred by even greater reliance on supplemental the MRF and the lower of a plant’s Class supplemental milk suppliers who both milk to meet the fluid milk needs of the I use or marketwide Class I utilization. assemble and transport milk to plants markets. Record evidence shows a Accordingly, the current $0.15 regulated by the two orders to satisfy constant increase in both the volume assessment rate for the Appalachian Class I demands. and distance of supplemental milk order appears to be sufficient to meet all Record evidence reveals that the supplies, especially for the Southeast claims even when paying transportation Appalachian and Southeast marketing marketing area. As such, it is reasonable credits on full loads of milk delivered to areas incur different costs in attracting to conclude that future transportation Class I plants regulated by the order. supplemental milk to meet Class I credit claims will increase. In this The record indicates that the needs. In recent years, the regard, it is important to prevent transportation credit balancing fund for transportation credit reimbursement on exhausting the transportation credit the Southeast order has been claims for the Southeast order has been balancing fund before the payment of insufficient to pay transportation credit prorated at greater rates and more often claims on supplemental milk. Doing so claims. Record evidence indicates that than those of the Appalachian order. As is consistent with the fundamental during 2006, Southeast order discussed in the September 13, 2006, purposes of the transportation credit transportation credit payments were tentative decision for the Appalachian provisions. prorated to 81, 36, 39, and 64 percent and Southeast orders (71 FR 54118), the The adopted increases in Class I of the transportation credit claims for Appalachian marketing area receives the prices will likely alter the payout of the months of September, October, majority of its supplemental milk transportation credit claims because the November, and December, respectively. supplies from the northern Mid-Atlantic differences in origin and delivery point Such transportation credit claims also States. The Southeast marketing area Class I prices are increased. However, have increased in number of pounds receives the majority of its supply from adoption of expanded transportation and in number of miles. Specifically, the Midwest and Southwest States. The credit payment months to include the total pounds claimed for the receipt location of supplemental milk supplies January and February, as well as of transportation credits has increased for the Southeast marketing area payments on the entire load of milk, from 374 million pounds for July

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12983

through December 2000 to 820 million determine the qualification of the evidence in the record were pounds for July through December supplemental milk producers to be considered in making the findings and 2006—an increase of 119 percent. eligible for a transportation credit conclusions set forth above. To the Increasing the maximum payment. Since this decision adopts extent that the suggested findings and transportation credit assessment rate for providing for the month of February as conclusions filed by interested parties the Southeast order should not result in a month in which transportation credit are inconsistent with the findings and an unnecessary accumulation of funds. payments can be made, it is necessary conclusions set forth herein, the claims For the Southeast order, the record to redefine the months that a producer to make such findings or reach such indicates that transportation credits may qualify to receive transportation conclusions are denied for the reasons paid in 2006 would have totaled credits on either order. previously stated in this decision. $15,704,872 for the months of July through December and would have Administrative Assessment Increase General Findings totaled $18,604,872 by including the The hearing record reveals that The findings and determinations months of January and February. This fluctuations in the volumes of milk hereinafter set forth supplement those analysis is based on using the same pooled on the Appalachian, Southeast, that were made when the Appalachian, and Florida orders can be attributed to MRF of $0.044 as in the Appalachian Florida, and Southeast orders were first a combination of declining milk order analysis, paying of transportation issued and when they were amended. supplies and the tightening of diversion credit claims on full loads of milk, and The previous findings and limits in all three marketing areas. This with the proposed Class I price determinations are hereby ratified and combination can reduce market adjustments. However, the assessment confirmed, except where they may administrator revenues to a level too rate of $0.20 per cwt falls far short of the conflict with those set forth herein. total revenue needed to pay all expected low for the proper administration of the transportation credit claims. Even a orders while maintaining the mandated The following findings are hereby $0.30 per cwt assessment may not reserve level. The adoption of Proposals made with respect to the aforesaid generate sufficient revenue to meet all 4, 5, and 6 will create a more stable marketing agreements and orders: expected claims on full loads of revenue stream for the administration of (a) The tentative marketing supplemental milk. Nevertheless, a the three southeastern orders. agreements and the orders, as hereby $0.30 cwt assessment is more likely to It is reasonable to increase the proposed to be amended, and all of the be sufficient to cover all expected maximum administrative assessment terms and conditions thereof, will tend transportation credit claims. rate to $0.08 per cwt in the to effectuate the declared policy of the Determining those producers eligible Appalachian, Southeast and Florida Act; to receive a transportation credit on orders to ensure that the market (b) The parity prices of milk as their supplemental milk deliveries administrators have the proper funds to determined pursuant to section 2 of the requires that the dairy farmer be located carry out all of the services provided by Act are not reasonable with respect to outside either the Appalachian or the the three marketing areas. While the the price of feeds, available supplies of Southeast marketing areas, the producer maximum administrative assessment feeds, and other economic conditions must not meet the Producer definition rate is increased to $0.08 per cwt in the that affect market supply and demand of the orders during more than 2 of the Appalachian, Southeast, and Florida for milk in the marketing area, and the immediately preceding months of orders, the actual rate charged will only minimum prices specified in the February through May, and not more be as high as necessary to properly tentative marketing agreements and the than 50 percent of the milk production administer the orders and provide orders, as hereby proposed to be of the dairy farmer during those 2 necessary services to market amended, are such prices as will reflect months, in aggregate, can be received as participants. the aforesaid factors, ensure a sufficient producer milk under the order during Conforming Changes quantity of pure and wholesome milk, those 2 months. and be in the public interest; and DCMA has proposed that these Conforming changes were made to 7 requirements for the Appalachian and CFR 1000.50 Class prices, component (c) The tentative marketing Southeast orders be made more flexible prices, and advanced pricing factors. agreements and the orders, as hereby without substantially changing the Specifically, the Class I skim milk price proposed to be amended, will regulate identification of milk that is not a and the Class I butterfat price provisions the handling of milk in the same regular part of the supply of milk to the were changed to conform to the manner as, and will be applicable only two orders. Specifically proposed is that amendments adopted in this proceeding to persons in the respective classes of a dairy farmer must not be a producer as provided for in Proposal 7 of the industrial and commercial activity on the orders for more than 45 of the 92 hearing notice. The changes made to 7 specified in, the marketing agreements days in the months March through May CFR 1000.50 (b) and (c) included upon which a hearing has been held. or must have less than 50 percent of the reference to the adjustments adopted to Rulings on Exceptions producer’s milk pooled on the orders Class I prices specified in 7 CFR during those 3 months combined. On 1005.51(b), 1006.51(b), and 1007.51(b). In arriving at the findings and the basis of record testimony, this The conforming changes were presented conclusions, and the regulatory change is warranted. Specifically, it in the partial tentative final decision (73 provisions of this decision, each of the represents a change that provides FR 11194) and implemented by the exceptions received was carefully and flexibility in identifying supplemental interim final rule (73 FR 14153). fully considered in conjunction with the milk producers and may result in lower record evidence. To the extent that the operational costs to those producers Rulings on Proposed Findings and findings, conclusions, and regulatory incurring the costs of supplying Conclusions provisions of this decision are at supplemental milk to the Appalachian Briefs, proposed findings, and variance with any of the exceptions, and Southeast marketing areas. conclusions were filed on behalf of such exceptions are hereby overruled Additionally, prior to the interim certain interested parties. These briefs, for the reasons previously stated in this adoption, February was a month used to proposed findings, and conclusions, and decision.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12984 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

Marketing Agreement and Order marketing areas. The hearing was held PART 1005—MILK IN THE Annexed hereto and made a part pursuant to the provisions of the APPALACHIAN MARKETING AREA Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act hereof are two documents—a Marketing ■ of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), 2. Section 1005.85 is revised, to read Agreement regulating the handling of as follows: milk and an Order Amending the Order and the applicable rules of practice and regulating the handling of milk in the procedure (7 CFR part 900). § 1005.85 Assessment for order Appalachian, Florida, and Southeast Upon the basis of the evidence administration. marketing areas, that was approved by introduced at such hearing and the On or before the payment receipt date producers and published in the Federal record thereof, it is found that: specified under § 1005.71, each handler Register on March 17, 2008 (73 FR shall pay to the market administrator its (1) The said orders as hereby 14153) and on May 9, 2008 (73 FR pro rata share of the expense of amended, and all of the terms and 26513) as an Interim Final Rule and administration to the order at a rate conditions thereof, will tend to Correcting Amendments, respectively. specified by the market administrator effectuate the declared policy of the Act; These documents have been decided that is no more than $.08 per upon as the detailed and appropriate (2) The parity prices of milk, as hundredweight with respect to: means of effectuating the foregoing determined pursuant to Section 2 of the (a) Receipts of producer milk conclusions. Act, are not reasonable in view of the (including the handler’s own It is hereby ordered that this entire price of feeds, available supplies of production) other than such receipts by decision and the Marketing Agreement feeds, and other economic conditions a handler described in § 1000.9 (c) of annexed hereto be published in the which affect market supply and demand this chapter that were delivered to pool Federal Register. for milk in the aforesaid marketing plants of other handlers; Determination of Producer Approval areas. The minimum prices specified in (b) Receipts from a handler described and Representative Period the orders as hereby amended are such in § 1000.9(c) of this chapter; prices as will reflect the aforesaid (c) Receipts of concentrated fluid milk The month of July 2013 is hereby factors, insure a sufficient quantity of products from unregulated supply determined to be the representative pure and wholesome milk, and be in the plants and receipts of nonfluid milk period for the purpose of ascertaining public interest; and products assigned to Class I use whether the issuance of the order, as pursuant to § 1000.43(d) of this chapter (3) The said orders as hereby amended and as hereby proposed to be and other source milk allocated to Class amended regulate the handling of milk amended, regulating the handling of I pursuant to § 1000.43(a)(3) and (8) of in the same manner as, and are milk in the Appalachian, Southeast, and this chapter and the corresponding steps Florida marketing areas is approved or applicable only to persons in the of § 1000.44(b) of this chapter, except favored by producers, as defined under respective classes of industrial or other source milk that is excluded from the terms of the order as hereby commercial activity specified in, a the computations pursuant to proposed to be amended, who during marketing agreement upon which a § 1005.60(d) and (e) of this chapter; and such representative period were hearing has been held. (d) Route disposition in the marketing engaged in the production of milk for Order Relative to Handling area from a partially regulated sale within the aforesaid marketing area. distributing plant that exceeds the skim List of Subjects in 7 CFR Parts 1005, It is therefore ordered, that on and milk and butterfat subtracted pursuant 1006 and 1007 after the effective date hereof, the to § 1000.76(a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this handling of milk in the Appalachian, chapter. Milk Marketing Orders. Florida, and Southeast marketing areas Order Amending the Order Regulating shall be in conformity to and in PART 1006—MILK IN THE FLORIDA the Handling of Milk in the compliance with the terms and MARKETING AREA Appalachian, Florida, and Southeast conditions of the orders, as amended, ■ 3. Section 1006.85 is revised to read Marketing Areas and as hereby amended, as follows: as follows: This order shall not become effective The provisions of the order amending until the requirements of § 900.14 of the § 1006.85 Assessment for order the orders contained in the interim administration. rules of practice and procedure amendments of the orders issued by the governing proceedings to formulate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing On or before the payment receipt date specified under § 1006.71, each handler marketing agreements and marketing Service, on March 12, 2008, and shall pay to the market administrator its orders have been met. published in the Federal Register on pro rata share of the expense of March 17, 2008, (72 FR 14153) and as Findings and Determinations administration of the order at a rate corrected in the correcting amendments The findings and determinations specified by the market administrator issued May 6, 2008, and published May hereinafter set forth supplement those that is no more than $.08 per 9, 2008, (73 FR 26513) are adopted and that were made when the orders were hundredweight with respect to: first issued and when they were shall be the terms and provisions of (a) Receipts of producer milk amended. The previous findings and these orders. (including the handler’s own determinations are hereby ratified and For the reasons set forth in the production) other than such receipts by confirmed, except where they may preamble, 7 CFR parts 1005, 1006 and a handler described in § 1000.9(c) of this conflict with those set forth herein. 1007 are proposed to be amended as chapter that were delivered to pool (a) Findings. A public hearing was follows: plants of other handlers; held upon certain proposed ■ (b) Receipts from a handler described amendments to the tentative marketing 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR in § 1000.9(c) of this chapter; agreements and to the orders regulating parts 1005, 1006 and 1007 continues to (c) Receipts of concentrated fluid milk the handling of milk in the read as follows: products from unregulated supply Appalachian, Florida, and Southeast Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674, and 7253. plants and receipts of nonfluid milk

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12985

products assigned to Class I use enter into this marketing agreement and DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE pursuant to § 1000.43(d) of this chapter do hereby agree that the provisions and other source milk allocated to Class referred to in paragraph I hereof, as Agricultural Marketing Service I pursuant to § 1000.44(a)(3) and (8) and augmented by the provisions specified the corresponding steps of § 1000.44(b) in paragraph II hereof, shall be and are 7 CFR Parts 1005 and 1007 of this chapter, except other source milk the provisions of this marketing [Doc. No. AMS–DA–09–0001; AO–388–A17 that is excluded from the computations agreement as if set out in full herein. and AO–366–A46; DA–05–06–A] pursuant to § 1007.60(d) and (e) of this I. The findings and determinations, chapter; and Milk in the Appalachian and Southeast (d) Route disposition in the marketing order relative to handling, and the Marketing Areas; Final Partial Decision 2 area from a partially regulated provisions of § ll to ll all on Proposed Amendments to distributing plant that exceeds the skim inclusive, of the order regulating the Marketing Agreements and to Orders milk and butterfat subtracted pursuant handling of milk in the lll3 to 1000.76(a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this marketing area (7 CFR part ll4) which AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, chapter. is annexed hereto; and USDA. II. The following provisions: § ll5 ACTION: Proposed rule. PART 1007—MILK IN THE SOUTHEAST Record of milk handled and MARKETING AREA SUMMARY: This final decision proposes authorization to correct typographical to permanently adopt revised ■ 4. Section 1007.85 is revised, to read errors. transportation credit balancing fund as follows: (a) Record of milk handled. The provisions for the Appalachian and § 1007.85 Assessment for order undersigned certifies that he/she Southeast milk marketing orders. 6 administration. handled during the month of lll , Specifically, this document Establishes lll a variable mileage rate factor using a On or before the payment receipt date hundredweight of milk covered fuel cost adjustor to determine the specified under § 1007.71, each handler by this marketing agreement. transportation credit payments of both shall pay to the market administrator its (b) Authorization to correct orders; increases the transportation pro rata share of the expense of typographical errors. The undersigned credit assessment rate for the administration of the order at a rate hereby authorizes the Deputy Appalachian order to $0.15 per specified by the market administrator Administrator, or Acting Deputy hundredweight; and establishes a zero that is no more than $.08 per Administrator, Dairy Programs, diversion limit standard on loads of hundredweight with respect to: Agricultural Marketing Service, to milk requesting transportation credits. (a) Receipts of producer milk correct any typographical errors which Separate decisions will address the (including the handler’s own may have been made in this marketing proposed adoption of an intra-market production) other than such receipts by agreement. transportation credit provision for the a handler described in § 1000.9(c) of this Appalachian and Southeast orders and chapter that were delivered to pool Effective date. This marketing for increasing the transportation credit plants of other handlers; agreement shall become effective upon rate assessment for the Southeast order. (b) Receipts from a handler described the execution of a counterpart hereof by This final decision is subject to in § 1000.9(c) of this chapter; the Department in accordance with producer approval. Producer approval (c) Receipts of concentrated fluid milk Section 900.14(a) of the aforesaid rules for this action will be determined products from unregulated supply of practice and procedure. concurrently with amendments adopted plants and receipts of nonfluid milk In Witness Whereof, The contracting in a separate final decision that amends products assigned to Class I use handlers, acting under the provisions of the Class I pricing and other provisions pursuant to § 1000.43(d) of this chapter the Act, for the purposes and subject to of the Appalachian, Southeast, and and other source milk allocated to Class the limitations herein contained and not Florida milk marketing orders. I pursuant to § 1000.44(a)(3) and (8) of otherwise, have hereunto set their FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin this chapter and the corresponding steps respective hands and seals. of § 1000.44(b) of this chapter, except Taylor, USDA/AMS/Dairy Programs, other source milk that is excluded from Signature Order Formulation and Enforcement the computations pursuant to By (Name) lllllllllllllll Branch, STOP 0231–Room 2971, 1400 § 1007.60(d) and (e) of this chapter; and (Title) lllllllllllllllll Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250–0231, (202) 720– (d) Route disposition in the marketing (Address) llllllllllllllll 7183, email address: Erin.Taylor@ area from a partially regulated (Seal) distributing plant that exceeds the skim ams.usda.gov. Attest llllllllllllllllll milk and butterfat subtracted pursuant SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final to 1000.76(a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this Dated: February 25, 2014. decision proposes to permanently adopt chapter. amendments that: (1) Establish a [Note: The following will not appear in the Rex A. Barnes, variable transportation credit mileage Code of Federal Regulations.] Associate Administrator. rate factor which uses a fuel cost [FR Doc. 2014–04692 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] adjustor in both orders; (2) Increase the Marketing Agreement Regulating the Appalachian order’s maximum BILLING CODE 3410–02–P Handling of Milk in Certain Marketing transportation credit assessment rate to Areas $0.15 per hundredweight (cwt); and (3) The parties hereto, in order to 2 First and last section of order. Establish a zero diversion limit standard effectuate the declared policy of the Act, 3 Name of order. on loads of milk requesting and in accordance with the rules of 4 Appropriate part number. transportation credits. practice and procedure effective 5 Next consecutive section number. This administrative action is governed thereunder (7 CFR part 900), desire to 6 Appropriate representative period for the order. by the provisions of sections 556 and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12986 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

557 of Title 5 of the United States Code multiple plants that collectively exceed Appalachian order adopted in this and, therefore, is excluded from the the 500-employee limit, the plant will decision is necessary due to expected requirements of Executive Order 12866. be considered a large business even if higher mileage reimbursement rates The amendments to the rules the local plant has fewer than 500 arising from escalating fuel costs, the proposed herein have been reviewed employees. transporting of milk over longer under Executive Order 12988, Civil During January 2006, the time of the distances and the expected continuing Justice Reform. They are not intended to hearing, there were 3,055 dairy farmers need to rely on supplemental milk have a retroactive effect. If adopted, the pooled on the Appalachian order (Order supplies arising from declining local proposed amendments would not 5) and 3,367 dairy farmers pooled on the milk production in the marketing areas. preempt any state or local laws, Southeast order (Order 7). Of these, The transportation credit assessment regulations, or policies, unless they 2,889 dairy farmers (95 percent) in rate for the Southeast order was present an irreconcilable conflict with Order 5 and 3,218 dairy farmers (96 increased from 10 cents per cwt to 20 this rule. percent) in Order 7 were considered cents per cwt on an interim basis (71 FR The Agricultural Marketing small businesses. 62377). Subsequent to this increase, a Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 During January 2006, there were a separate rulemaking affecting the U.S.C. 601–674) (the Act), provides that total of 37 handlers operating plants Southeast order proposed an additional administrative proceedings must be associated with the Appalachian order increase in the assessment rate to 30 exhausted before parties may file suit in (22 fully regulated plants, 11 partially cents per cwt. A tentative partial court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the regulated plants, 2 producer-handlers decision (73 FR 11194), effective Act, any handler subject to an order may and 2 exempt plants). A total of 52 February 25, 2008, describes the record request modification or exemption from plants were associated with the evidence supporting a 30 cents per cwt such order by filing a petition with the Southeast order (31 fully regulated transportation credit assessment rate. United States Department of Agriculture plants, 9 partially regulated plants and The 30 cents per cwt assessment rate (USDA) stating that the order, any 12 exempt plants). The number of plants was then adopted on an interim basis provision of the order, or any obligation meeting the small business criteria (73 FR 14153) effective March 18, 2008. imposed in connection with the order is under the Appalachian and Southeast Since these separate decisions address not in accordance with the law. A orders were 9 (24 percent) and 18 (35 the higher assessment rate, there is no handler is afforded the opportunity for percent), respectively. further consideration to this issue in a hearing on the petition. After a The amendments that are this proceeding. hearing, USDA would rule on the recommended for permanent adoption Proposals published in the hearing petition. The Act provides that the in this decision revise the transportation notice as Proposal 2, seeking to establish district court of the United States in any credit provisions of the Appalachian an intra-market transportation credit district in which the handler is an and Southeast orders. The Appalachian provision for the Appalachian and inhabitant, or has its principal place of and Southeast orders contain provisions Southeast orders, and Proposal 5, business, has jurisdiction in equity to for a transportation credit balancing seeking to reduce the volume of milk review USDA’s ruling on the petition, fund. To partially offset the costs of diverted to plants located outside of the provided a bill in equity is filed not transporting supplemental milk into Appalachian and Southeast milk later than 20 days after the date of the each marketing area to meet fluid milk marketing areas, will be addressed in a entry of the ruling. demand at distributing plants during the separate decision. No further discussion months of July through December, of these proposals is made in this Regulatory Flexibility Act and handlers are charged an assessment decision. Paperwork Reduction Act year-round to generate revenue used to The adopted amendments also amend In accordance with the Regulatory make payments to qualified handlers. the Producer milk provisions of the Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), the The adopted amendments establish a Appalachian and Southeast orders by Agricultural Marketing Service has variable mileage rate factor that would eliminating the current ability to pool considered the economic impact of this be adjusted monthly by changes in the diverted milk associated with action on small entities and has certified price of diesel fuel (a fuel cost adjustor) supplemental milk receiving a that this proposed rule would not have as reported by the Department of Energy transportation credit payment. As a significant economic impact on a for paying claims from the previously indicated in the tentative substantial number of small entities. For transportation credit balancing funds of partial final decision of this rulemaking the purpose of the Regulatory Flexibility the Appalachian and Southeast orders. (71 FR 54118), this decision does not Act, a dairy farm is considered a ‘‘small Prior to their interim adoption, the specifically adopt the Dean Foods business’’ if it has an annual gross mileage rate of both orders was fixed at Company proposal (published in the revenue of less than $750,000, and a 0.35 cents per cwt per mile. hearing notice as Proposal 4), but agrees dairy products manufacturer is a ‘‘small The adopted amendments increase with the need to limit diverted milk business’’ if it has fewer than 500 the transportation credit assessment rate pooled on the order made possible by employees. for the Appalachian order. Specifically, supplemental milk eligible to receive For the purposes of determining the maximum assessment rate for the transportation credits. which dairy farms are ‘‘small Appalachian order is increased to $0.15 Prior to amendments adopted on an businesses,’’ the $750,000 per year per cwt. The transportations credit interim basis, the Appalachian and criterion was used to establish a assessment rate for the Southeast order Southeast orders provided marketing guideline of 500,000 pounds is increased by actions taken in a transportation credits on supplemental per month. Although this guideline does separate rulemaking (73 FR 14153). The shipments of milk for Class I use not factor in additional monies that may higher assessment rate is intended to provided the milk was from dairy be received by dairy producers, it minimize the proration and depletion of farmers who are not defined as a should be an inclusive standard for the order’s transportation credit ‘‘producer’’ under the orders. A most small dairy farms. For purposes of balancing fund during those months producer under the order is defined as determining a handler’s size, if the plant when supplemental milk is needed. The a dairy farmer who: (1) during the is part of a larger company operating higher assessment rate for the immediately preceding months of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12987

March through May and not more than Preliminary Statement The following findings and 50 percent of the milk production of the A public hearing was held upon conclusions on the material issues are dairy farmer, in aggregate, is received as proposed amendments to the marketing based on evidence presented at the producer milk by either order during agreement and the orders regulating the hearing and the record thereof: those 3 months; and (2) produced milk handling of milk in the Appalachian 1. Transportation Credits on a farm not located within the and Southeast marketing areas. The specified marketing areas of either hearing was held, pursuant to the A. Establishing a Variable Mileage Rate order. The provisions of each order provisions of the Agricultural Marketing Factor provide the market administrator the Agreement Act of 1937 (AMAA), as A proposal, published in the hearing discretionary authority to adjust the 50 amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), and the notice as Proposal 3, seeking to establish percent milk production standard to applicable rules of practice and a variable mileage rate factor (MRF) that assure orderly marketing and efficient procedure governing the formulation of uses a fuel cost adjustor in the handling of milk in the marketing areas. marketing agreements and marketing transportation credit payment Adoption of the proposed orders (7 CFR part 900). provisions in both the Appalachian and amendments will be applied to all The proposed amendments set forth Southeast orders, is recommended for Appalachian and Southeast order below are based on the record of a permanent adoption. At the time of the handlers and producers, which consist public hearing held in Louisville, KY, hearing, the two orders provided for a of both large and small businesses. on January 10–12, 2006, pursuant to a fixed mileage rate of $0.035 per cwt per Since the adopted amendments will notice of hearing issued December 22, mile. The proposal was offered by Dairy affect all producers and handlers 2005, published December 28, 2005 (70 Farmers of America, Inc. (DFA). DFA is equally regardless of their size, the FR 76718). a dairy farmer member-owned Capper- amendments would not have a Upon the basis of the evidence Volstead cooperative that at the time of significant economic impact on a introduced at the hearing and the record the hearing had 12,800 member farmers substantial number of small entities. thereof, the Administrator, on whose milk was pooled throughout the The Agricultural Marketing Service is September 1, 2006, issued a Tentative Federal order system, including on the committed to complying with the E- Partial Decision, published in the Appalachian and Southeast orders. Government Act, to promote the use of Federal Register on September 13, 2006 A witness appearing on behalf of the Internet and other information (71 FR 54118) containing notice of the Southern Marketing Agency, Inc. (SMA) technologies to provide increased opportunity to file written exception and Dairy Cooperative Marketing opportunities for citizen access to thereto. Association, Inc. (DCMA) testified in Government information and services, The material issues on the record of support of Proposal 3. SMA and DCMA and for other purposes. hearing relate to: are marketing agencies-in-common operating in the southeast region of the This notice does not require 1. Transportation Credits additional information collection that country. Members of SMA at the time of needs clearance by the Office of A. Establishing a variable mileage rate the hearing included Arkansas Dairy Management and Budget (OMB) beyond factor. Cooperative Association; Dairy Farmers currently approved information B. Increasing the maximum of America, Inc.; Dairymen’s Marketing collection. The primary sources of data assessment rates. Cooperative, Inc.; Lone Star Milk used to complete the forms are routinely C. Establishing diversion limit Producers, Inc.; and Maryland & used in most business transactions. standards. Virginia Milk Cooperative Association, Inc. Members of DCMA at the time of Forms require only a minimal amount of Findings and Conclusions information that can be supplied the hearing included the without data processing equipment or a This final decision specifically abovementioned members of SMA; Zia trained statistical staff. Thus, the addresses proposals published in the Milk Producers Association; Select Milk information collection and reporting hearing notice as Proposals 3, 1, and Producers Association; Cooperative burden is relatively small. Requiring the certain objectives of Proposal 4. Milk Producers Association, Inc.; and same reports for all handlers does not Proposal 3 seeks to establish a variable Southeast Milk, Inc. Dairylea significantly disadvantage any handler mileage rate factor (MRF) using a fuel Cooperative, Inc. also requested that the that is smaller than the industry cost adjustor. Proposal 1 seeks to witness testify on their behalf and in average. increase the maximum transportation support of Proposal 3. credit assessment rates for both orders. The SMA witness testified that the No other burdens are expected to fall The intent of Proposal 4 is to discourage southeastern region of the United States on the dairy industry as a result of the volume of milk pooled by diversions is experiencing declining milk overlapping Federal rules. This by reducing the amount of production while the population and rulemaking proceeding does not transportation credits a handler could demand for fluid milk are increasing. As duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any receive. A complete discussion and a result, the witness stated that handlers existing Federal rules. findings on these three proposals servicing the Appalachian and Prior Documents in This proceeding appears after the summary of testimony. Southeast marketing areas must Proposal 2, seeking to establish an continually seek supplemental supplies Notice of Hearing: Issued December intra-market transportation credit of milk from outside their normal 22, 2005; published December 28, 2005 provision for both the Appalachian and milksheds. The witness added that the (70 FR 76718). Southeast orders and Proposal 5, volume of supplemental milk needed to Tentative Partial Decision: Issued seeking to reduce the volume of milk meet demand that cannot be met by September 1, 2006; published diverted to an out-of-area plant, will be local production and the distances from September 13, 2006 (71 FR 54118). addressed in a separate decision. where the supplemental milk is Interim Final Rule: Issued October 19, Accordingly, no further references to obtained continues to increase. The 2006; published October 25, 2006 (71 Proposals 2 and 5 will be made in this witness explained that these marketing FR 62377). decision. conditions cause the transportation

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12988 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

credit balancing funds to be depleted at The SMA witness illustrated fuel price, the witness submitted a rate faster than the rate at which components used to calculate the selected milk hauling bills from October handlers are assessed. proposed variable MRF. According to to November 2003 as the basis for The SMA witness presented monthly the witness, a monthly average diesel determining the reference hauling cost. fuel cost data for the United States and fuel price, a reference diesel fuel price, The witness testified that for this time nine U.S. sub-regions from the Energy an average mile-per-gallon truck fuel period the simple average hauling rate Information Administration of the use, a reference hauling cost per loaded charged per loaded mile in the United States Department of Energy mile and a reference load size are the Southeast was $1.9332 and $1.8913, (EIA). Relying on EIA data, the witness components needed to calculate the respectively, and averaged $1.9122. asserted that the cost of diesel fuel has proposed variable MRF. Accordingly, the witness offered that escalated sharply in recent years. Using EIA data for the United States the average hauling rate of $1.91 per According to the witness, the national and nine U.S. sub-regions, the SMA loaded mile should become the average diesel fuel price in mid-1997 witness explained that using the Lower reference hauling cost used in was reported to be approximately $1.15 Atlantic and Gulf Coast EIA regions in calculating the MRF. to $1.17 per gallon while the national computing the monthly mileage rates The SMA witness provided data average diesel fuel price in mid-2005 would be reflective of the Appalachian compiled by the United States was reported to be $2.20 to $2.50 per and Southeast marketing areas. Relying Department of Transportation (USDOT) gallon. The witness emphasized that on EIA data, the witness explained that on combination truck fuel economy. diesel fuel prices are much higher than the Lower Atlantic region is comprised According to the witness, the USDOT the prices that existed when the of the states of Virginia, West Virginia, data indicated that the average miles transportation credit provisions were North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, traveled per gallon for a combination first implemented in 1996 and amended and Florida. Similarly, the witness truck in 2002 was 5.2. The witness was in 1997. added, the Gulf Coast region is of the opinion that dairy industry fuel The SMA witness noted that the cost comprised of Alabama, Mississippi, economy is similar, as it ranges between of hauling has also increased. Relying Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, and New 5.0 to 6.0 miles per gallon. Accordingly, on EIA data, the SMA witness estimated Mexico. According to the witness, of the the witness advocated using a 5.5 miles the cost of hauling to be in the range of nine sub-regions described by the EIA, per gallon fuel consumption rate in $1.75 to $1.80 per loaded mile in 1997, the Lower Atlantic and Gulf Coast computing the proposed MRF. The whereas the cost in 2005 was about regions best reflect the Appalachian and witness also testified that a 5,600 gallon $2.35 per loaded mile. As diesel fuel Southeast marketing areas tanker, at its fullest capacity, can carry geographically. The witness also noted 48,160 pounds of milk. Therefore, the costs have increased, the witness that according to EIA data, the diesel witness explained, 48,000 pounds explained, so have other costs such as fuel costs for these two regions are should be the reference load size used equipment, insurance, and labor. among the lowest reported nationally. in calculating the MRF. The SMA witness emphasized that In establishing a reference diesel fuel The SMA witness summarized that there have been no adjustments made to price for the proposed transportation Proposal 3 calculates a variable monthly the MRF of the transportation credit credit mileage rate calculation, the SMA MRF by using: (1) EIA data from a base provisions since they were last amended witness relied on EIA retail diesel fuel period defined as October and in 1997. The witness recounted that the prices for the time period of October to November 2003, (2) hauling cost of original mileage rate was reduced by 5 November 2003. During that period, the $1.91 per loaded mile, (3) a reference percent, from $0.037 per cwt per mile to witness said, diesel fuel prices averaged diesel fuel rate of $1.42 per gallon, (4) $0.035 per cwt per mile in 1997. $1.48 per gallon nationally and ranged a fuel economy of 5.5 miles per gallon The SMA witness explained that in from $1.42 per gallon in the Lower and (5) a load size of 48,000 pounds. 1997, approximately 94 to 95 percent of Atlantic to $1.43 per gallon in the Gulf The SMA witness explained that the the transportation costs of supplemental Coast EIA regions. Due to relatively proposed mileage rate would be milk were covered by transportation little fluctuation of diesel fuel prices calculated by averaging the four most credit balancing fund payments. The during October to November 2003, the recent weeks of retail on-highway diesel witness reiterated that since no witness was of the opinion that this prices for both the Lower Atlantic and adjustments have been made to the period is a fair and conservative Gulf Coast, as reported by the EIA prior orders’ transportation credit timeframe on which to establish a to each order’s announcement of the reimbursement rate since 1997, the reference diesel fuel price. The witness Advance Class milk prices. According to percentage of hauling costs covered by concluded by suggesting $1.42 per cwt the witness, the proposed mileage rate the transportation credits today are per mile should be used as the reference would then be computed and included substantially less than those in 1997. diesel fuel price. in each order’s announcement of According to the SMA witness, the The SMA witness submitted a random Advanced Class milk prices that are use of a fixed mileage rate is not selection of actual milk hauler bills as announced publicly on or before the responsive to changes in hauling costs. the basis for computing the reference 23rd of the month. The witness explained that Proposal 3 hauling cost component of the proposed The SMA witness stressed that, for a would compute a variable MRF. According to the witness, actual variety of reasons, the proposed mileage transportation credit mileage rate per origination and destination points, rate computation reflects less than the cwt per mile that would adjust with miles moved, and rates and fuel actual cost of hauling. The witness changes in the cost of diesel fuel. The surcharges per loaded mile were asserted that the proposed mileage rate witness stressed the importance of, and depicted on each hauling bill. For the is based on costs of hauling from 2003, the need for, keeping information on month of October 2005, the witness rather than a more current timeframe, hauling costs current by using stated that hauling costs ranged from and therefore would only reflect independent fuel cost data. The witness $1.89 to $2.70 per loaded mile, with the changes in the cost of diesel fuel since stated that hauling cost rates, adjusted average being $2.48 per loaded mile. In that time. The witness also reiterated for changes in fuel costs, are common in order to be consistent with the that the proposed mileage rates would the industry. timeframe used for the reference diesel apply only to Class I milk shipped in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12989

excess of 85 miles, directly from farms I differential surface becomes more and potential future abuse of to plants. The SMA witness was of the outdated and unable to reflect the costs transportation credits. The witness opinion that transportation costs will of moving milk. asserted that current order provisions continue to increase and that adopting A post-hearing brief was submitted on allow supplemental milk to receive the proposed changes to the behalf of Lone Star Milk Producers transportation credits, when such milk transportation credit provisions will (Lone Star) in support of Proposal 3 is not demanded. Moreover, the witness avoid exhausting the transportation because it would establish updated stressed that there is no assurance that credit balancing fund before costs are mileage rates for payments from the transportation credit balancing fund reimbursed. transportation credit balancing funds. payments would flow to the dairy The SMA witness asserted at the time The brief stated that the hauling cost farmer members of the cooperatives of the hearing that they were incurring factor used to develop the mileage rate acting as handlers located in the two substantial losses in supplying for the transportation credit balancing marketing areas regardless of the supplemental milk for Class I use to the fund has not been updated since the producers’ status as independent or Appalachian and Southeast marketing mid 1990’s and is inadequate. cooperative members. areas. The witness indicated that A post-hearing brief submitted by A post-hearing brief submitted on hauling costs in supplying Maryland & Virginia Milk Producers behalf of Dean reiterated support for supplemental milk exceed $15 million Cooperative Association, Inc. (Maryland Proposal 3, indicating that disorderly annually. & Virginia) reiterated support for the marketing conditions exist because the A comment filed by SMA in response adoption of Proposal 3. milk supply in the Southeastern United to the Tentative Final Decision A post-hearing brief was submitted on States is deficit and the cost of reiterated support for the adoption of behalf of South East Dairy Farmers supplying the market is not borne Proposal 3. Association (SEDFA). The brief equally. Additionally, a comment filed Six DFA farmer-members testified in expressed support for a variable mileage by Dean in response to the Tentative support of Proposal 3. According to rate based on the changes in the cost of Final Decision expressed continued these witnesses, it is the cooperative diesel fuel. The brief stated that the support for the adoption of Proposal 3. members of SMA who are acting as industry uses a consistent fuel economy A dairy farmer who supplies milk to handlers to supply the supplemental estimate of 5.0 to 6.0 miles per gallon Dean testified in support of the intent of fluid milk needs of both marketing when calculating expected milk Proposal 3. The witness stated that a areas. According to the witnesses, this transportation costs. The brief stressed dynamic mileage rate that adjusts to the results in additional costs that are that the extreme rise in diesel fuel energy markets is better than a static absorbed by the dairy farmer members prices in recent months has made the factor that is unable to adjust in of the cooperatives that comprise SMA. adoption of Proposal 3 critical for response to changes in energy costs. The witnesses argued that hauling costs producers who incur the cost of hauling A dairy farmer who markets milk to and the distances supplemental milk milk to the market. Dean through Dairy Marketing Service must be hauled continue to increase. A witness appearing on behalf of (DMS) testified in favor of Proposal 3. The six DFA dairy farmer witnesses Southeast Milk, Inc. (SMI) testified in The witness stated that using a variable were of the opinion that Proposal 3 is support of Proposal 3. SMI is a dairy MRF derived from a source outside of a reasonable solution to deal with the marketing cooperative with, at the time the dairy industry, such as the USDOT, continued production decline and of the hearing, approximately 300 dairy would help decrease the chances of population driven demand increase in farmer members in Florida, Georgia, industry participants manipulating the the southeastern region of the United Alabama, and Tennessee. The SMI information that should be used in States. The witnesses were of the witness stated that relying on cost calculating a MRF. opinion that using a fuel adjustor that indexes of other government agencies A witness appearing on behalf of moves up and down with changes in the determined on a national scale makes Land O’Lakes, Inc. (LOL) testified in cost of diesel fuel would more the data less subject to manipulation by support of Proposal 3. LOL is a dairy adequately cover the costs of any given industry. farmer member-owned Capper-Volstead transporting supplemental milk to the A witness testified on behalf of Dean cooperative with, at the time of the two marketing areas. Foods Company (Dean) in support of hearing, over 4,000 member farmers A post-hearing brief submitted by Proposal 3. According to the witness, whose milk is pooled on 6 Federal DFA, and supported by SMA, reiterated Dean owns and operates 8 plants Orders. The witness stated that its support for adopting a fuel cost adjustor. regulated by the Appalachian marketing members’ milk located in the Northeast A post-hearing brief was submitted on area and 10 plants regulated by the and Midwest have provided behalf of Arkansas Dairy Cooperative Southeast marketing area. The Dean supplemental supplies to both the Association (ADCA) in support of witness agreed with the benefit of using Appalachian and Southeast marketing Proposal 3. According to ADCA, its an adjustor in determining the MRF to orders for the past 10 years. members’ milk does not usually qualify reflect changes in fuel prices over time. According to the witness, LOL for transportation credit payments However, the witness also was of the supplies supplemental milk to the because it is typically pooled on the opinion that the MRF should be reduced Appalachian and Southeast orders and Southeast and Central orders year- to 95 percent in order to be consistent experiences high milk hauling costs. round. However, ADCA noted that its with the Secretary’s past decisions that The witness asserted that using diesel members are impacted by the cost of transportation credits do not encourage fuel prices as the basis for the MRF hauling supplemental milk into the the uneconomic movement of milk or would make it responsive to actual costs southeast because of its membership in inefficiencies. incurred by the handlers moving milk a marketing agency-in-common. The Dean witness testified that the into these two deficit markets. A post-hearing brief was submitted on marketing areas are in need of A post-hearing brief submitted by behalf of Dairymen’s Marketing supplemental milk supplies and that LOL reiterated support for the adoption Cooperative, Inc. (DMCI) in support of supplying such milk presents of Proposal 3. The brief said that in Proposal 3. The brief emphasized that as challenges. Nevertheless, the witness order to fulfill the supplemental milk fuel costs continue to increase, the Class expressed concern for the continuing needs of the Appalachian and Southeast

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12990 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

order marketing areas, milk is sourced assessment rate in the Appalachian increased volumes of supplemental milk from 28 States. According to the brief, order is increased by $0.055 per cwt on were transported from locations farther this demonstrates that the distance milk Class I milk for an amended rate of from the marketing areas. must travel has further increased, $0.15 per cwt. The Southeast order’s The witness said that the reason the thereby strengthening the justification maximum assessment rate was market administrators prorated for the adoption of Proposal 3. increased by $0.10 per cwt for an payments from the transportation credit Additionally, a comment filed by LOL amended rate of $0.20 per cwt and balancing funds was because the rate of in response to the Tentative Final implemented on an interim basis. assessments exceeded collections. The Decision expressed continued support Subsequent to the interim adoption of witness was of the opinion that this for the adoption of Proposal 3. the $0.20 per cwt assessment rate, a occurred because more supplemental An independent dairy farmer from separate rulemaking increased this rate milk was sourced from more distant Tennessee testified in opposition to any to $0.30 per cwt (73 FR 14153). locations. changes to the Appalachian or Accordingly, this decision would Relying on market administrator data, Southeast marketing orders. The witness permanently adopt the higher the witness concluded that only 55 testified that additional government assessment rate for the Appalachian percent of the actual cost of transporting intervention in moving milk was not order only. supplemental milk was covered by the necessary and that supply and demand A witness appearing on behalf of transportation credit payments in the should be relied upon to dictate what DCMA and SMA testified in support of Appalachian order in 2004. Similarly, services are needed. The witness Proposal 1. As previously described in only 39 percent of the actual cost was asserted that amending the orders as testimony regarding Proposal 3, the covered for the Southeast order during proposed would change the way milk is SMA witness said that the current the same period. The witness further moved, thereby hindering efficient milk transportation credit provisions provide estimated that in 2005, only 53 percent hauling. The witness also was of the for the collection of a maximum and 43 percent of the actual hauling opinion that there is no assurance that transportation credit assessment to costs for supplemental milk would be transportation credits received for handlers on all Class I milk for the covered for the Appalachian and supplying supplemental milk would Appalachian and Southeast marketing Southeast orders, respectively. truly reach the market’s producers. The areas year-round. While the market In explaining the need for the witness expressed concerns that the administrator has the discretion to adoption of Proposal 3, the SMA proposed increases in the transportation waive the maximum transportation witness reiterated that the combined credit rate could affect producer credit assessments if deemed necessary, effect of higher mileage hauling rates decisions and producer blend prices. the SMA witness explained that the and the increased distance from which A witness testified on behalf of the market administrator of each order supplemental milk had to be hauled, Kentucky Dairy Development Council collected the maximum assessments in resulted in a smaller portion of actual (KDDC). KDDC is a member-based 2004 and 2005. However, the witness transportation costs being funded with organization that, at the time of the said that the collected assessments in transportation credits compared to the hearing, represented approximately both orders had been insufficient to pay rate in 1997. The witness was of the 1,360 dairy farmers in Kentucky. The the requested credits, thereby opinion that transportation costs will witness did not state support for or necessitating the prorating of payments continue to increase, making it opposition to the proposals presented at from the transportation credit balancing necessary to again increase the the hearing. The witness was of the fund. assessment rate. opinion that noncompetitive pricing is The SMA witness stated that even Further illustrating the need to discouraging milk production in the with the November 1, 2005, increase the maximum transportation southeastern United States. The witness implementation of a transportation credit assessment rate, the SMA witness was of the opinion that farm milk prices credit assessment increase of $0.03 per indicated that if a transportation credit in Kentucky and in the Southeastern cwt for both orders, the assessment rate reimbursement rate of $0.046 per cwt States have eroded and that KDDC was will likely not be able to ensure per mile had been in place rather than opposed to any Federal Order changes payments from the transportation credit the current rate of $0.035 per cwt per which would further erode farm prices. balancing funds on all milk eligible to mile, the Appalachian order would have The witness did testify in support of receive payment. required an assessment of $0.133 per changes to the orders that would The SMA witness estimated that the cwt in 2004 and an assessment of strengthen the position of dairy farmers transportation credit assessment rate for $0.1415 per cwt in 2005, to prevent the in Kentucky and in other Southeastern the Appalachian order for 2004 would prorating of transportation credit claims. States. have needed to be $0.0889 per cwt and Similarly, the witness stated that for the A post-hearing brief submitted by $0.0953 per cwt for all of 2005 to cover Southeast order, the assessment rate KDDC in support of Proposal 3 said that all of the transportation credits would have needed to have been Proposal 3 would benefit Kentucky requested. The witness also estimated $0.1927 per cwt in 2004 and $0.1869 dairy farmers by providing assistance in that the Southeast order transportation per cwt in 2005. recovering market service costs. credit assessment rate would needed to The SMA witness testified that the have been $0.1318 per cwt and $0.1246 different rates of transportation credit B. Increasing the Maximum Assessment per cwt in 2004 and 2005, respectively, balancing fund assessments proposed Rate to cover all requested credits. for the Appalachian and Southeast A proposal, published in the hearing Additionally, the witness noted that the orders reflect the differing costs of notice as Proposal 1, offered by DFA, transportation credits requested for both supplying supplemental milk into each that seeks to increase the maximum the Appalachian and Southeast marketing area. The witness stated that transportation credit balancing fund marketing orders for the months of July, while the transportation credit assessment rates for the Appalachian September, and October of 2005 assessment was waived for 2 months and Southeast orders is adopted. exceeded the transportation credits during 2002 and 2003 in the Specifically, the maximum requested in all of 2004. The witness Appalachian order, assessments were transportation credit balancing fund said this also demonstrates that not waived for the Southeast order. The

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12991

witness asserted that while both orders Appalachian and Southeast marketing has been insufficient to support rely on some of the same sources for areas with supplemental milk. Select transportation credit payments. While supplemental milk, the Appalachian and Continental expressed support for the witness supported the transportation marketing area, at the time of the proponent’s hearing testimony in favor credit assessment increases effective in hearing, received most of its milk from of increasing the transportation credit November 2005, the witness did not the more northern Mid-Atlantic States assessment rates of the two orders. The think that this would be sufficient to while the Southeast marketing area brief stated that while the proposals reimburse future claims. received most of its supplemental milk under consideration will not fix long- A post-hearing brief submitted by from States located to the west and term marketing and transportation LOL reiterated its support for the southwest of the marketing area. problems, Proposal 1 should be adopted adoption of Proposal 1. The brief Furthermore, the witness added that in conjunction with USDA’s indicated that the southeast region of different assessment rates for the two consideration of alternative approaches the country is not able to fulfill Class I orders are warranted because at the time aimed at correcting the milk deficit demands during any season of the year of the hearing, supplemental milk problems in the southeast region of the and must rely on a supplemental milk moved greater distances to service the United States. supply from about 28 States outside the Southeast market than it did to service The Select/Continental brief Appalachian and Southeast marketing the Appalachian market. expressed the opinion that blend prices, areas. The brief noted that The six DFA dairy farmer witnesses not Class I prices, provide the economic transportation credits installed in the that testified in support of Proposal 3 incentive to supply milk to a marketing southeastern region in 1996 were based also testified in support of increasing area. The brief stated that when on the recognition that the region’s the transportation credit assessments for producers in a large marketing area Class I needs could only be met by both orders. The witnesses were of the share the same blend price, the supplemental milk from dairy farms opinion that the assessment increases incentive to move milk within the large located outside of the region. would generate funds needed to marketing area is greatly diminished. In A witness testifying on behalf of Dean maintain a sufficient transportation addition, the brief indicated that the expressed cautious support for credit fund balance capable of paying on pricing of diverted milk ignores the increasing the transportation credit eligible claims. In addition, the value of milk to the market where assessment rates of the two orders witnesses were of the opinion that the pooled, which results in milk being because the availability of additional orders’ current location adjustments pooled that is not available to meet the credits must be balanced with were not able to reflect the rapidly Class I needs of the market. consideration for abuses and undesired increasing costs of transporting milk A post-hearing brief was submitted on results. The witness was of the opinion from where it is located to where it is behalf of Southeast Dairy Farmer that handlers who receive such credits needed. Similarly, the witnesses stated Association (SEDFA). The brief are also pooling milk on the orders that over-order premiums cannot be expressed support for Proposal 1 as through the diversion process which garnered from the market to offset published in the hearing notice. SEDFA does not actually serve the markets’ rapidly increasing transportation costs. represents cooperative and independent Class I needs. The six DFA dairy farmer witnesses producers who are regular and A post-hearing brief submitted on were also of the opinion that the intent supplemental milk suppliers located in behalf of Dean agreed with proponents of increasing the transportation credit and outside of the Appalachian and of Proposal 1 that disorderly marketing assessment rates was a reasonable Southeast marketing areas. conditions exist. The brief stated that solution to mitigate continued The SEDFA brief asserted that the southeast area’s milk supply is production declines and the increasing whether milk is produced inside or deficit and the cost of supplying the demand for milk in the southeastern outside of the two marketing areas, the market is not borne equally. United States due to continued cost of moving Class I supplemental A witness testified on behalf of SMI population increases in that region. The milk should be borne by the in opposition to Proposal 1. The witness witnesses added that the markets’ marketplace. The brief stated that while characterized transportation credits as a producers face higher fuel costs and the reimbursement of actual hauling subsidy. The witness further expressed longer hauling distances associated with costs is much lower than in 1997, the that subsidizing the transportation of obtaining supplemental milk. When amount of supplemental milk being milk produced outside of the marketing producers go out of business, the brought into the marketing areas is areas results in economic disincentives witnesses said, the gap between supply increasing. The brief concluded that for local milk production and provides and demand widens thereby increasing because reimbursement of actual incentives for local milk supplies to be the cost of supplying the market with hauling cost is smaller, the higher costs replaced by milk from outside the two supplemental milk. not reimbursed have fallen marketing areas. The witness noted that Post-hearing briefs submitted by DFA disproportionately on producers. The when transportation credits were first reiterated the position and testimony of brief agreed with Lone Star and adopted in 1996, the average Class I SMA in support of increasing the Maryland & Virginia that the $0.03 utilization of the southeast region was transportation credit assessment rates increase in the transportation credit in the mid-80 percent range. Since the immediately. assessments implemented in November implementation of transportation A post-hearing brief was submitted on 2005 1 would be insufficient to cover the credits, the witness said, Class I behalf of Select Milk Producers, Inc. expected transportation credit claims utilization had fallen to the 60 percent (Select) and Continental Dairy Products, during 2006. range. It was the opinion of the witness Inc. (Continental) in support of Proposal A witness appearing on behalf of LOL that transportation credit provisions are 1. At the time of the hearing, Select’s testified in support of Proposal 1. The contributing to declining milk members were located in New Mexico, LOL witness agreed with other production in the two marketing areas. Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma, while proponents that the transportation The SMI witness testified that Continental’s members were located in credit balancing fund for both orders transportation credits should be Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio. The brief eliminated. As an alternative, the stated that both cooperatives supply the 1 70 FR 59221. witness suggested: (1) Establishing a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12992 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

method whereby Class I prices could be the adoption of Proposal 1. In addition and Southeast orders from locations adjusted based on more regional to the witness’ testimony regarding distant from the marketing areas. While marketing conditions; (2) adopting a Proposal 3 as was already described, the Proposal 4 would provide incentives to base-excess plan; (3) increasing the witness was of the opinion that limit the pooling of milk through the current Class I differential level; and (4) additional government intervention to diversion process, it would do so any other provisions that would provide for increasing the transportation indirectly by limiting the payment of encourage local milk production. credit assessment rate was not necessary transportation credits. This decision A Kentucky dairy farmer testified in and that supply and demand forces chooses to directly limit diversions by opposition to Proposal 1. The witness should dictate what services are needed. establishing a zero diversion limit on argued that providing transportation The witness asserted that amending the milk that receives transportation credits. credits devalues local milk, which orders as proposed would change the A witness appearing on behalf of results in lower prices to local way milk is transported and would Dean testified in support of Proposal 4 producers and causes declining milk hinder efficient handling of milk. The while also expressing cautious support production in the two marketing areas. witness was of the opinion that there for the proposed transportation credit The witness expressed concern that would be no assurance that the assessment increase (Proposal 1). The Proposal 1 would encourage more milk transportation credits would benefit the witness was of the opinion that handlers from outside the marketing areas to be producers who were pooled on the two supplying supplemental milk to the two pooled on the orders even though it is orders and had incurred the additional marketing areas receive a financial not delivered to either marketing area costs of servicing the Class I market. benefit from pooling diverted milk on on a daily basis, as is the locally A dairy farmer, who also markets milk the orders even though the milk does produced milk. According to the to Dean through DMS, testified in not ultimately serve the fluid market. witness, local producers are not able to opposition to Proposal 1. The witness The witness explained that while the receive the full value for local said that local producers of the diverted milk typically does not serve production because transportation Appalachian and Southeast marketing the two markets, it seeks to be pooled credits give price advantages to areas are unable to supply all the fluid on the two orders because the blend producers located far from the milk needs of the two marketing areas prices are higher than what this milk marketing areas. The witness concluded because local milk production in these could receive if pooled on other Federal by stating that pooling milk located areas is declining. The witness orders. outside of both marketing areas does not suggested that if Proposal 1 were The Dean witness testified that the represent Class I use and therefore this adopted, an accounting of the total establishment of large marketing orders milk should not be pooled on the transportation costs of all milk has created new marketing problems. Appalachian or Southeast orders. movements should be supplied to the According to the witness, when the A dairy farmer witness who supplies market administrators and be made Federal order system had a larger milk to Dean testified in opposition to available for public inspection. The number of smaller markets, each order’s Proposal 1. The witness viewed witness also suggested making changes marketwide pools were small. Markets increasing assessment rates on to the level of adjustments of milk with large populations relative to transportation credits as detrimental to prices by location (location adjustments) associated milk, the witness explained, those dairy farmers who are located in as an alternative to increasing the had higher Class I utilizations and the Appalachian and Southeast transportation credit assessment rate. higher blend prices to attract marketing areas and who regularly The witness said if location adjustments supplemental milk supplies. Markets supply the Class I needs of the market. were changed, the pooling standards for with significant supplies of milk and The witness was of the opinion that both orders would also need to be smaller populations, the witness related, Proposal 1 lacks safeguards on the adjusted. Specifically, the witness had lower Class I utilizations and amount of additional milk that could be suggested increasing the number of producers pooled in those markets were pooled on the orders by diversion. The days’ production needed to touch base, provided with the economic incentive witness said that this additional pooled or increasing the performance standards to look for higher returns from markets milk would unnecessarily lower the of the orders. with higher blend prices. The witness blend price received by producers and A post-hearing brief submitted by the further explained that smaller marketing essentially result in out-of-area milk Kentucky Dairy Development Council areas limited the size of the Class I supplies becoming less expensive (KDDC) supported Proposal 1. The brief market and, in turn, limited how much relative to milk produced in-area. As a noted that increasing the transportation milk could be pooled by diversion. The consequence, the witness said, local in- credit assessment rate would benefit witness said that when orders were area producers will be forced out of Kentucky dairy farmers by providing smaller, there were disincentives to business because of lower prices. assistance in recovering costs associated pooling milk and the orders were more Should this occur, the witness said, the with serving the market. effective in limiting a handler’s ability need for additional out-of-area to pool milk through diversions. C. Establishing Diversion Limit supplemental milk supplies would According to the witness, the relative Standards further increase to meet the Class I value of diverted milk was tied to its needs of the marketing areas. A proposal submitted by Dean Foods, distance from the market. The witness suggested that instead of published in the hearing notice as The Dean witness also testified that providing additional transportation Proposal 4, seeks to reduce a handler’s the Class I price surface adopted during credits, a review of the level of Class I ability to utilize transportation credits to Federal milk order reform changed the differentials and a review of diversions qualify producers for pooling on the relative relationship of milk value to its and touch-base provisions should be orders. The intent of the proposal is to distance from the market. According to considered in another hearing. limit the pooling of additional surplus the witness, the location value of An independent dairy farmer from milk on the orders through the diversion diverted milk prior to reform was Tennessee testified against making any process. At the time of the hearing, large determined by adjusting milk value changes to the Appalachian and volumes of milk were being pooled according to its distance from an order’s Southeast marketing orders, including through diversions on the Appalachian pricing point. The witness said this

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12993

resulted in each plant having a different The Dean witness acknowledged the opinion that transportation credits give location adjustment value to its milk need for balancing because distributing producers located outside the marketing receipts depending on the order on plants do not typically need to receive areas a price advantage because their which its receipts were pooled. The milk every day of the week. However, diverted milk receives the blend price of witness explained that the further milk the witness asserted that unlimited the orders. was located from the order’s pricing diversions undermine the purpose of A witness appearing on behalf of LOL point, the less likely it was to be pooled the Federal order system. The witness testified in opposition to Proposal 4. as a diversion. explained that the proposed 30 percent The witness noted that transportation The Dean witness expressed concern diversion limit on supplemental milk credits were established to attract that no longer valuing milk relative to seeking transportation credits is supplemental milk and to partially the order on which it is pooled had a reasonable because a distributing plant offset the cost of hauling supplemental material effect on the value of pooling typically receives milk five days per milk into the deficit markets. The milk located far from the market by week. The need to divert milk 2 days witness explained that the orders’ diversion. The witness was of the per week, the witness explained, specify the conditions that must be met opinion that the flatter Class I price justifies the 30 percent diversion limit. to be eligible to receive transportation surface, with fixed differential levels by The Dean witness explained that based credit payments. The current county, places a value on milk that is on data provided by the market transportation credit provisions, the not reflective of its value to the administrator, there are handlers in both witness said, already limit payments for marketing order where pooled making it orders who divert significantly more supplemental milk from outside the economically desirable to pool milk pounds of milk than the orders need to marketing areas to include only the milk located far from the market through the balance the Class I demands of pool of dairy farmers who are not defined as diversion process. The witness was also distributing plants, and yet still receive ‘‘producers’’ under the orders. The of the opinion that this served to transportation credits. witness also said that payments are provide the incentive for pooling distant A post-hearing brief submitted on limited to Class I pounds and are not milk by diversion. behalf of Dean reiterated support for the paid on the first 85 miles of hauling The Dean witness testified that even adoption of Proposal 4 provided that milk from farms to the plant receiving though there are closer milk supplies, Proposals 1 and 3 are adopted. The brief supplemental milk. distant milk is being pooled on both stated that Proposal 4, when adopted in The LOL witness stressed that orders. The witness further asserted that conjunction with Proposals 1 and 3, additional limitations would do nothing transportation credits amplify the would tend to limit the abuse of to encourage the delivery of needed pooling of milk on the orders, which transportation credits on supplemental supplemental milk into the marketing does not service the markets’ Class I milk for Class I use as a result of the cap areas during the short production needs. The witness was of the opinion on the receipt of transportation credits months. The witness was of the opinion that pooling distant milk by diversion by handlers suggested in Proposal 4. that if the intent is to change the clearly results in disorderly marketing The brief also stressed that, if adopted, diversion limits of the orders, then those conditions within the two markets. the provisions detailed in Proposal 4 changes should be addressed in a According to the witness, when such would lead to the exercise of some separate hearing. milk is pooled, local farmers who are control over the amount of milk that A post-hearing brief submitted by consistently serving the Class I needs of would be pooled on the orders through LOL reiterated its position given at the the markets receive a needlessly lower the diversion process. hearing opposing Proposal 4. The brief blend price. A dairy farmer who supplies milk to also stated that Proposal 4 improperly According to the Dean witness, the Dean testified in support of Proposal 4. assumes that all handlers supplying objective of Proposal 4 is to modify the The witness agreed with Dean and other supplemental milk have equal access to receipt of transportation credits witnesses that orders should only pool distributing plants and that distributing depending on a handler’s specific the milk of producers who truly serve plants’ Class I use of milk is the same service to the Class I need of the markets the Class I needs of the market, as the Class I utilization of the two and to lower transportation credit otherwise revenue essentially leaves the markets. payments to those handlers who have two marketing areas. According to the A witness appearing on behalf of higher levels of diversions. The witness witness, this loss of revenue leads area SMA also testified in opposition to stated that the current reimbursement dairy farmers to exit the industry, Proposal 4. The witness was of the rate of transportation credits is the same thereby further reducing the availability opinion that the orders touch-base and for each handler regardless of the level of local milk supplies and increasing the diversion limit standards already of its relative service to the fluid market. need for acquiring more milk produced provide sufficient safeguards to pooling The witness explained that when a from far outside the marketing areas. milk not needed for Class I use. The handler delivers 100 percent of its The witness was of the opinion that it SMA witness explained that it is receipts to a pool distributing plant, it is the shipments of supplemental milk difficult to establish specific diversion receives transportation credits at the into the marketing areas that provide the limits on supplemental milk, as same rate as a handler delivering only ability to pool milk by diversion when contained in Proposal 4, because of the minimum volume needed to meet it is not available to the market. individual differences in the balancing the pooling qualifications. The witness A witness from SMI testified in needs of each distributing plant, noting conveyed that the handlers meeting support of Proposal 4, provided that these needs continually change. only the minimum pooling standards Proposals 1 and 3 are adopted. The witness emphasized that difficulties are then able to divert milk which is not A Kentucky dairy producer testified in balancing the orders’ pool actually available to the market. in support of Proposal 4 and said that distributing plants exist year-round, and Additionally, the witness indicated that supplemental milk receiving that suppliers sometimes have no adjusting a handler’s receipt of transportation credits should be subject control over factors that may alter transportation credits in this way will to some limits on the amount of balancing needs. The witness noted that maintain and help extend the additional milk that can be pooled by some of SMA’s purchase agreements for transportation credit balancing funds. diversion. The witness was of the supplemental milk included

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12994 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

arrangements where transportation Proposal 4. The premise of its the orders’ dairy farmers, no analysis credit payments are paid directly to the opposition was that Proposal 4 would was provided to verify the claim. supplying cooperative. In this regard, establish a ‘‘one-size-fits-all’’ diversion Additionally, LOL wrote that the record the witness expressed concern that limit for all Class I handlers. The brief reveals the problem with diversions is providing a separate diversion limit on noted that a distributing plant’s reserve greater in the Southeast marketing area milk receiving transportation credit milk needs are individual decisions in and therefore unique marketing payments would unfairly penalize the response to its customer base and conditions call for unique provisions in cooperative when a distributing plant seasonal changes in demand. The brief each order. overestimates its need for supplemental expressed the opinion that the orders Findings/Discussion milk. The witness stated that extreme already provide for some of the most variations in daily, weekly, and monthly strict diversion limit standards and The issue before USDA in this deliveries to pool distributing plants touch-base requirements in the Federal decision is the consideration of changes occur. Relying on market administrator order system. to the transportation credit and closely data for January 2004 through October related provisions of the Appalachian Comments and Exceptions 2005 that showed the ratio of the and Southeast milk marketing orders. highest delivery to lowest delivery day, Comments filed by Dean in response Transportation credit provisions have the witness concluded that a 30 percent to the tentative partial decision been a feature of the current orders (and reserve factor would not have been supported the proposed amendments as their predecessor orders) since 1996. sufficient to cover distributing plant recommended by USDA. The brief The need for transportation credit balancing needs. offered support of USDA’s alternative to provisions arose from a consistent need The SMA witness also was of the Proposal 4 which, in its opinion, more to import milk from considerable opinion that Proposal 4 would give pool directly addressed the problem of distances to the marketing areas during distributing plant operators an pooling diverted milk that is associated certain months of the year when local advantage over cooperatives who, in with supplemental milk supplies. Dean milk production was not sufficient to their capacity as handlers, are supplying also stated that since the Department’s meet Class I demands. Transportation supplemental milk. The witness said alternative continued to address the credit provisions provide payments to that while cooperatives handle the intent of Proposal 4, it would support handlers to cover a portion of the costs majority of supplemental milk for the the adoption of Proposals 1 and 3. In of hauling supplemental milk supplies orders, they may receive little or no brief, Dean expressed that USDA’s into the Appalachian and Southeast transportation credit payments under decision adequately addressed concerns marketing areas during the months of Proposal 4. According to the witness, a it expressed at the hearing regarding January, February, and July through diversion limit could only benefit those pooling abuse and ensuring that December—a time period during which handlers in nearer proximity to the transportation credits only reimburse supplemental milk is needed to meet marketing areas. handlers for a portion of the the demand for Class I milk at A post-hearing brief was submitted on supplemental hauling costs. distributing plants. behalf of ADCA in opposition to Comments filed on behalf of SMA The transportation credit provisions Proposal 4. The brief stressed that the also expressed support for the are designed to distinguish between seasonality of production in the amendments recommended in the producers who regularly supply the southeastern region is the highest in the tentative final decision. SMA stated that Appalachian and Southeast markets country and as such, a greater reserve of the recommended amendments would from producers who are supplemental milk must be available. The brief ensure that there are sufficient funds suppliers (not regular suppliers) of these concluded that Proposal 4 would create available to fund the transportation markets. Only milk from producers who inequities between handlers supplying credit balancing fund and that are both located outside of the supplemental milk while also transportation credits would better marketing area and who are not encouraging uneconomic movements of reflect the changing costs of supplying considered ‘‘producers’’ of the order is milk. supplemental milk to the southeastern eligible to receive transportation credits. A post-hearing brief was submitted on region. Comments filed on behalf of The record reveals that the behalf of DMCI in opposition to LOL supported the adoption of Appalachian marketing area, and in Proposal 4. The brief asserted that there Proposals 1 and 3. LOL stated that particular, the Southeast marketing area, are too many unanswered questions as increasing the transportation credit are chronically unable to meet Class I to how Proposal 4 would be applied. assessment rates and updating the demands. Local milk production The brief stated that a distributing payment rate to better reflect the cost of relative to demand has declined and is plant’s reserve milk needs are an fuel were long overdue improvements to expected to continue declining. individual business decision and should the two orders’ transportation credit Consequently, local milk production is only be limited by the order’s pooling provisions. However, LOL took not always able to fulfill the Class I provisions. exception with USDA’s needs of the markets which necessitates A post-hearing brief submitted by recommendation regarding Proposal 4 the need for supplemental milk from DFA and other SMA members reiterated (pooling of diverted milk through distant locations. As local milk their opposition to Proposal 4. The brief supplemental milk supplies). LOL production has eroded, the volume of noted that during many months, a 30 argued that by not allowing diversions supplemental milk needed for fluid use percent diversion limit is insufficient to on supplemental milk supplies, has increased, while at the same time cover balancing needs. Therefore, if supplemental milk suppliers located the distance from the marketing areas Proposal 4 were implemented, the brief outside of the marketing areas would from which the supplies are obtained said, it could disproportionately affect bear the burden of balancing the has increased. This development is different supplemental supplies and markets’ seasonal milk needs. LOL also particularly evident for the Southeast distributing plants in the marketing argued that while USDA asserted in the marketing area. These combined factors areas. tentative final decision that limiting have caused the transportation credit A post-hearing brief was submitted on diversions on supplemental milk balancing fund (TCBF) to be insufficient behalf of Lone Star in opposition to supplies would increase blend prices to in covering requested transportation

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12995

credit payments. The TCBF will likely variable MRF used in the calculation of relative to any other time between 1997 not be able to cover future requested TCBF payments include: a monthly and 2005. payments unless the amendments average diesel fuel price; a reference From October to November 2003, contained in this decision are adopted. diesel fuel price; an average mile-per- national diesel fuel prices fluctuated by While both marketing areas are able to gallon truck fuel use; a reference only $0.001. Specifically, diesel fuel supply the Class I needs of their hauling cost per loaded mile; and a prices averaged $1.48125 per gallon in respective markets during the spring reference load size. October 2003 and $1.48225 per gallon in ‘‘flush’’ months without the need for The Energy Information November 2003. Similarly, the record transportation credits, the record clearly Administration (EIA) data for the United shows that, for both the Lower Atlantic indicates that both orders are unable to States and nine U.S. sub-regions are a and Gulf Coasts, diesel fuel prices fully supply their fluid needs with local reliable and reasonable data source to be ranged from $1.4210 to $1.43075 per production during the last 6 months of used in the establishment of certain gallon between October and November the year. The chronic shortage of milk components required to determine a 2003. The stability of diesel fuel prices for fluid uses during this period has variable MRF. The data are during October to November 2003 worsened over time, especially in the representative of diesel fuel prices in supports this period as a reasonable Southeast marketing area. Evidence the Appalachian and Southeast point in time for use in determining a shows that the trend of declining marketing orders and can be relied upon reference diesel fuel price. Therefore, production relative to demand will as a basis upon which adjustments to the record supports using $1.42 per result in an increased need for the MRF can be made. Reliance on EIA gallon as the reference diesel price in supplemental milk supplies and it is data, as it is independent and unbiased, the MRF calculation. likely that this trend will continue into will make determination of the MRF Evidence submitted by SMA provides the foreseeable future. objective and uniformly applicable to all a basis for the determination of a handlers. reference average hauling cost per Variable Mileage Rate Factor—A Fuel loaded mile as a component for The proponent’s suggested that the Cost Adjustor determining the MRF. The evidence use of the Lower Atlantic and Gulf Coast Based on record evidence, this consisted of data randomly selected EIA regions in the computation of decision continues to find that the from actual hauler bills paid to mileage rate factor (MRF) used to monthly mileage rates for the cooperatives during October and determine the payment of transportation Appalachian and Southeast orders is November 2003, and October and credits should include a fuel cost reasonable. The record reveals that the November 2005. The record supports adjustor as proposed in DFA’s Proposal Lower Atlantic and Gulf Coast regions the use of hauling cost data from 3. best reflect the Appalachian and October and November 2003 as a basis The original fixed mileage rate for Southeast marketing areas for the calculation of a reference hauling both orders was $0.037 per cwt per mile geographically. Additionally, the record cost in the MRF consistent with the time when the transportation credit reflects that the diesel fuel prices frame used for the reference diesel provisions were first established in reported for these two regions are price. 1996. The computation of the among the lowest in the country. Hence, The randomly selected hauling bills transportation credit payments was it is appropriate to utilize these depict actual origination and based on the total miles supplemental geographically defined data sets in the destination points of the milk hauled, milk was shipped from its point of mileage rate calculations. miles traveled, and the rates and fuel origination to its destination—the The record reveals that fuel prices and surcharges per loaded mile for each bill. receiving pool distributing plant. In other factors impacting hauling prices For the month of October 2005, the data 1997, several amendments were made to have increased greatly since the indicate that hauling costs ranged from the transportation credit provisions of establishment of transportation credits. $1.89 to $2.70 per loaded mile, with an the orders that included a reduction of Specifically, the record indicates that average cost of $2.48 per loaded mile. the mileage rate from $0.037 per cwt per current diesel fuel prices exceed those Data also show that the simple average mile to the current $0.035 per cwt per prices that prevailed when hauling rate charged per loaded mile in mile.2 transportation credit provisions were the Southeast marketing area was Additional amendments made in 1997 first implemented in 1996 and amended $1.9332 and $1.8913 in October and to the transportation credit provisions in 1997. The national average diesel fuel November 2003, respectively, yielding a specified the exclusion of the first 85 prices in mid-1997 were reported to be two-month simple average cost of miles supplemental milk was hauled approximately $1.15 to $1.17 per gallon, $1.9122 per loaded mile. Therefore, it is from farms in determining the total while the national average diesel fuel reasonable to conclude that a reference miles shipped. Additionally, the 1997 price in mid-2005 was reported to be hauling rate of $1.91 per loaded mile be amendments eliminated the use of the $2.20 to $2.50 per gallon. Additionally, used as a component in the MRF orders’ producer settlement fund as a while diesel fuel prices have increased, calculations.3 source of revenue for the payment of all other costs impacting hauling have Another component needed in the transportation credits on supplemental also increased. According to the record, calculation of the MRF is the average milk when the TCBF was unable to pay EIA data indicates that hauling costs number of miles traveled per gallon of net transportation credit claims. No ranged from $1.75 to $1.80 per loaded fuel used in transporting milk. other amendments have been made to mile in 1997 and were about $2.35 per the MRF used in the transportation loaded mile in January 2006. 3 It should be noted that as a result of the Establishing a reference diesel fuel price Emergency Hurricane hearing held for the credit provisions since 1997. Appalachian, Florida and Southeast marketing Proposal 3 adjusts the MRF for the MRF calculation using the EIA orders during the fall of 2004, a reasonable haul rate accordingly with changes in the cost of retail diesel fuel prices from October to used to determine how handlers would be diesel fuel. Specifically, the component November 2003 data is reasonable. compensated for the transportation costs of According to the EIA data, national extraordinary movements of milk was established factors used in the determination of the for a temporary time period. Specifically, a average diesel fuel costs during this maximum of $2.25 per loaded mile hauling rate was 2 62 FR 39738. period demonstrated price stability established (69 FR 71697).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12996 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

Combination truck fuel economy data, that a 5.5-mile per gallon fuel of weekly retail on-highway diesel regularly maintained by the United consumption rate is reasonable and prices for both the Lower Atlantic and States Department of Transportation, should be used to compute the MRF. Gulf Coast, as reported by the EIA. indicates that the average miles per The record also supports the use of Record evidence supports announcing gallon for a combination truck was 5.2 48,000 pounds as a reasonable reference the monthly MRF at the same time as in 2002; and 5.1 in 2003. The record load size for determining the MRF. Data Advanced Class Prices, on or before the also consists of testimony revealing that reveal that a 5,600 gallon tanker truck at 23rd of the month. This way, handlers the dairy industry typically estimates maximum capacity can carry 48,160 will know in advance the rate at which fuel economy at between 5.0–6.0 miles pounds of milk. Therefore, 48,000 transportation credits will be paid. pounds is appropriate for use as the per gallon. Therefore, given that 5.5 reference load size component in Table 1 shows an example of the miles per gallon is the median point, calculating the MRF. calculation of the MRF to be used in the and the goal of this decision is to Proposal 3 would calculate the MRF transportation credit provisions: promote efficiencies, the record finds by averaging the four most recent weeks BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP07MR14.002 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12997

Concern exists that relying on a was $0.06 per cwt for each order. The transportation credit claims, especially variable MRF may result in reimbursing first increase, adopted in 1997, raised during the time when payment of the total, rather than a portion, of the the maximum assessment by $0.005 per credits was most needed. Preventing the hauling costs on supplemental milk. In cwt for the Appalachian order and by prorating of the transportation credit this regard, a variable MRF that is $0.01 per cwt for the Southeast order.5 reimbursement payments would have consistent and reflective of the original The second increase in the maximum required a higher assessment rate. intent of the transportation credit assessment rates for both orders became Evidence submitted by the SMA witness provisions of the Appalachian and effective in November 2005.6 The showed that the maximum Southeast orders is necessary. As maximum assessment rates for both transportation credit assessment rate for already discussed, approximately 94 to orders were increased by $0.03 per cwt, the Appalachian order would have 95 percent of the total transportation from $0.065 to $0.095 per cwt for the needed to be $0.0889 and $0.0953 per costs on supplemental milk were Appalachian order, and from $0.070 to cwt, for 2004 and 2005, respectively. covered by the TCBF payments for both $0.10 per cwt for the Southeast order. Such evidence further supports the need orders in 1997. However, the record The hearing record reveals that the to increase the transportation credit reveals that for 2005, 53 percent and 42 Appalachian order was able to pay all assessment rate. percent of the total transportation costs transportation credit claims for every The adoption of the variable MRF that for the Appalachian and Southeast month since implementation through is calculated and adjusted with changes orders, respectively, were covered by September 2004. For the remainder of in diesel fuel prices (as presented in TCBF payments. 2004, the Appalachian Market Proposal 3), will most likely increase Due to a number of unknown Administrator began prorating the the current mileage rate of $0.035 per variables, it is not possible to transportation credit payments. cwt per mile. Relying on EIA data, the predetermine the percent of the total Specifically, the record shows that for record reveals that applying the transportation costs that will be the Appalachian order, 41, 39, and 43 calculated mileage rates to the months reimbursed by TCBF payments. percent of the transportation credit of July through December 2005 would However, the transportation credit claims were paid in October, November, have resulted in transportation credit provisions already contain and December of 2004, respectively. The mileage rates ranging from $0.0432 to$ precautionary measures for how the Appalachian order paid 90 percent and 0.0461 per cwt per mile for both orders. MRF is calculated. The record indicates 31 percent of the claims in September If a transportation credit mileage that reference diesel fuel prices and and October of 2005, respectively. reimbursement rate of $0.046 per cwt reference hauling costs per loaded mile Despite the assessment rate increase that per mile had been in place, rather than are components of the mileage rate became effective November 2005, the the current rate of $0.035 cents per cwt, calculation and are based on 2003 data evidence indicates that only 58 percent the maximum transportation credit that are more current than the data of the transportation credit claims for assessments needed for the Appalachian considered and adopted in 1997 the Appalachian order were paid. Table order to ensure that the TCBF covered establishing a fixed mileage rate. 2 below illustrates the percent paid from all claims, would have been $0.133 and Finally, current transportation credit the TCBF for the Appalachian order: $0.1415 per cwt for 2004 and 2005, provisions do not include the first 85 respectively. This analysis supports miles that supplemental milk is shipped TABLE 2—PERCENT OF concluding, and this final decision continues to find, that increasing the from farms in determining the total TRANSPORTATION CREDITS PAID Appalachian order maximum miles shipped. This feature also plays a [Percent of Transportation Credits Paid] part to safeguard against excessive transportation credit assessment rate, as contained in Proposal 1, by $0.055, to transportation credit payments. Appalachian marketing area $0.15 per cwt is warranted. Maximum Assessment Rates FO 5 Precautionary measures, which This decision continues to find that decrease the likelihood that the rate of the transportation credit assessment rate Jul 04 ...... 100.0 assessments occurs in excess of actual in the Appalachian order should be Aug 04 ...... 100.0 handler claims, are currently provided Sep 04 ...... 100.0 for within the transportation credit increased to $0.15 per cwt on all Class Oct 04 ...... 40.6 I milk pooled.4 provisions of the orders. The Nov 04 ...... 39.0 transportation credit provisions provide As discussed earlier in this decision, Dec 04 ...... 45.7 transportation credit provisions of the the market administrator the authority Appalachian and Southeast orders were Jul 05 ...... 100.0 to reduce or waive assessments as originally established to partially offset Aug 05 ...... 100.0 necessary to maintain sufficient fund the cost of transporting supplemental Sep 05 ...... 91.9 balances for the payment of the milk supplies into each marketing area Oct 05 ...... 30.6 transportation credits requested. to meet fluid milk demands. The Nov 05 * ...... 58.5 Therefore, increasing the maximum transportation credit assessment rates * Effective November 1, 2005, the transpor- transportation credit assessment rate have been increased twice in an effort tation credit assessment rates were increased will not result in an accumulation of to ensure that the TCBF would be by 3 cents for the Appalachian order. funds beyond what is needed to pay Source: Appalachian Market Administrator transportation credit claims and no sufficient to meet the expected claims. data. When first established for the additional precautionary measures are Appalachian, Southeast, and The record demonstrates that at a necessary beyond those currently predecessor orders (Orders 5, 7, 11 and transportation credit mileage rate of provided. 46), the maximum transportation credit $0.0035 per cwt per mile, the TCBF The record supports concluding that assessment charged to Class I handlers assessment for Appalachian marketing local milk production is expected to area has been insufficient to pay all continue declining within both 4 The Southeast order transportation credit marketing areas and will result in an assessment rate has subsequently been increased in 5 62 FR 39738. even greater reliance on supplemental a separate rulemaking proceeding (73 FR 14153). 6 70 FR 59221. milk to meet the fluid milk needs of the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12998 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

markets. Record evidence shows a In addition, the record indicates that, for the Southeast marketing area for the constant increase in both the volume for the Southeast marketing area, the months when transportation credits are and the distance, from which monthly weighted average distance available, the calculated total maximum supplemental milk supplies are supplemental milk eligible to receive diverted pounds associated with obtained. It is reasonable to conclude transportation credits traveled ranged supplemental milk would have totaled that future transportation credit claims from 578 to 627 miles, during July over 178 million pounds in 2004, and will increase. In this regard, it is through December 2000. During July over 226 million pounds in 2005. On important to prevent exhausting the through November 2005, the weighted the basis of these calculations, an TCBF before the payment of claims on average distance increased, ranging from estimate of diversions attributed to the supplemental milk have been met. 682 to 755 miles. The amount of supplemental milk is 64 percent of total Doing so is consistent with the supplemental milk receiving diversions for both 2004 and 2005, fundamental purposes of the transportation credits during 2005 was ranging from 56 percent to 77 percent of transportation credit provisions. nearly 686 million pounds. In 2000 and the total known diversions outside the Therefore, increasing the transportation 2004 the amounts were 363 million and marketing areas. credit assessment rate as contained in 541 million, respectively. This The contribution from diversions Proposal 1, will better assure that the represents an 89 percent increase in the associated with supplemental milk as rate of assessments will keep pace with amount of supplemental milk receiving compared to total outside diversions is the payments from the TCBF. transportation credits from 2000 to 2005 nearly three times greater than the and a 27 percent increase since 2004. contribution of the supplemental milk Diversion Limit Standard for For the Southeast order, the record to Class I utilization. As previously Supplemental Milk reveals that total diversions at locations discussed, for 2004 and 2005, The intent of a proposal offered by outside of the Appalachian and supplemental milk represented about Dean, published in the hearing notice as Southeast marketing areas totaled 883.4 15.9 and 19 percent, respectively, of Proposal 4, seeks to provide a method million pounds in 2004. Total total Class I utilization. However, to limit the amount of additional milk diversions outside of the marketing estimated diversions attributable to being pooled by diversion on the areas for 2005, not including the months supplemental milk represent Appalachian and Southeast orders. As of November and December, were 965.6 approximately 64 percent of total proposed, Dean’s proposal would million pounds, an increase of 9.3 diversions. Clearly, not only do change the amount of transportation percent from 2004. Such data for transportation credits offset the costs of credits paid on eligible supplemental November and December 2005 are not hauling supplemental milk to the milk depending on the amount of milk contained in the record. For the months markets, they also contribute to pooling delivered to plants other than pool of January through June, when much more milk on the orders through distributing plants—this includes transportation credits are not available, the diversion process. total diversions outside the marketing For the Appalachian order, data diversions to plants located outside of areas increased almost 18 percent from contained in the record is much more the marketing areas and deliveries to 2004 to 2005. During the time period of limited for determining the diversions pool supply plants. Simply put, the July through October, when arising from transportation credit greater the volume of diversions, the transportation credits are available, eligible supplemental milk. What can be lower the amount of transportation such diversions increased over 27 reasonably concluded is that the pooling credits paid. In this regard, Dean’s percent from 2004 to 2005. It is of diverted milk linked to supplemental proposal attempts to provide an reasonable, given the trend of the data, milk is not occurring on nearly the incentive to limit diversions indirectly that the percentage increase from 2004 magnitude as is the case for the by reducing transportation credits paid would have been greater than 27 percent Southeast order. For the Appalachian on supplemental milk. This decision if data had been available for the order, evidence indicates that total agrees with the need to limit pooling months of November and December diversions at locations outside of the diverted milk on the orders that is 2005. Appalachian and Southeast marketing linked to supplemental milk deliveries It is reasonable to conclude that areas, for the time period of January to distributing plants. Rather than diversions outside the Appalachian and through June, increased by 64.4 percent attempt to create disincentives to Southeast marketing areas are most from 2004 to 2005. Total diversions pooling diverted milk indirectly, this likely attributed to supplemental milk from the time period of July through decision addresses the issue directly by that is eligible to receive transportation November, when transportation credits adopting a zero diversion limit standard credits. The record reveals that for the are available, decreased over 20 percent on supplemental milk deliveries to Southeast marketing area, the 27 percent from 2004 to 2005. distributing plants that receive increase in the amount of milk receiving For the Appalachian order, only 2 transportation credits. transportation credits from 2004 months of data—October and November The record reveals that the volume of through 2005 corresponds with the 27 2005—is available to estimate the supplemental milk needed to serve the percent increase of diversions outside maximum diversions that could be Class I needs of the marketing areas has the marketing areas between 2004 and associated with supplemental milk. grown over time and is expected to 2005. It is also reasonable to conclude Relying on Appalachian Market continue growing. Supplemental milk is from the record that it is in the interest Administrator data, it is estimated that representing a greater percentage of the of the handler supplying supplemental the maximum diversions from Southeast market’s total Class I milk, and in this case, the cooperatives transportation credit eligible milk utilization. The record reveals that for in their capacity as handlers, to during October and November 2005 the months of July through December, maximize the value of diversions. Doing were approximately 34 percent and 28 supplemental milk accounted for 16 so would require pooling the maximum percent, respectively, of the total percent of total Class I utilization in amount of diverted milk to the closest diversions at locations outside the 2004. For 2005, such supplemental milk location from where supplemental milk Appalachian and Southeast marketing as a percent of total Class I utilization was sourced. Therefore, relying on data areas. Supplemental milk on the increased to 19 percent. provided by the Market Administrator Appalachian order for October and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12999

November 2005 was approximately 19 marketing areas; and (3) receiving clearly represents a burden borne by the percent, and 16 percent, respectively, of higher blend prices on the diverted milk cooperatives supplying supplemental the total Class I milk pooled. that would have otherwise been pooled milk. Pooling the diversions of this milk on a different order with a typically Pooling diverted milk at locations far differs from pooling diverted milk that lower blend price. from the marketing areas based on is part of the regular supply of milk of The pooling of milk that is not part of supplemental milk eligible to receive the marketing area. Pooling diverted the regular and consistent supply of transportation credits would provide milk associated with transportation milk which serves the Class I needs of additional revenue to help offset credit eligible supplemental milk, the market is contradictory to the intent hauling costs not covered by the current allows more milk to be pooled on the of an order’s pooling standards and transportation credit assessment rates. order than normal. Pooling this milk is provisions. The pooling standards of the This diverted milk receives the blend different than pooling milk that is part orders serve to identify the milk of price of the order where it is pooled. of the regular supply for the marketing producers who regularly and The benefit is that the blend price area. The difference is that producers of consistently serve the Class I needs of received on such diverted milk, on milk eligible to receive transportation the marketing areas. Pooling milk that is either the Appalachian or Southeast credits are not a part of the regular and available but not immediately needed order, is historically higher than the consistent supply of milk that serves the for Class I use is provided through price the milk would otherwise receive. Class I needs of the markets. In fact, diversion limit standards. Diversion As presented above, this final transportation credit qualifying criteria limit standards provide the criteria for decision adopts a variable mileage rate exclude the milk of producers who are determining how much additional milk factor that will reimburse hauling costs regularly pooled on the orders. These can be pooled on the orders. Diverted at a level more reflective of actual costs, producers are, therefore, supplemental milk in this context reflects the in addition to a significantly higher suppliers of milk to the Appalachian legitimate reserve supply of milk transportation credit assessment. To the and Southeast marketing areas. available to serve the Class I needs of extent that it is necessary to offset the Pooling diverted milk arising from the marketing areas and, therefore, higher costs of transporting supplemental milk eligible to receive receives the blend price of the orders. supplemental milk, the adoption of a transportation credits not only offsets Since implementation of Federal milk variable MRF and the increase in the the intended benefit of increasing the order reform, there have been many transportation credit assessment rates supply of milk for fluid uses, it also formal rulemakings that have amended should significantly reduce or eliminate lowers blend prices to those producers orders to more properly identify the the need to seek generating revenue to who regularly and consistently supply milk of producers which should and offset hauling costs at the expense of the the Class I needs of the markets. Higher should not be pooled on the orders. The producers who are regularly and blend prices provide important milk of producers who are the consistently supplying milk to meet the economic signals—the incentive to: (1) consistent and reliable suppliers serving Class I needs of the two marketing areas. Continue supplying the markets; (2) the Class I needs of the market should LOL took exception with the increase local production; and (3) attract be pooled even when it is not proposed zero diversion limit standard the milk of producers to become regular immediately needed for Class I use. arguing that it would shift the burden of and consistent suppliers. However, this foundational principle of balancing the southeastern markets’ Lowering blend prices received by orderly marketing in milk marketing seasonal milk needs onto the markets’ producers who regularly supply the orders is essentially disregarded for 6 supplemental milk suppliers. LOL also markets relative to producers who months each year when the orders allow argued that USDA should provide an supply supplemental milk sends the pooling of diverted milk from analysis to verify that adoption of this contradictory pricing signals. Lower producers who are specifically standard would, in fact, increase the blend prices do not send the proper identified as not being ‘‘producers’’ orders’ blend prices. price signals to local producers to under either of the orders. The transportation credit provisions increase local production or to continue The lowering of blend prices by of the Southeast and Appalachian supplying the Class I needs of the pooling such diverted milk is an orders are designed to attract markets. Furthermore, lower blend unintended outcome not foreseen when supplemental milk supplies for Class I prices fail to create the price signals the transportation credit provisions of use when the orders’ regular supplies necessary to attract a regular and the Appalachian and Southeast orders cannot meet demand. Supplemental consistent milk supply. were implemented and amended. As the suppliers choose to provide this service The availability of transportation blend prices are reduced so is the and are subsequently compensated by credits on supplemental milk has incentive for local milk production. The receiving the orders’ blend price and the clearly provided a platform to pool markets become less capable of ability to receive a transportation credit additional diverted milk at locations supplying their own Class I needs and to reimburse them for part of the distant to the marketing areas. Milk supplemental milk supplies needed to hauling cost. If, at any time, a diverted from supplemental producers meet Class I needs are not likely to be supplemental supplier does not believe is more likely to be diverted at locations supplied without reliance on additional they are adequately compensated for far from the marketing areas. The record transportation credits. their service, they may cease providing reveals that suppliers of the The pooling of diverted milk supplemental supplies. This decision supplemental milk to the Appalachian associated with supplemental milk continues to find that allowing milk and Southeast marketing areas pool would seem to offer substantial benefits diversions on supplemental milk diverted milk at locations as far away as to cooperative suppliers. The record supplies receiving a transportation California and Utah. Supplemental milk reveals that when transportation credits credit lowers the TCBF monies available suppliers benefit in three ways: (1) were first implemented, well over 90 to supplemental milk loads that are Receiving reimbursement for costs of percent of hauling costs were offset. The actually delivered to the southeastern transporting milk to the deficit markets; record further reveals that more recent markets, and ultimately decreases the (2) receiving cost savings from the conditions suggest that only about 45 blend price paid to the orders’ diverted milk not transported to the percent is being reimbursed. This producers. A quantitative assessment is

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13000 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

not necessary to conclude that the exceptions received was carefully and (a) Findings. A public hearing was pooling of this diverted milk on the fully considered in conjunction with the held upon certain proposed orders is disorderly and should not record evidence. To the extent that the amendments to the tentative marketing occur. findings and conclusions and the agreements and to the orders regulating regulatory provisions of this decision the handling of milk in the Rulings on Proposed Findings and are at variance with any of the Appalachian, Florida and Southeast Conclusions exceptions, such exceptions are hereby marketing areas. The hearing was held Briefs, proposed findings, and overruled for the reasons previously pursuant to the provisions of the conclusions were filed on behalf of stated in this decision. Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act certain interested parties. These briefs, of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), proposed findings, conclusions, and the Marketing Agreement and Order and the applicable rules of practice and evidence in the record were considered Annexed hereto and made a part procedure (7 CFR part 900). in making the findings and conclusions hereof are two documents—a Marketing Upon the basis of the evidence set forth above. To the extent that the Agreement regulating the handling of introduced at such hearing and the suggested findings and conclusions filed milk and an Order amending the order record thereof, it is found that: by interested parties are inconsistent regulating the handling of milk in the (1) The said orders as hereby with the findings and conclusions set Appalachian and Southeast marketing amended, and all of the terms and forth herein, the claims to make such areas, that was approved by producers conditions thereof, will tend to findings or reach such conclusions are and published in the Federal Register effectuate the declared policy of the Act; denied for the reasons previously stated on October 25, 2006 (71 FR 62377). (2) The parity prices of milk, as in this decision. These documents have decided upon as determined pursuant to section 2 of the the detailed and appropriate means of Act, are not reasonable in view of the General Findings effectuating the foregoing conclusions. price of feeds, available supplies of The findings and determinations It is hereby ordered that this entire feeds, and other economic conditions hereinafter set forth supplement those decision and the Marketing Agreement which affect market supply and demand that were made when the Appalachian annexed hereto be published in the for milk in the aforesaid marketing and Southeast orders were first issued Federal Register. areas. The minimum prices specified in and when they were amended. The the orders as hereby amended are such previous findings and determinations Determination of Producer Approval prices as will reflect the aforesaid are hereby ratified and confirmed, and Representative Period factors, insure a sufficient quantity of except where they may conflict with The month of July 2013 is hereby pure and wholesome milk, and be in the those set forth herein. determined to be the representative public interest; and The following findings are hereby period for the purpose of ascertaining (3) The said orders as hereby made with respect to the aforesaid whether the issuance of the order, as amended regulate the handling of milk marketing agreements and orders: amended and as hereby proposed to be in the same manner as, and are (a) The tentative marketing amended, regulating the handling of applicable only to persons in the agreements and the orders, as hereby milk in the Appalachian and Southeast respective classes of industrial or proposed to be amended, and all of the marketing areas is approved or favored commercial activity specified in, a terms and conditions thereof, will tend by producers, as defined under the marketing agreement upon which a to effectuate the declared policy of the terms of the order as hereby proposed to hearing has been held. Act; be amended, who during such Order Relative to Handling (b) The parity prices of milk as representative period were engaged in It is therefore ordered, that on and determined pursuant to section 2 of the the production of milk for sale within after the effective date hereof, the Act are not reasonable with respect to the aforesaid marketing area. the price of feeds, available supplies of handling of milk in the Appalachian feeds, and other economic conditions List of Subjects in 7 CFR Parts 1005 and and Southeast marketing areas shall be that affect market supply and demand 1007 in conformity to and in compliance with for milk in the marketing area, and the Milk Marketing Orders. the terms and conditions of the orders, minimum prices specified in the as amended, and as hereby amended, as tentative marketing agreements and the Order Amending the Order Regulating follows: For the reasons set forth in the orders, as hereby proposed to be the Handling of Milk in the preamble, 7 CFR parts 1005 and 1007 amended, are such prices as will reflect Appalachian and Southeast Marketing are proposed to be amended as follows: the aforesaid factors, ensure a sufficient Areas ■ quantity of pure and wholesome milk, This order shall not become effective 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR and be in the public interest; and until the requirements of § 900.14 of the parts 1005 and 1007 continues to read (c) The tentative marketing rules of practice and procedure as follows: agreements and the orders, as hereby governing proceedings to formulate Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674, and 7253. proposed to be amended, will regulate marketing agreements and marketing the handling of milk in the same orders have been met. PART 1005—MILK IN THE manner as, and will be applicable only APPALACHIAN MARKETING AREA Findings and Determinations to persons in the respective classes of ■ 2. Section 1005.13 is amended by industrial and commercial activity The findings and determinations revising paragraphs (d)(3) and (d)(4) to specified in, the marketing agreements hereinafter set forth supplement those read as follows: upon which a hearing have been held. that were made when the orders were first issued and when they were § 1005.13 Producer milk. Rulings on Exceptions amended. The previous findings and * * * * * In arriving at the findings and determinations are hereby ratified and (d) * * * conclusions, and the regulatory confirmed, except where they may (3) The total quantity of milk so provisions of this decision, each of the conflict with those set forth herein. diverted during the month by a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13001

cooperative association shall not exceed had been disbursed had the fund PART 1007—MILK IN THE SOUTHEAST 25 percent during the months of July balance been sufficient. MARKETING AREA through November, January, and (b) The market administrator shall February, and 35 percent during the announce publicly on or before the 23rd ■ 6. Section 1007.13 is amended by months of December and March through day of the month (except as provided in revising paragraphs (d)(3) and (d)(4) to June, of the producer milk that the § 1000.90) the assessment pursuant to read as follows: cooperative association caused to be paragraph (a) of this section for the § 1007.13 Producer milk. delivered to, and physically received at, following month. pool plants during the month, excluding * * * * * ■ 4. Section 1005.82 is amended by the total pounds of bulk milk received (d) * * * directly from producers meeting the revising paragraphs (d)(2)(ii) and (d)(3)(iv) to read as follows: (3) The total quantity of milk diverted conditions as described in during the month by a cooperative § 1005.82(c)(2)(ii) and (iii), and for § 1005.82 Payments from the association shall not exceed 25 percent which a transportation credit is transportation credit balancing fund. during the months of July through requested; * * * * * November, January, and February, and (4) The operator of a pool plant that (d) * * * 35 percent during the months of is not a cooperative association may December and March through June, of (2) * * * divert any milk that is not under the the producer milk that the cooperative control of a cooperative association that (ii) Multiply the number of miles so association caused to be delivered to, diverts milk during the month pursuant determined by the mileage rate for the and physically received at, pool plants to paragraph (d) of this section. The month computed pursuant to during the month, excluding the total total quantity of milk so diverted during § 1005.83(a)(6); pounds of bulk milk received directly the month shall not exceed 25 percent * * * * * from producers meeting the conditions during the months of July through (3) * * * as described in section 1007.82(c)(2)(ii) November, January, and February, and and (iii), and for which a transportation 35 percent during the months of (iv) Multiply the remaining miles so credit is requested; computed by the mileage rate for the December and March through June, of (4) The operator of a pool plant that the producer milk physically received at month computed pursuant to § 1005.83(a)(6); is not a cooperative association may such plant (or such unit of plants in the divert any milk that is not under the * * * * * case of plants that pool as a unit control of a cooperative association that pursuant to § 1005.7(d) during the ■ 5. Add Section 1005.83 to read as diverts milk during the month pursuant month, excluding the quantity of follows: to paragraph (d) of this section. The producer milk received from a handler total quantity of milk so diverted during described in § 1000.9(c) of this chapter § 1005.83 Mileage Rate for the Transportation Credit Balancing Fund. the month shall not exceed 25 percent and excluding the total pounds of bulk during the months of July through milk received directly from producers (a) The market administrator shall November, January and February, and meeting the conditions as described in compute a mileage rate each month as 35 percent during the months of § § 1005.82(c)(2)(ii) and (iii), and for follows: December and March through June of which a transportation credit is (1) Compute the simple average the producer milk physically received at requested; rounded to three decimal places for the such plant (or such unit of plants in the * * * * * most recent four (4) weeks of the Diesel case of plants that pool as a unit ■ 3. Section 1005.81 is amended by Price per Gallon as reported by the pursuant to § 1007.7(e)) during the revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read Energy Information Administration of month, excluding the quantity of as follows: the United States Department of Energy producer milk received from a handler described in § 1000.9(c) of this chapter, § 1005.81 Payments to the transportation for the Lower Atlantic and Gulf Coast credit balancing fund. Districts combined. excluding the total pounds of bulk milk received directly from producers (a) On or before the 12th day after the (2) From the result in paragraph (a)(1) in this section subtract $1.42 per gallon; meeting the conditions as described in end of the month (except as provided in section 1007.82(c)(2)(ii) and (iii), and for § 1000.90 of this chapter), each handler (3) Divide the result in paragraph which a transportation credit is operating a pool plant and each handler (a)(2) of this section by 5.5, and round requested. specified in § 1000.9(c) shall pay to the down to three decimal places to * * * * * market administrator a transportation compute the fuel cost adjustment factor; ■ credit balancing fund assessment (4) Add the result in paragraph (a)(3) 7. Section 1007.81 is amended by determined by multiplying the pounds of this section to $1.91; revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: of Class I producer milk assigned (5) Divide the result in paragraph § 1007.81 Payments to the transportation pursuant to § 1005.44 by $0.15 per (a)(4) of this section by 480; credit balancing fund. hundredweight or such lesser amount as * * * * * the market administrator deems (6) Round the result in paragraph necessary to maintain a balance in the (a)(5) of this section down to five (b) The market administrator shall fund equal to the total transportation decimal places to compute the mileage announce publicly on or before the 23rd credits disbursed during the prior June– rate. day of the month (except as provided in February period. In the event that (b) The market administrator shall § 1000.90 of this chapter) the assessment during any month of the June–February announce publicly on or before the 23rd pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section period the fund balance is insufficient day of the month (except as provided in for the following month. to cover the amount of credits that are § 1000.90 of this chapter) the mileage ■ 8. Section 1007.82 is amended by due, the assessment should be based rate pursuant to paragraph (a) of this revising paragraphs (d)(2)(ii) and upon the amount of credits that would section for the following month. (d)(3)(iv) to read as follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13002 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

§ 1007.82 Payments from the provisions of § ll to ll7 all ACTION: Draft interim staff guidance; transportation credit balancing fund. inclusive, of the order regulating the withdrawal. * * * * * handling of milk in the lll8 (d) * * * marketing area (7 CFR Part ll9) which SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory (2) * * * is annexed hereto; and Commission (NRC) is announcing the (ii) Multiply the number of miles so II. The following provisions: § ll10 withdrawal of draft Spent Fuel Storage determined by the mileage rate for the Record of milk handled and and Transportation Interim Staff month computed pursuant to authorization to correct typographical Guidance No. 26A (SFST–ISG–26A), § 1007.83(a)(6); * * * * * errors. Revision 0, ‘‘Shielding and Radiation (3) * * * (a) Record of milk handled. The Protection Review Effort and Licensing (iv) Multiply the remaining miles so undersigned certifies that he/she Parameters for 10 CFR Part 72 computed by the mileage rate for the handled during the month of lll,11 Applications.’’ month computed pursuant to lll hundredweight of milk covered DATES: The withdrawal is effective as of § 1007.83(a)(6); by this marketing agreement. March 7, 2014. * * * * * (b) Authorization to correct ■ ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID 9. Add a new Section 1007.83 to read typographical errors. The undersigned as follows: NRC–2013–0051 when contacting the hereby authorizes the Deputy NRC about the availability of § 1007.83 Mileage Rate for the Administrator, or Acting Deputy information regarding this document. Transportation Credit Balancing Fund. Administrator, Dairy Programs, You may access publicly-available (a) The market administrator shall Agricultural Marketing Service, to information related to this document compute the mileage rate each month as correct any typographical errors which using any of the following methods: follows: may have been made in this marketing • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to (1) Compute the simple average agreement. http://www.regulations.gov and search rounded to three decimal places for the Effective date. This marketing for Docket ID NRC–2013–0051. Address most recent 4 weeks of the Diesel Price agreement shall become effective upon questions about NRC dockets to Carol per Gallon as reported by the Energy the execution of a counterpart hereof by Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; Information Administration of the the Department in accordance with Sec. email: [email protected]. For United States Department of Energy for 900.14(a) of the aforesaid rules of technical questions, contact the the Lower Atlantic and Gulf Coast practice and procedure. individual listed in the FOR FURTHER Districts combined. In Witness Whereof, The contracting INFORMATION CONTACT section of this (2) From the result in paragraph (a)(1) handlers, acting under the provisions of document. in this section subtract $1.42 per gallon; the Act, for the purposes and subject to • NRC’s Agencywide Documents (3) Divide the result in paragraph the limitations herein contained and not Access and Management System (a)(2) of this section by 5.5, and round otherwise, have hereunto set their (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly down to three decimal places to respective hands and seals. available documents online in the compute the fuel cost adjustment factor; Signature ADAMS Public Documents collection at (4) Add the result in paragraph (a)(3) http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ of this section to $1.91; By (Name) lllllllllllllll (Title) lllllllllllllllll adams.html. To begin the search, select (5) Divide the result in paragraph ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then (Address) llllllllllllllll (a)(4) of this section by 480; select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS (6) Round the result in paragraph (Seal) Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, (a)(5) of this section down to five Attest llllllllllllllllll please contact the NRC’s Public decimal places to compute the MRF. (b) The market administrator shall Dated: February 25, 2014. Document Room (PDR) reference staff at announce publicly on or before the 23rd Rex A. Barnes, 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by day of the month (except as provided in Associate Administrator. email to [email protected]. Draft § 1000.90 of this chapter) the mileage [FR Doc. 2014–04693 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] SFST–ISG–26A, Revision 0 is available electronically under ADAMS Accession rate pursuant to paragraph (a) of this BILLING CODE 3410–02–P section for the following month. No. ML13010A570. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and [This marketing agreement will not appear purchase copies of public documents at in the Code of Federal Regulations.] NUCLEAR REGULATORY the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One Marketing Agreement Regulating the COMMISSION White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Handling of Milk in Certain Marketing Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. 10 CFR Part 72 Areas FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. The parties hereto, in order to [NRC–2013–0051] Michel Call, Office of Nuclear Material effectuate the declared policy of the Act, Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear and in accordance with the rules of Shielding and Radiation Protection Regulatory Commission, Washington, practice and procedure effective Review Effort and Licensing DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–287– thereunder (7 CFR part 900), desire to Conditions for Dry Storage 9183; email: [email protected]. Applications enter into this marketing agreement and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: do hereby agree that the provisions AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory I. Background referred to in paragraph I hereof, as Commission. augmented by the provisions specified Draft SFST–ISG–26A proposed in paragraph II hereof, shall be and are 7 First and last section of order. guidance for the NRC staff to use when the provisions of this marketing 8 Name of order. reviewing the shielding and radiation agreement as if set out in full herein. 9 Appropriate Part number. protection portions of applications for I. The findings and determinations, 10 Next consecutive section number. certificates of compliance (CoC), order relative to handling, and the 11 Appropriate representative period for the order. specific licenses, and amendments

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13003

submitted in accordance with part 72 of update to NUREG–1745, ‘‘Standard doors and legs. This proposed AD Title 10 of the Code of Federal Format and Content for Technical would require repetitive inspections of Regulations (10 CFR), ‘‘Licensing Specifications for 10 CFR part 72 Cask the uplock springs of the NLG and MLG Requirements for the Independent Certificates of Compliance.’’ doors and legs for broken and damaged Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High- The staff finds withdrawing the draft springs, and corrective actions if Level Radioactive Waste, and Reactor- ISG is appropriate considering the necessary. We are proposing this AD to Related Greater Than Class C Waste,’’ initiating event that caused the staff to detect and correct improper free fall (10 CFR part 72) Subpart L, ‘‘Approval write draft SFST–ISG–26A has thus far extension of the MLG or NLG, which of Spent Fuel Storage Casks,’’ and been an isolated event from several could lead to possible loss of control of Subpart B, ‘‘License Application, Form, years ago, and the staff has not seen any the airplane on the ground, and and Contents.’’ Draft SFST–ISG–26A applications for the use of high dose- consequent damage to the airplane and proposed to revise the shielding and rate transfer casks since then. However, injury to occupants. radiation protection review procedures the staff will continue to monitor for DATES: We must receive comments on contained in NUREG–1536, Revision 1, events or actions (particularly those this proposed AD by April 21, 2014. ‘‘Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel involving transfer casks) that may ADDRESSES: You may send comments by Dry Storage Systems at a General indicate there is a need for the ISG prior any of the following methods: License Facility,’’ and NUREG–1567, to completion of, or in addition to, the • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to ‘‘Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel other efforts. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the Dry Storage Facilities.’’ With regard to the review procedure instructions for submitting comments. The staff began writing draft SFST– priority levels, the staff currently finds •Fax: (202) 493–2251. ISG–26A as a response to an event that the generic priority levels in • Mail: U.S. Department of involving the use of a high dose-rate NUREG–1536 sufficiently meet the Transportation, Docket Operations, transfer cask. Its first intent was to staff’s commitment of ensuring the M–30, West Building Ground Floor, provide reviewers guidance on how to appropriate level of effort for these Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey review these systems. The scope had reviews. However, the staff will also Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. been expanded to also provide NRC monitor the use of these procedures to • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of reviewers with guidance on performing determine any further need for Transportation, Docket Operations, graded reviews based on system dose enhancement. M–30, West Building Ground Floor, rates which modify the review ‘‘priority’’ as defined in NUREG–1536. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey of February 2014. The staff developed this part of the ISG Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 in response to industry comments For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through regarding the amount of details the staff Mark D. Lombard, Friday, except Federal holidays. reviewed in response to a 10 CFR part Director, Division of Spent Fuel Storage and For service information identified in 72 license, certificate or amendment Transportation, Office of Nuclear Material this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS, application. Safety and Safeguards. Airworthiness Office—EAW, 1 Rond The staff published a notice of [FR Doc. 2014–05017 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac opportunity for public comment on BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 draft SFST–ISG–26A in the Federal 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email Register on March 29, 2013 (78 [email protected]; FR19148). The staff received two DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Internet http://www.airbus.com. You comments, with each commenter raising may view this referenced service a significant number of substantive Federal Aviation Administration information at the FAA, Transport issues which has caused the staff to Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue reconsider the need for and the clarity 14 CFR Part 39 SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the of the guidance. [Docket No. FAA–2014–0137; Directorate FAA, call 425–227–1221. II. Discussion Identifier 2013–NM–135–AD] Examining the AD Docket The staff considered the comments RIN 2120–AA64 and has decided to defer pursuing You may examine the AD docket on action on the draft ISG. Thus, draft Airworthiness Directives; Airbus the Internet at http:// SFST–ISG–26A is being withdrawn. Airplanes www.regulations.gov by searching for From the comments received, the staff AGENCY: Federal Aviation and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– concluded that the guidance as written Administration (FAA), DOT. 0137; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. is not clear and would require ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, substantial revision to be well (NPRM). understood as well as meet the needs of except Federal holidays. The AD docket the staff. Although the staff still finds SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new contains this proposed AD, the that guidance regarding the issues airworthiness directive (AD) for all regulatory evaluation, any comments addressed in draft SFST–ISG–26A Airbus Model A300 series airplanes; received, and other information. The would be useful, especially in relation Model A300 B4–600, B4–600R, and F4– street address for the Docket Operations to high dose-rate transfer casks, there 600R series airplanes; Model A300 C4– office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in are recent developments that also touch 605R Variant F airplanes (collectively the ADDRESSES section. Comments will on some of these issues that the staff called Model A300–600 series be available in the AD docket shortly finds are appropriate to pursue in lieu airplanes); and Model A310 series after receipt. of the ISG. This includes the staff’s airplanes. This proposed AD was FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan consideration of a petition to make prompted by reports of rupture of the Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, changes to 10 CFR Part 72 (PRM–72–7) uplock springs of the nose landing gear International Branch, ANM–116, and the staff’s consideration of an (NLG) and main landing gear (MLG) Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13004 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA dated July 16, 2013 (referred to after this and locating it in Docket No. FAA– 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–2125; as the Mandatory Continuing 2014–0137. fax (425) 227–1149. Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the Relevant Service Information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI Airbus has issued Mandatory Service Comments Invited states: Bulletins A300–32–0465, A300–32– We invite you to send any written Some cases of Nose Landing Gear (NLG) 6111, and A310–32–2147, all Revision relevant data, views, or arguments about and Main Landing Gear (MLG) Door and Leg 01, all dated April 25, 2013. The actions this proposed AD. Send your comments Uplock spring ruptures on A300, A310 or described in this service information are to an address listed under the A300–600 aeroplanes have been reported in intended to correct the unsafe condition ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. service. identified in the MCAI. Springs within the uplock are used to FAA–2014–0137; Directorate Identifier FAA’s Determination and Requirements 2013–NM–135–AD’’ at the beginning of either lock the gear or the door in the up position, or to participate in emergency of this Proposed AD your comments. We specifically invite mechanical unlocking. comments on the overall regulatory, The springs are positioned in pairs, and in This product has been approved by economic, environmental, and energy case of rupture of one spring the other one the aviation authority of another aspects of this proposed AD. We will remains to fulfill the function, whereas the country, and is approved for operation consider all comments received by the rupture of both springs will disable the in the United States. Pursuant to our closing date and may amend this locking function or the emergency unlocking bilateral agreement with the State of proposed AD based on those comments. function. Design Authority, we have been notified We will post all comments we This condition, if not detected and of the unsafe condition described in the receive, without change, to http:// corrected, could prevent proper free fall MCAI and service information extension of the MLG or NLG, possibly referenced above. We are proposing this www.regulations.gov, including any leading to loss of control of the aeroplane on personal information you provide. We the ground, consequently resulting in damage AD because we evaluated all pertinent will also post a report summarizing each to the aeroplane and injury to occupants. information and determined an unsafe substantive verbal contact we receive For the reason described above, this condition exists and is likely to exist or about this proposed AD. [EASA] AD requires [repetitive] detailed develop on other products of the same visual inspection[s] of the NLG and MLG type design. Discussion Door and Leg Uplock springs [for broken and Costs of Compliance The European Aviation Safety Agency damaged springs] and, depending of findings, (EASA), which is the Technical Agent their replacement. We estimate that this proposed AD for the Member States of the European You may examine the MCAI in the affects 156 airplanes of U.S. registry. Community, has issued EASA AD docket on the Internet at http:// We estimate the following costs to Airworthiness Directive 2013–0150, www.regulations.gov by searching for comply with this proposed AD:

ESTIMATED COSTS

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

Repetitive inspections ...... 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 per inspection .. $0 $85 per inspection ...... $13,260 per inspection.

In addition, we estimate that any safety in air commerce. This regulation 3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in necessary replacement would take about is within the scope of that authority Alaska; and 9 work-hours for a cost of $765 per because it addresses an unsafe condition 4. Will not have a significant product. The cost of parts is minimal. that is likely to exist or develop on economic impact, positive or negative, We have no way of determining the products identified in this rulemaking on a substantial number of small entities number of aircraft that might need this action. under the criteria of the Regulatory action. Regulatory Findings Flexibility Act. Authority for This Rulemaking We determined that this proposed AD List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Title 49 of the United States Code would not have federalism implications Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation specifies the FAA’s authority to issue under Executive Order 13132. This rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, safety, Incorporation by reference, proposed AD would not have a Safety. section 106, describes the authority of substantial direct effect on the States, on the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: the relationship between the national The Proposed Amendment Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more Government and the States, or on the Accordingly, under the authority detail the scope of the Agency’s distribution of power and delegated to me by the Administrator, authority. responsibilities among the various the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part We are issuing this rulemaking under levels of government. the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 39 as follows: Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: For the reasons discussed above, I General requirements.’’ Under that certify this proposed regulation: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS section, Congress charges the FAA with 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory DIRECTIVES promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in action’’ under Executive Order 12866; air commerce by prescribing regulations 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 for practices, methods, and procedures DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures continues to read as follows: the Administrator finds necessary for (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13005

§ 39.13 [Amended] do not constitute terminating actions for the Directorate, FAA, has the authority to ■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding repetitive inspections required by paragraph approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested the following new AD: (g) of this AD. using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (1) If, during any inspection required by In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2014–0137; paragraph (g) of this AD, one spring on the request to your principal inspector or local Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–135–AD. MLG or NLG door uplock is found broken or Flight Standards District Office, as damaged, within 2 months after the (a) Comments Due Date appropriate. If sending information directly inspection, replace the affected MLG or NLG We must receive comments by April 21, door uplock, as applicable, with a serviceable to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: 2014. part, in accordance with the Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, (b) Affected ADs Accomplishment Instructions of the International Branch, ANM–116, Transport applicable service bulletin identified in Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind None. paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or (g)(3) of this AD. Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; (c) Applicability (2) If, during any inspection required by telephone (425) 227–2125; fax (425) 227– This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes paragraph (g) of this AD, one spring on the 1149. Information may be emailed to: 9- specified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), MLG or NLG leg uplock is found broken or [email protected]. (c)(4), (c)(5), and (c)(6) of this AD; certificated damaged, repeat the inspection required by Before using any approved AMOC, notify in any category; all serial numbers. paragraph (g) of this AD thereafter at your appropriate principal inspector, or intervals not to exceed 50 flight cycles. (1) Model A300 B2–1A, B2–1C, B2K–3C, lacking a principal inspector, the manager of B2–203, B4–2C, B4–103, and B4–203 Replacement of any affected leg uplock, as required by paragraph (h)(2)(i) or (h)(2)(ii) of the local flight standards district office/ airplanes. certificate holding district office. The AMOC (2) Model A300 B4–601, B4–603, B4–620, this AD, as applicable, constitutes approval letter must specifically reference and B4–622 airplanes. terminating action for the repetitive this AD. (3) Model A300 B4–605R and B4–622R inspections required by paragraph (h)(2) of airplanes. this AD. (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement (4) Model A300 F4–605R and F4–622R (i) If, during any inspection required by in this AD to obtain corrective actions from airplanes. paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, the second free a manufacturer, use these actions if they are (5) Model A300 C4–605R Variant F fall spring on the MLG or NLG leg uplock is FAA-approved. Corrective actions are airplanes. found broken or damaged, before further considered FAA-approved if they were (6) Model A310–203, –204, –221, –222, flight, replace the affected MLG or NLG leg approved by the State of Design Authority (or uplock, as applicable, with a serviceable part, –304, –322, –324, and –325 airplanes. its delegated agent or the Design Approval in accordance with the Accomplishment (d) Subject Instructions of the applicable service bulletin Holder with a State of Design Authority’s design organization approval, as applicable). Air Transport Association (ATA) of identified in paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or (g)(3) You are required to ensure the product is America Code 32, Landing gear. of this AD. (ii) Within 1,000 flight cycles after doing airworthy before it is returned to service. (e) Reason the inspection required by paragraph (g) of (k) Related Information This AD was prompted by reports of this AD during which the spring has been rupture of the uplock springs of the nose found broken, replace the affected MLG or (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing landing gear (NLG) and main landing gear NLG leg uplock, as applicable, with a Airworthiness Information (MCAI) European (MLG) doors and legs. We are issuing this AD serviceable part, in accordance with the Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness to detect and correct improper free fall Accomplishment Instructions of the Directive 2013–0150, dated July 16, 2013, for extension of the MLG or NLG, which could applicable service bulletin identified in related information. This MCAI may be lead to possible loss of control of the airplane paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or (g)(3) of this AD. found in the AD docket on the Internet at (3) If, during any inspection required by on the ground, and consequent damage to the http://www.regulations.gov by searching for paragraph (g) of this AD, two free fall springs airplane and injury to occupants. and locating it in Docket No. FAA–2014– on the same MLG or NLG leg uplock are (f) Compliance found broken or damaged, before further 0137. Comply with this AD within the flight, replace the affected MLG or NLG leg (2) For service information identified in compliance times specified, unless already uplock, as applicable, with a serviceable part, this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness done. in accordance with the Accomplishment Office—EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice Instructions of the applicable service bulletin Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; (g) Repetitive Inspections identified in paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or (g)(3) telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD. 93 44 51; email account.airworth-eas@ of this AD: Perform a detailed inspection of airbus.com; Internet http://www.airbus.com. the uplock springs of the MLG and NLG legs (i) Credit for Previous Actions You may view this service information at the and doors for broken and damaged springs, This paragraph provides credit for the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 in accordance with the Accomplishment applicable actions required by paragraphs (g) Instructions of the applicable service and (h) of this AD, if those actions were Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information identified in paragraph (g)(1), performed before the effective date of this AD information on the availability of this (g)(2), or (g)(3) of this AD. Repeat the using the applicable service information material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. inspection thereafter at intervals not to identified in paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), or (i)(3) Issued in Renton, Washington, on February exceed 18 months. of this AD. 26, 2014. (1) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin (1) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300–32–0465, Revision 01, dated April 25, A300–32–0465, dated July 20, 2012. Jeffrey E. Duven, 2013 (for Model A300 series airplanes). (2) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, (2) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300–32–6111, dated July 20, 2012. Aircraft Certification Service. A300–32–6111, Revision 01, dated April 25, (3) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin [FR Doc. 2014–04955 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] 2013 (for Model A300–600 series airplanes). A310–32–2147, dated July 20, 2012. (3) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin BILLING CODE 4910–13–P A310–32–2147, Revision 01, dated April 25, (j) Other FAA AD Provisions 2013 (for Model A310 series airplanes). The following provisions also apply to this AD: (h) Corrective Actions (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance The corrective actions required by (AMOCs): The Manager, International paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13006 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR information will be available online at 6(a) of the Executive Order requests http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, public input on options for policy, Occupational Safety and Health OSHA cautions commenters about regulation, and standards Administration submitting personal information such as modernization. The comment period for Social Security numbers and birthdates. Section 6(a) runs until March 31, 2014. 29 CFR Part 1910 Security-related procedures may OSHA received comments from several [Docket No. OSHA–2013–0020] significantly delay receipt of stakeholders who are preparing submissions sent by regular mail. responses to the Section 6(a) docket, as RIN No. 1218–AC82 Contact the Docket Office for well as comments in response to the information about security-related RFI. These stakeholders noted that Process Safety Management and procedures. much of the subject matter in Section Prevention of Major Chemical Docket: To read or download 6(a) is similar to the subject matter Accidents; Extension of Comment comments submitted in response to this addressed by the RFI. Accordingly, the Period Federal Register notice, go to Docket stakeholders requested that the deadline AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health No. OSHA–2013–0020 at http:// for submitting comments to the RFI Administration (OSHA), Labor. www.regulations.gov or to the OSHA correspond to the deadline for the Section 6(a) comment period, which is ACTION: Request for information; Docket Office at the address above. All March 31, 2014, thereby allowing them extension of comment period. comments and submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; to prepare complete and accurate SUMMARY: The Occupational Safety and however, some information (e.g., comments for both records. Therefore, Health Administration (OSHA) is copyrighted material) is not publicly to allow commenters adequate time to extending the deadline for submitting available to read or download through prepare complete and accurate comments on the Request for that Web site. All comments and comments to the RFI, OSHA is, with Information on Process Safety submissions are available for inspection this notice, extending the deadline for Management and Prevention of Major and, when permissible, copying at the submitting comments in response to the Chemical Accidents. OSHA Docket Office. RFI to March 31, 2014.1 DATES: The comment due date for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: II. Authority and Signature General information and press proposed rule published in the Federal David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, inquiries: Contact Frank Meilinger, Register on December 9, 2013 (78 FR Assistant Secretary of Labor for Director, Office of Communications, 73756) is extended. Comments must be Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Room N–3647, OSHA, U.S. Department submitted (postmarked, sent, or Department of Labor, 200 Constitution of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., received) by March 31, 2014. Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210, Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) ADDRESSES: Submit comments and authorized the preparation of this notice 693–1999; email: meilinger.francis2@ additional material using any of the pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657, 40 dol.gov. following methods: U.S.C. 333, 33 U.S.C. 941, Secretary of Electronically: Submit comments Technical inquiries: Contact Lisa Long, Director, Office of Engineering Labor’s Order No. 1–2012 (77 FR 3912, along with attachments electronically at Jan. 25, 2012), and 29 CFR part 1911. http://www.regulations.gov, which is Safety, Directorate of Standards and the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Click Guidance, Room N–3609, OSHA, U.S. Signed at Washington, DC, on March 4, 2014. on the ‘‘COMMENT NOW!’’ box next to Department of Labor, 200 Constitution the title ‘‘Process Safety Management Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; David Michaels, and Prevention of Major Chemical telephone: (202) 693–2222 or email: Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health. Accidents’’ and follow the instructions [email protected]. on-line for making electronic Copies of this Federal Register notice: [FR Doc. 2014–04983 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] submissions. Electronic copies of this Federal BILLING CODE 4510–26–P Fax: Commenters may fax Register notice are available at http:// submissions, including attachments, regulations.gov. Copies also are that are not longer than 10 pages to the available from the OSHA Office of ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693–1648. Publications, Room N–3101, U.S. AGENCY Mail, hand delivery, express mail, Department of Labor, 200 Constitution messenger, or courier service: Submit Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; 40 CFR Part 82 comments to the OSHA Docket Office, telephone: (202) 693–1888. This notice, [EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0065; FRL–9903–64– U.S. Department of Labor, Room N– as well as news releases and other OAR] relevant information, also are available 2625, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., RIN 2060–AR80 Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) at OSHA’s Web site at http:// 693–2350 (OSHA’s TTY number is (877) www.osha.gov. Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: The 889–5627). The Docket Office accepts SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 2014 and 2015 Critical Use Exemption deliveries (hand, express mail, from the Phaseout of Methyl Bromide messenger, or courier service) during I. Background normal business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 OSHA published a request for AGENCY: Environmental Protection p.m., e.t. information (RFI) on December 09, Agency (EPA). Instructions: All submissions must 2013, on Process Safety Management ACTION: Proposed rule. include the Agency name and the and Prevention of Major Chemical SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection docket number for this rulemaking Accidents (78 FR 73756) in response to Agency (EPA) is proposing uses that (Docket No. OSHA–2013–0020). OSHA Section 6(e) of Executive Order 13650: places all comments, including any Improving Chemical Facility Safety and 1 Information on the executive order is available personal information provided, in the Security. The RFI notice requested at: http://www.osha.gov/chemicalexecutiveorder/ public docket without change and this comments by March 10, 2014. Section index.html.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13007

qualify for the critical use exemption made available online at Stratospheric Program Implementation (CUE) and the amount of methyl www.regulations.gov, including any Branch (6205J), 1200 Pennsylvania bromide that may be produced or personal information provided, unless Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. imported for those uses for both the the comment includes information You may also visit the methyl bromide 2014 and 2015 control periods. EPA is claimed to be Confidential Business section of the Ozone Depletion Web site proposing this action under the Information (CBI) or other information of EPA’s Stratospheric Protection authority of the Clean Air Act to reflect whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Division at www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr for consensus decisions taken by the Parties Do not submit information that you further information about the methyl to the Montreal Protocol on Substances consider to be CBI or otherwise bromide critical use exemption, other that Deplete the Ozone Layer at the protected through www.regulations.gov Stratospheric Ozone Protection Twenty-Fourth and Twenty-Fifth or email. The www.regulations.gov Web regulations, the science of ozone layer Meetings of the Parties. EPA is also site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, depletion, and related topics. proposing to amend the regulatory which means EPA will not know your SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This framework to remove provisions related identity or contact information unless proposed rule concerns Clean Air Act to sale of pre-phaseout inventory for you provide it in the body of your (CAA) restrictions on the consumption, critical uses. EPA is seeking comment comment. If you send an email production, and use of methyl bromide on the list of critical uses, on EPA’s comment directly to EPA without going (a Class I, Group VI controlled determination of the specific amounts of through www.regulations.gov your email substance) for critical uses during methyl bromide that may be produced address will be automatically captured calendar years 2014 and 2015. Under and imported for those uses, and on the and included as part of the comment the Clean Air Act, methyl bromide amendments to the regulatory that is placed in the public docket and consumption (consumption is defined framework. made available on the Internet. If you under section 601 of the CAA as DATES: Comments must be submitted by submit an electronic comment, EPA production plus imports minus exports) April 21, 2014. Any party requesting a recommends that you include your and production were phased out on public hearing must notify the contact name and other contact information in January 1, 2005, apart from allowable person listed below by 5 p.m. Eastern the body of your comment and with any exemptions, such as the critical use and Standard Time on March 12, 2014. If a disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA the quarantine and preshipment (QPS) hearing is requested it will be held on cannot read your comment due to exemptions. With this action, EPA is March 24, 2014. EPA will post technical difficulties and cannot contact proposing and seeking comment on the information regarding a hearing, if one you for clarification, EPA may not be uses that will qualify for the critical use is requested, on the Ozone Protection able to consider your comment. exemption as well as specific amounts Web site www.epa.gov/ozone/ Electronic files should avoid the use of of methyl bromide that may be strathome.html. Persons interested in special characters, any form of produced and imported for proposed attending a public hearing should encryption, and be free of any defects or critical uses for the 2014 and 2015 consult with the contact person below viruses. For additional information control periods. EPA also seeks regarding the location and time of the about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA comment on the amendments to the hearing. Docket Center homepage at http:// regulatory framework to remove www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. provisions related to sale of pre- ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Docket: All documents in the docket phaseout inventory for critical uses. identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– are listed on the www.regulations.gov OAR–2014–0065, by one of the Web site. Although listed in the index, Table of Contents following methods: • some information is not publicly I. General Information www.regulations.gov: Follow the available, e.g., CBI or other information A. Regulated Entities on-line instructions for submitting whose disclosure is restricted by statute. B. What Should I Consider When Preparing comments. Certain other material, such as My Comments? • Email: [email protected]. copyrighted material, is not placed on II. What Is Methyl Bromide? • Fax: (202) 566–9744. the Internet and will be publicly III. What Is the Background to the Phaseout • Phone: (202) 566–1742. Regulations for Ozone-Depleting • U.S. Mail: Docket EPA–HQ–OAR– available only in hard copy form. Substances? 2014–0065, U.S. Environmental Publicly available docket materials are IV. What Is the Legal Authority for Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, available either electronically through Exempting the Production and Import of Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at Methyl Bromide for Critical Uses 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, Authorized by the Parties to the NW., Washington, DC 20460 EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Montreal Protocol? • Hand Delivery or Courier: Docket Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, V. What Is the Critical Use Exemption Process? EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0065, EPA Docket DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday A. A. Background of the Process Center—Public Reading Room, EPA B. How Does This Proposed Rule Relate to West Building, Room 3334, 1301 through Friday, excluding legal Previous Critical Use Exemption Rules? Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, holidays. The telephone number for the C. Proposed Critical Uses DC 20004. Such deliveries are only Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, D. Proposed Critical Use Amounts accepted during the Docket’s normal and the telephone number for the Air E. Amending the Critical Stock Allowance hours of operation, and special and Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. Framework arrangements should be made for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For F. The Criteria in Decisions IX/6 and Ex. deliveries of boxed information. further information about this proposed I/4 G. Emissions Minimization Instructions: Direct your comments to rule, contact Jeremy Arling by telephone VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– at (202) 343–9055, or by email at A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 0065. EPA’s policy is that all comments [email protected] or by mail at U.S. Planning and Review and Executive received will be included in the public Environmental Protection Agency, Order 13563: Improving Regulation and docket without change and may be Stratospheric Protection Division, Regulatory Review

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13008 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

B. Paperwork Reduction Act must be submitted for inclusion in the pertaining to restricted use pesticides) C. Regulatory Flexibility Act public docket. when producing, importing, exporting, D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. acquiring, selling, distributing, E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism When submitting comments, remember transferring, or using methyl bromide. F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation to: The provisions in this proposed action and Coordination with Indian Tribal • Identify the rulemaking by docket Governments are intended only to implement the G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of number and other identifying CAA restrictions on the production, Children from Environmental Health and information (subject heading, Federal consumption, and use of methyl Register date, and page number). bromide for critical uses exempted from Safety Risks • H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Follow directions—The agency may the phaseout of methyl bromide. ask you to respond to specific questions Significantly Affect Energy Supply, III. What Is the background to the Distribution, or Use or organize comments by referencing a I. National Technology Transfer and Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part phaseout regulations for ozone- Advancement Act or section number. depleting substances? J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions • Explain why you agree or disagree; The regulatory requirements of the to Address Environmental Justice in suggest alternatives and substitute stratospheric ozone protection program Minority Populations and Low-Income language for your requested changes. that limit production and consumption Populations • Describe any assumptions and of ozone-depleting substances are in 40 I. General Information provide any technical information and/ CFR part 82, subpart A. The regulatory or data that you used. program was originally published in the A. Regulated Entities • If you estimate potential costs or Federal Register on August 12, 1988 (53 Entities and categories of entities burdens, explain how you arrived at FR 30566), in response to the 1987 potentially regulated by this proposed your estimate in sufficient detail to signing and subsequent ratification of allow for it to be reproduced. the Montreal Protocol on Substances action include producers, importers, • and exporters of methyl bromide; Provide specific examples to that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal applicators and distributors of methyl illustrate your concerns, and suggest Protocol). The Montreal Protocol is the bromide; and users of methyl bromide alternatives. international agreement aimed at • Explain your views as clearly as that applied for the 2014 and 2015 reducing and eliminating the possible, avoiding the use of profanity critical use exemption including production and consumption of or personal threats. stratospheric ozone-depleting growers of vegetable crops, fruits, and • Make sure to submit your substances. The United States was one nursery stock, and owners of stored food comments by the comment period of the original signatories to the 1987 commodities and structures such as deadline identified. Montreal Protocol and the United States grain mills and processors. This list is ratified the Protocol in 1988. Congress not intended to be exhaustive, but rather II. What is methyl bromide? then enacted, and President George to provide a guide for readers regarding Methyl bromide is an odorless, H.W. Bush signed into law, the Clean entities likely to be regulated by this colorless, toxic gas which is used as a Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA of proposed action. To determine whether broad-spectrum pesticide and is 1990) which included Title VI on your facility, company, business, or controlled under the CAA as a Class I Stratospheric Ozone Protection, codified organization could be regulated by this ozone-depleting substance (ODS). as 42 U.S.C. Chapter 85, Subchapter VI, proposed action, you should carefully Methyl bromide was once widely used to ensure that the United States could examine the regulations promulgated at as a fumigant to control a variety of satisfy its obligations under the 40 CFR part 82, subpart A. If you have pests such as insects, weeds, rodents, Protocol. EPA issued regulations to questions regarding the applicability of pathogens, and nematodes. Information implement this legislation and has since this action to a particular entity, consult on methyl bromide can be found at amended the regulations as needed. the person listed in the preceding http://www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr. Methyl bromide was added to the section. Methyl bromide is also regulated by Protocol as an ozone-depleting B. What should I consider when EPA under the Federal Insecticide, substance in 1992 through the preparing my comments? Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Copenhagen Amendment to the and other statutes and regulatory Protocol. The Parties to the Montreal 1. Confidential Business Information. authority, as well as by States under Protocol (Parties) agreed that each Do not submit confidential business their own statutes and regulatory developed country’s level of methyl information (CBI) to EPA through authority. Under FIFRA, methyl bromide production and consumption www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly bromide is a restricted use pesticide. in 1991 should be the baseline for mark the part or all of the information Restricted use pesticides are subject to establishing a freeze on the level of that you claim to be CBI. For CBI Federal and State requirements methyl bromide production and information in a disk or CD–ROM that governing their sale, distribution, and consumption for developed countries. you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the use. Nothing in this proposed rule EPA published a final rule in the disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then implementing Title VI of the Clean Air Federal Register on December 10, 1993 identify electronically within the disk or Act is intended to derogate from (58 FR 65018), listing methyl bromide as CD–ROM the specific information that provisions in any other Federal, State, a Class I, Group VI controlled substance. is claimed as CBI. Information so or local laws or regulations governing This rule froze U.S. production and marked will not be disclosed except in actions including, but not limited to, the consumption at the 1991 baseline level accordance with procedures set forth in sale, distribution, transfer, and use of of 25,528,270 kilograms, and set forth 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one methyl bromide. Entities affected by this the percentage of baseline allowances complete version of the comment that proposal must comply with FIFRA and for methyl bromide granted to includes information claimed as CBI, a other pertinent statutory and regulatory companies in each control period (each copy of the comment that does not requirements for pesticides (including, calendar year) until 2001, when the contain the information claimed as CBI but not limited to, requirements complete phaseout would occur. This

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13009

phaseout date was established in the regulations to allow for an IX/6. In that Decision, the Parties agreed response to a petition filed in 1991 exemption for quarantine and that ‘‘a use of methyl bromide should under sections 602(c)(3) and 606(b) of preshipment (QPS) purposes through an qualify as ‘critical’ only if the the CAAA of 1990, requesting that EPA interim final rule on July 19, 2001 (66 nominating Party determines that: (i) list methyl bromide as a Class I FR 37751), and a final rule on January The specific use is critical because the substance and phase out its production 2, 2003 (68 FR 238). lack of availability of methyl bromide and consumption. This date was On December 23, 2004 (69 FR 76982), for that use would result in a significant consistent with section 602(d) of the EPA published a rule (the ‘‘Framework market disruption; and (ii) there are no CAAA of 1990, which, for newly listed Rule’’) that established the framework technically and economically feasible Class I ozone-depleting substances for the critical use exemption, set forth alternatives or substitutes available to provides that ‘‘no extension [of the a list of approved critical uses for 2005, the user that are acceptable from the phaseout schedule in section 604] under and specified the amount of methyl standpoint of environment and health this subsection may extend the date for bromide that could be supplied in 2005 and are suitable to the crops and termination of production of any class I from stocks and new production or circumstances of the nomination.’’ EPA substance to a date more than 7 years import to meet the needs of approved promulgated these criteria in the after January 1 of the year after the year critical uses. EPA subsequently definition of ‘‘critical use’’ at 40 CFR in which the substance is added to the published rules applying the critical use 82.3. In addition, the Parties decided list of class I substances.’’ exemption framework for each of the that production and consumption, if At the Seventh Meeting of the Parties annual control periods from 2006 to any, of methyl bromide for critical uses (MOP) in 1995, the Parties agreed to 2012. In the 2013 rule, EPA amended should be permitted only if a variety of adjustments to the methyl bromide the framework to remove certain conditions have been met, including control measures and agreed to requirements related to sale of pre- that all technically and economically reduction steps and a 2010 phaseout phaseout inventory for critical uses. feasible steps have been taken to date for developed countries with Under authority of section 604(d)(6) minimize the critical use and any exemptions permitted for critical uses. of the CAA, EPA is proposing the uses associated emission of methyl bromide, At that time, the United States that will qualify as approved critical that research programs are in place to continued to have a 2001 phaseout date uses for two separate control periods develop and deploy alternatives and in accordance with section 602(d) of the (2014 and 2015) as well as the amount substitutes, and that methyl bromide is CAAA of 1990. At the Ninth MOP in of methyl bromide that may be not available in sufficient quantity and 1997, the Parties agreed to further produced or imported to satisfy those quality from existing stocks of banked or adjustments to the phaseout schedule uses in each of those years. EPA is also recycled methyl bromide. for methyl bromide in developed proposing to amend the regulatory EPA requested critical use exemption countries, with reduction steps leading framework to remove additional applications through Federal Register to a 2005 phaseout. The Parties also provisions related to sale of pre- notices published on June 14, 2011 (76 established a phaseout date of 2015 for phaseout inventory for critical uses. The FR 34700) (for the 2014 control period) Article 5 countries. proposed critical uses and amounts for and on May 17, 2012 (77 FR 29341) (for the 2015 control period). Applicants IV. What is the legal authority for 2014 reflect Decision XXIV/5, taken at submitted data on their use of methyl exempting the production and import of the Twenty-Fourth Meeting of the bromide, the technical and economic methyl bromide for critical uses Parties in November 2012. The feasibility of using alternatives, ongoing authorized by the parties to the proposed critical uses and amounts for research programs into the use of Montreal Protocol? 2015 reflect Decision XXV/4, taken at the Twenty-Fifth Meeting of the Parties alternatives in their sector, and efforts to In October 1998, the U.S. Congress minimize use and emissions of methyl amended the Clean Air Act to prohibit in October 2013. In accordance with Article 2H(5) of bromide. the termination of production of methyl the Montreal Protocol, the Parties have EPA reviews the data submitted by bromide prior to January 1, 2005, to issued several Decisions pertaining to applicants, as well as data from require EPA to align the U.S. phaseout governmental and academic sources, to the critical use exemption. These of methyl bromide with the schedule establish whether there are technically include Decisions IX/6 and Ex. I/4, specified under the Protocol, and to and economically feasible alternatives which set forth criteria for review of authorize EPA to provide certain available for a particular use of methyl critical uses. The status of Decisions is exemptions. These amendments were bromide, and whether there would be a addressed in NRDC v. EPA, (464 F.3d 1, contained in Section 764 of the 1999 significant market disruption if no D.C. Cir. 2006) and in EPA’s Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency exemption were available. In addition, ‘‘Supplemental Brief for the Supplemental Appropriations Act (Pub. an interagency workgroup reviews other Respondent,’’ filed in NRDC v. EPA and L. 105–277, October 21, 1998) and were parameters of the exemption available in the docket for this proposed codified in section 604 of the CAA, 42 applications such as dosage and U.S.C. 7671c. The amendment that action. In this proposed rule on critical emissions minimization techniques and specifically addresses the critical use uses for 2014 and 2015, EPA is honoring applicants’ research or transition plans. exemption appears at section 604(d)(6), commitments made by the United States As required in section 604(d)(6) of the 42 U.S.C. 7671c(d)(6). EPA revised the in the Montreal Protocol context. CAA, for each exemption period, EPA phaseout schedule for methyl bromide V. What is the critical use exemption consults with the United States production and consumption in a process? Department of Agriculture (USDA) and rulemaking on November 28, 2000 (65 other departments and institutions of FR 70795), which allowed for the A. Background of the Process the Federal government that have reduction in methyl bromide Article 2H of the Montreal Protocol regulatory authority related to methyl consumption specified under the established the critical use exemption bromide. This assessment process Protocol and extended the phaseout to provision. At the Ninth Meeting of the culminates in the development of the 2005 while creating a placeholder for Parties in 1997, the Parties established U.S. critical use nomination (CUN). critical use exemptions. EPA amended the criteria for an exemption in Decision Annually since 2003, the U.S.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13010 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

Department of State has submitted a above, are in the public docket for this limits the sale of inventory for critical CUN to the United Nations Environment rulemaking. The proposed critical uses uses through allocations of Critical Programme (UNEP) Ozone Secretariat. and amounts reflect the analyses Stock Allowances (CSA). A CSA was the The Methyl Bromide Technical Options contained in those documents. right granted through 40 CFR part 82 to Committee (MBTOC) and the sell 1 kg of methyl bromide from B. How does this proposed rule relate to Technology and Economic Assessment previous critical use exemption rules? inventory produced or imported prior to Panel (TEAP), which are advisory the January 1, 2005, phaseout date for bodies to Parties to the Montreal The December 23, 2004, Framework an approved critical use during the Protocol, review each Party’s CUN and Rule established the framework for the specified control period. Under the make recommendations to the Parties on critical use exemption program in the framework, the sale of pre-phaseout the nominations. The Parties then make United States, including definitions, inventories for critical uses in excess of Decisions on the authorization of prohibitions, trading provisions, and the amount of CSAs held by the seller critical use exemptions for particular recordkeeping and reporting obligations. was prohibited. Today, EPA is Parties, including how much methyl The preamble to the Framework Rule proposing to remove all of the bromide may be supplied for the included EPA’s determinations on key remaining provisions in 40 CFR part 82 exempted critical uses. EPA then issues for the critical use exemption related to critical stock allowances. provides an opportunity for public program. comment on the amounts and specific Since publishing the Framework Rule, C. Proposed Critical Uses uses of methyl bromide that the agency EPA has annually promulgated In Decision XXIV/5, taken in is proposing to exempt. regulations to exempt specific quantities November 2012, the Parties to the On January 31, 2012, the United of production and import of methyl Protocol agreed ‘‘to permit, for the States submitted the tenth Nomination bromide, to determine the amounts that agreed critical-use categories for 2014 for a Critical Use Exemption for Methyl may be supplied from pre-phaseout set forth in table A of the annex to the Bromide for the United States of inventory, and to indicate which uses present decision for each party, subject America to the Ozone Secretariat of meet the criteria for the exemption to the conditions set forth in the present UNEP. This nomination contained the program for that year. See 71 FR 5985 decision and in decision Ex.I/4 to the (February 6, 2006), 71 FR 75386 request for 2014 critical uses. In extent that those conditions are (December 14, 2006), 72 FR 74118 February 2012, MBTOC sent questions applicable, the levels of production and (December 28, 2007), 74 FR 19878 to the United States concerning consumption for 2014 set forth in table (April 30, 2009), 75 FR 23167 (May 3, technical and economic issues in the B of the annex to the present decision, 2010), 76 FR 60737 (September 30, 2014 nomination. The United States which are necessary to satisfy critical 2011), 77 FR 29218 (May 17, 2012), and transmitted responses to MBTOC in uses . . .’’ The following uses are those 78 FR 43797 (July 22, 2013). March, 2012. In May 2012, the MBTOC set forth in table A of the annex to provided their interim Unlike in previous years, EPA today proposes critical uses for both 2014 and Decision XXIV/5 for the United States: recommendations on the U.S. • nomination in the May TEAP Progress 2015. EPA is proposing to do so to Commodities • Report. In that report, MBTOC posed expedite the issuance of 2015 Mills and food processing structures • questions about the U.S. nominations allowances. EPA has received repeated Cured pork for dried fruit, dried cured ham, and comments in recent years that a failure • Strawberry—field strawberries. The United States to issue CUE allowances in a timely In Decision XXV/4, taken in October responded to those questions in August fashion places manufacturers and 2013, the Parties to the Protocol agreed 2012. These documents, together with distributors, who need to plan for the ‘‘[t]o permit, for the agreed critical-use reports by the advisory bodies noted upcoming growing season, in a difficult categories for 2015 set forth in table A above, are in the public docket for this position. For 2013, the final rule was of the annex to the present decision for rulemaking. The proposed critical uses not effective until July 22, 2013, and each party, subject to the conditions set and amounts reflect the analysis EPA recognizes that this late date could forth in the present decision and in contained in those documents. cause difficulties for growers as well as decision Ex.I/4 to the extent that those On January 24, 2013, the United manufacturers and distributors. EPA conditions are applicable, the levels of States submitted the eleventh seeks to avoid such difficulties for 2015 production and consumption for 2015 Nomination for a Critical Use by issuing the authorization for that year set forth in table B of the annex to the Exemption for Methyl Bromide for the in this rulemaking. present decision, which are necessary to United States of America to the Ozone Today’s proposed action continues satisfy critical uses . . .’’ The following Secretariat of UNEP. This nomination the approach established in the 2013 uses are those set forth in table A of the contained the request for 2015 critical rule for determining the amounts of annex to Decision XXV/4 for the United uses. In February and March 2013, Critical Use Allowances (CUAs) to be States: MBTOC sent questions to the United allocated for critical uses. A CUA is the • Cured pork States concerning technical and privilege granted through 40 CFR part • economic issues in the 2015 82 to produce or import 1 kilogram (kg) Strawberry—field nomination. The United States of methyl bromide for an approved EPA is proposing to modify the table transmitted responses to MBTOC in critical use during the specified control in 40 CFR part 82, subpart A, appendix March, 2013. In May 2013, the MBTOC period. A control period is a calendar L to reflect the agreed critical use provided its interim recommendations year. See 40 CFR 82.3. The two control categories identified in Decision on the U.S. nomination in the May periods at issue in this rule are 2014 and XXIV/5 and Decision XXV/4. EPA is TEAP Progress Report and posed 2015. Each year’s allowances expire at proposing to amend the table of critical additional questions about the U.S. the end of that control period and, as uses and critical users based on the nominations. The United States explained in the Framework Rule, are authorizations in Decision XXIV/5 and responded to those questions in August not bankable from one year to the next. Decision XXV/4 and the technical 2013. These documents, together with The 2013 Rule also removed from the analyses contained in the 2014 and 2015 reports by the advisory bodies noted regulatory framework the restriction that U.S. nominations that assess data

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13011

submitted by applicants to the CUE and the U.S. Golf Course which critical uses are approved for program. Superintendents Association. For those which control periods. EPA is not EPA is seeking comment on the sectors the USG came to a decision that proposing other changes to the table but technical analyses contained in the U.S. the sectors not nominated have not is repeating the following clarifications nominations (available for public review provided rigorous and convincing made in previous years for ease of in the docket). Specifically, EPA evidence that they meet the criteria laid reference. The ‘‘local township limits requests information regarding any out in Decision IX/6, and further that no prohibiting 1,3-dichloropropene’’ are changes to the registration (including new problem or large yield/quality loss prohibitions on the use of 1,3- cancellations or registrations), use, or had been demonstrated that warranted dichloropropene products in cases efficacy of alternatives that have seeking a supplemental authorization where local township limits on use of occurred after the nominations were from the Parties to the Montreal this alternative have been reached. In submitted. EPA recognizes that as the Protocol. addition, ‘‘pet food’’ under subsection B market for alternatives evolves, the The following are proposed changes of Food Processing refers to food for thresholds for what constitutes to the existing appendix due to the domesticated dogs and cats. Finally, ‘‘significant market disruption’’ or applications and analysis conducted for ‘‘rapid fumigation’’ for commodities ‘‘technical and economic feasibility’’ the 2015 control period. For 2015 EPA refers to instances in which a buyer may change. Such information has the is proposing to remove California wine provides short (two working days or potential to alter the technical or grape growers and Florida growers of fewer) notification for a purchase or economic feasibility of an alternative eggplants, peppers, tomatoes, and there is a short period after harvest in and could thus cause EPA to modify the strawberries. These groups did not which to fumigate and there is limited analysis that underpins EPA’s submit applications for 2015 and silo availability for using alternatives. determination as to which uses and therefore were not included in the 2015 what amounts of methyl bromide U.S. nomination. D. Proposed Critical Use Amounts qualify for the CUE. EPA is proposing to remove sectors or Table A of the annex to Decision The following are proposed changes users that applied for a critical use in XXIV/5 lists critical uses and amounts to the existing appendix, starting with 2015 but that the United States did not agreed to by the Parties to the Montreal changes due to the applications and nominate for 2015. As described above Protocol for 2014. The maximum analysis conducted for the 2014 control EPA conducted a thorough technical amount of new production and import period. For 2014, EPA is proposing to assessment of each application and the for U.S. critical uses, specified in Table remove Georgia growers of cucurbits, USG determined that certain sectors or B of Decision XXIV/5, is 442,337 kg, eggplants, peppers, and tomatoes. These users did not meet the critical use minus available stocks. This figure is groups did not submit applications for criteria. EPA notified these sectors of equivalent to 1.7% of the U.S. 1991 2014 and therefore were not included in their status by letters dated March 26, methyl bromide consumption baseline the 2014 U.S. nomination. 2013. These sectors are rice millers, pet of 25,528,270 kg. EPA is proposing to remove sectors or food manufacturing facilities, members Similarly, Table A of the annex to users that applied for a critical use in of the North American Millers Decision XXV/4 lists critical uses and 2014 but that the United States did not Association, and California entities amounts agreed to by the Parties to the nominate for 2014. EPA conducted a storing walnuts, dried plums, figs, and Montreal Protocol for 2015. The thorough technical assessment of each raisins. In addition, EPA is proposing to maximum amount of new production application and considered the effects remove entities storing dates as a critical and import for U.S. critical uses, that the loss of methyl bromide would use for 2015. While the United States specified in Table B of Decision XXV/ have for each agricultural sector, and nominated this sector for 2015, MBTOC 4, is 376,900 kg, minus available stocks. whether significant market disruption did not recommend that this sector be This figure is equivalent to 1.5% of the would occur as a result. As a result of a critical use in 2015 and the Parties did U.S. 1991 methyl bromide consumption this technical review, the United States not authorize this use. baseline. Government (USG) determined that EPA has received supplemental For 2014 and 2015, EPA is proposing certain sectors or users did not meet the applications for 2015 from sectors that to determine the level of new critical use criteria in Decision IX/6 and the United States did not nominate for production and import according to the the United States therefore did not 2015. These sectors are: Michigan framework and as modified by the 2013 include them in the 2014 Critical Use cucurbit, eggplant, pepper, and tomato Rule. Under this approach, the amount Nomination. EPA notified these sectors growers; Florida eggplant, pepper, of new production for each control of their status by letters dated February tomato, and strawberry growers; the period would equal the total amount 7, 2012. These sectors are orchard California Association of Nursery and authorized by the Parties to the replant for California wine grape Garden Centers; California stone fruit, Montreal Protocol in their Decisions growers and Florida growers of table and raisin grape, walnut, and minus any reductions for available eggplants, peppers, and tomatoes. For almond growers; ornamental growers in stocks, carryover, and the uptake of each of these uses, EPA found that there California and Florida; the U.S. Golf alternatives. These terms (available are technically and economically Course Superintendents Association; stocks, carryover, and the uptake of feasible alternatives to methyl bromide. and stored walnuts, dried plums, figs, alternatives) are discussed in detail Some sectors that were not included and raisins in California. The USG is below. As established in the 2013 Rule, in the 2014 Critical Use Nomination currently reviewing these supplemental EPA would not allocate critical stock submitted supplemental applications for applications for 2015 and EPA is not allowances. EPA would still determine 2014. These sectors are: The California proposing at this time to authorize whether there are any ‘‘available stocks’’ Association of Nursery and Garden critical use for these sectors. EPA is not and reduce the new production Centers; California stone fruit, table and proposing at this time to authorize allocation by that amount. Applying this raisin grape, walnut, and almond critical use for these sectors but may approach, EPA is proposing to allocate growers; ornamental growers in take future action as appropriate. allowances to exempt 442,337 kg of new California and Florida; California Finally, EPA is adding information to production and import of methyl strawberry nurseries; stored walnuts; Column B of appendix L to clarify bromide for critical uses in 2014 and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13012 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

376,900 kg of new production and the first time in the history of the CUE exemptions.’’ EPA regulations prohibit import for 2015. program, distributors were free to sell methyl bromide produced or imported Available Stocks: For 2014 and 2015 their entire remaining inventory to after January 1, 2005, under the critical the Parties indicated that the United critical users. At this time, EPA is use exemption from being added to the States should use ‘‘available stocks,’’ but unable to calculate what effect this existing pre-2005 inventory. Quantities did not indicate a minimum amount policy change may have had on the of methyl bromide produced, imported, expected to be taken from stocks. remaining inventory, although the exported, or sold to end-users under the Consistent with EPA’s past practice, agency will docket end of year critical use exemption in a control EPA is considering what amount, if any, inventory data that will be reported to period must be reported to EPA the of the existing stocks may be available EPA in February 2014. EPA notes that following year. EPA uses these reports to critical users during 2014 and 2015. it may be difficult to assess the impact to calculate the amount of methyl The amount of existing stocks reported of this change, which went into effect in bromide produced or imported under to EPA as of December 31, 2012, was mid-2013, simply from updated the critical use exemption, but not 627,066 kg. inventory data. EPA solicits comments exported or sold to end-users in that The Parties to the Protocol recognized on whether, and how, to draw year. EPA deducts an amount equivalent in their Decisions that the level of inferences as to the availability of stocks to this ‘‘carryover’’ from the total level existing stocks may differ from the level for critical uses based on inventory of allowable new production and import of available stocks. Both Decision XXIV/ figures as of December 31, 2013, (e.g., in the year following the year of the data 5 and Decision XXV/4 state that whether the magnitude of the reduction report. So for example, the amount of ‘‘production and consumption of methyl in pre-phaseout stocks could be carryover from 2012 is factored into the bromide for critical uses should be evidence of the degree of availability for determination for 2014. Carryover permitted only if methyl bromide is not critical uses). material (which is produced using available in sufficient quantity and For these reasons, EPA is proposing to critical use allowances) is not included quality from existing stocks. . . .’’ In find 0% of the existing inventory in EPA’s definition of existing inventory addition, the Decisions recognize that available for 2014 and 2015. EPA (which applies to pre-2005 material) ‘‘parties operating under critical-use specifically invites comment on because this would lead to a double- exemptions should take into account the whether 0% or 5% of existing inventory counting of carryover amounts. extent to which methyl bromide is will be available to critical users in 2014 All critical use methyl bromide that available in sufficient quantity and and/or 2015, taking into consideration companies reported to be produced or quality from existing stocks. . . .’’ the recent history of inventory imported in 2012 was sold to end users. Earlier Decisions also refer to the use of drawdown, the removal of the critical 759 MT of critical use methyl bromide ‘‘quantities of methyl bromide from stock allowance provisions, the quantity was produced or imported in 2012. stocks that the Party has recognized to and geographical location of authorized Slightly more than the amount be available.’’ Thus, it is clear that uses, and the quantity and location of produced or imported was actually sold individual Parties may determine their stocks. to end-users. This additional amount level of available stocks. Section Existing stocks, as of December 31, was from distributors selling material 604(d)(6) of the CAA does not require 2012, were equal to 627,066 kg. that was carried over from the prior EPA to adjust the amount of new Therefore, 5% would be 31,353 kg. control period. Therefore, EPA is production and import to reflect the Were EPA to find 5% of existing stocks proposing to apply the carryover availability of stocks; however, as to be available, EPA would reduce the deduction of 0 kg to the new production explained in previous rulemakings, amount of new production for 2014 amount for 2014. EPA’s calculation of making such an adjustment is a and/or for 2015 by 31,353 kg. EPA notes the amount of carryover at the end of reasonable exercise of EPA’s discretion that it is not proposing to allocate a 2012 is consistent with the method used under this provision. corresponding amount of critical stock in previous CUE rules, and with the In the 2013 CUE Rule (78 FR 43797, allowances, as had been the case prior format in Decision XVI/6 for calculating July 22, 2013), EPA established an to 2013. EPA removed the requirement column L of the U.S. Accounting approach that considered whether a to expend critical stock allowances Framework. Past U.S. Accounting percentage of the existing inventory was when selling inventory to critical users Frameworks, including the one for 2012, available. In that rule, EPA took in the 2013 CUE Rule. EPA notes that are available in the public docket for comment on whether 0% or 5% of the it will receive updated end of year this rulemaking. existing stocks was available. The final inventory data in February 2014. EPA Production, import, and sales data for rule found that 0% was available to be anticipates that inventory will have 2013 will be reported to EPA in allocated for critical use in 2013 for a been further drawn down, and therefore February 2014. Without these data, the number of reasons including: A pattern 5% of the existing stocks, based on the agency is unable to calculate how, or of significant underestimation of updated data, is likely to be whether, a reduction for carryover inventory drawdown; the increasing significantly less than 31,353 kg. EPA would affect the 2015 allocation concentration of critical users in solicits comment on whether, if EPA amount. However, EPA anticipates that California while inventory remained concludes some portion of existing the carryover will remain 0 kg, as it has distributed nationwide; and the stocks are ‘‘available,’’ EPA should been at that level since 2009. Based on recognition that the agency cannot calculate the portion that is available for information available, EPA believes that compel distributors to sell inventory to 2014 and/or 2015 based on the updated the demand for critical use methyl critical users. For further discussion, data for inventory as of December 31, bromide continues to be high and all please see the 2013 CUE Rule. EPA 2013. material produced or imported for a believes these circumstances remain Carryover Material: The Parties in particular control period is sold in that true for 2014 and 2015. paragraph 9 of Decision XXIV/5 ‘‘urge control period. Therefore, while the In addition, the 2013 CUE Rule parties operating under critical-use proposed allocation amount for 2015 removed the restriction that critical exemptions to put in place effective assumes 0 kg of carryover in 2013, EPA stock allowances be expended to sell systems to discourage the accumulation proposes to use the reported data to inventory to critical uses. As a result, for of methyl bromide produced under the calculate the actual carryover amount

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13013

for 2013, and subtract that amount (if 410,984 kg. EPA is also proposing to 40 CFR Part 82, which follow from any) from the authorization for new allocate 2015 critical use allowances for removing those restrictions including production and import in the final rule. new production or import of methyl removing the reference to the restriction Uptake of Alternatives: EPA considers bromide equivalent to 376,900 kg. EPA on selling inventory pursuant to a CSA data on the availability of alternatives is also taking comment on whether it from the definition of ‘‘critical use that it receives following submission of should find 5% of existing inventory to methyl bromide.’’ each nomination to UNEP. In previous be available, which would result in an The 2013 Rule also stated that EPA rules EPA has reduced the total CUE allocation of 345,547 kg. EPA is taking believed additional conforming changes amount when a new alternative has further comment on whether, if EPA may be appropriate but that it would been registered and increased the new concludes some portion of existing address those changes in a future production amount when an alternative stocks are ‘‘available,’’ EPA should rulemaking. Today EPA is proposing is withdrawn, but not above the amount calculate the portion that is available for and taking comment on removing the authorized by the Parties. 2014 and/or 2015 based on the updated remaining references to critical stock Since the United States submitted the data for inventory to be submitted in allowances in 40 CFR Part 82. EPA 2014 CUN on January 31, 2012, the February 2014. believes these provisions are no longer California Department of Pesticide EPA is proposing to allocate the 2014 necessary if the agency is not allocating Regulation has proposed control and 2015 allowances to the four separate critical stock allowances. measures for the use of chloropicrin companies that hold baseline Specifically, EPA is proposing to with the intent of reducing risk from allowances. The proposed allocations, remove the definitions of ‘‘critical stock acute exposures that might occur near as in previous years, are in proportion allowance,’’ ‘‘critical stock allowance fields fumigated with products to those baseline amounts, as shown in holder,’’ and ‘‘unexpended critical stock containing chloropicrin. Because this the proposed changes to the table in 40 allowance’’ from § 82.3. EPA is regulation is at the proposed stage and CFR 82.8(c)(1). Paragraph 3 of Decision proposing to no longer allow for the has not been finalized, EPA is unable to XXIV/5 and paragraph 5 of Decision intercompany transfer of critical stock state what effects these changes may XXV/4 state that ‘‘parties shall allowances at § 82.12(a) 1 or the have on the availability of methyl endeavour to license, permit, authorize exchange of critical use allowances for bromide alternatives for 2014. It is more or allocate quantities of methyl bromide critical stock allowances at § 82.12(e). likely that the proposed changes to the for critical uses as listed in table A of EPA is also proposing to remove the chloropicrin regulation would affect the the annex to the present decision.’’ This reporting and recordkeeping 2015 control period and EPA is similar to language in prior Decisions requirements related to critical stock specifically invites comments on the authorizing critical uses. These allowances in § 82.13(3) and (4). EPA implications for 2015. However EPA is Decisions call on Parties to endeavor to invites comment on the necessity of not proposing to make any reductions allocate critical use methyl bromide on these provisions, the appropriateness of for either the 2014 or 2015 control a sector basis. The proposed Framework removing them from the Code of Federal periods because of these uncertainties. Rule contained several options for Regulations, and whether there are other The critical use exemption program has allocating critical use allowances, provisions that should be amended in historically only relied on final actions including a sector-by-sector approach. light of the removal of the requirement when determining the availability of The agency evaluated various options to use critical stock allowances for sales alternatives. EPA is not aware of any based on their economic, of inventory to critical users. other actions regarding alternatives that environmental, and practical effects. In 2013 EPA held discussions with would lead to either an increase or After receiving comments, EPA USDA and the Department of State on decrease in 2014 and 2015. determined in the final Framework Rule tools that could potentially address EPA is not proposing to make any that a lump-sum, or universal, immediate and unforeseen needs for other modifications to CUE amounts to allocation, modified to include distinct methyl bromide including whether account for availability of alternatives. caps for pre-plant and post-harvest uses, emergency situations may arise that Rates of transition to alternatives have was the most efficient and least warrant the use of methyl bromide already been applied for authorized burdensome approach that would consistent with the treaty, recognizing 2014 and 2015 critical use amounts achieve the desired environmental that emergency uses are not intended as through the nomination and results, and that a sector-by-sector a replacement for CUE uses. In August, authorization process. EPA will approach would pose significant EPA held a stakeholder meeting to consider new data received during the administrative and practical difficulties. present, among other things, the comment period and continues to gather For the reasons discussed in the findings of those discussions and noted information about methyl bromide preamble to the 2009 CUE rule (74 FR that the three agencies had not yet alternatives through the CUE 19894), and because of the limited identified any specific situations that application process, and by other number of authorized uses, the agency could not be addressed by current means. EPA also continues to support believes that under the approach mechanisms. The U.S. government is research and adoption of methyl adopted in the Framework Rule, the committed to using flexibility in the bromide alternatives, and to request actual critical use will closely follow the Protocol’s existing mechanisms as an information about the economic and sector breakout listed in the Parties’ avenue to address changes in national technical feasibility of all existing and decisions. circumstance that affect the transition to potential alternatives. alternatives. EPA welcomes comments Allocation Amounts: EPA is E. Amending the Critical Stock on specific emergency situations that proposing to allocate 2014 critical use Allowance Framework may necessitate the use of methyl allowances for new production or The 2013 Rule removed the bromide, consistent with the import of methyl bromide equivalent to provisions at § 82.4(p)(ii) and (iii) 442,337 kg. Because EPA is taking requiring the use of critical stock 1 This provision allows any critical stock comment on finding 5% of existing allowances for sales of inventory to allowance holder (‘‘transferror’’) to transfer critical stock allowances to any critical stock allowance inventory to be available, EPA is also critical users. In addition, EPA made holder or any methyl bromide producer, importer, taking comment on an allocation of some necessary conforming changes to distributor, or third party applicator (‘‘transferee’’).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13014 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

requirements of the Montreal Protocol, Some of these criteria are evaluated in the benefit of providing pest control at and which could be difficult to address other documents as well. For example, lower application rates. The amount of using current tools and authorities. the United States has considered the methyl bromide nominated by the adoption of alternatives and research United States reflects the lower F. The Criteria in Decisions IX/6 and Ex. into methyl bromide alternatives (see application rates necessary when using I/4 Decision IX/6 paragraph (1)(b)(iii)) in high-barrier tarps, where such tarps are Decision XXIV/5 and Decision XXV/ the development of the National allowed. 4 call on Parties to apply the conditions Management Strategy submitted to the EPA will continue to work with the and criteria listed in Decisions Ex. I/4 Ozone Secretariat in December 2005, U.S. Department of Agriculture— (to the extent applicable) and IX/6 updated in October 2009. The National Agricultural Research Service (USDA– paragraph 1 to exempted critical uses Management Strategy addresses all of ARS) and the National Institute for Food for the 2014 and 2015 control periods. the aims specified in Decision Ex.I/4 and Agriculture (USDA–NIFA) to A discussion of the agency’s application paragraph 3 to the extent feasible and is promote emission reduction techniques. of the criteria in paragraph 1 of Decision available in the docket for this The federal government has invested IX/6 appears in sections V.A., and V.C. rulemaking. substantial resources into developing of this preamble. Section V.C. solicits There continues to be a need for and implementing best practices for comments on the technical and methyl bromide in order to conduct the methyl bromide use, including emission economic basis for determining that the research required by Decision IX/6. A reduction practices. The Cooperative uses listed in this proposed rule meet common example is an outdoor field Extension System, which receives some the criteria of the critical use exemption. experiment that requires methyl support from USDA–NIFA provides The CUNs detail how each proposed bromide as a standard control treatment locally appropriate and project-focused critical use meets the criteria in with which to compare the trial outreach education regarding methyl paragraph 1 of Decision IX/6, apart from alternatives’ results. As discussed in the bromide transition best practices. the criterion located at (b)(ii), as well as preamble to the 2010 CUE rule (75 FR Additional information on USDA the criteria in paragraphs 5 and 6 of 23179, May 3, 2010), research is a key research on alternatives and emissions Decision Ex. I/4. element of the critical use process. reduction can be found at: http:// The criterion in Decision IX/6 Research on the crops shown in the www.ars.usda.gov/research/programs/ paragraph (1)(b)(ii), which refers to the table in Appendix L to subpart A programs.htm?NP_CODE=308 and use of available stocks of methyl remains a critical use of methyl http://www.csrees.usda.gov/fo/ bromide, is addressed in section V.D. of bromide. While researchers may methylbromideicgp.cfm. this preamble. The agency has continue to use newly produced Users of methyl bromide should previously provided its interpretation of material for field, post-harvest, and continue to make every effort to the criterion in Decision IX/6 paragraph emission minimization studies requiring minimize overall emissions of methyl (1)(a)(i) regarding the presence of the use of methyl bromide, EPA bromide. EPA also encourages significant market disruption in the encourages researchers to use pre- researchers and users who are using absence of an exemption. EPA refers phaseout inventory. EPA also such techniques to inform EPA of their readers to the preamble to the 2006 CUE encourages distributors to make experiences and to provide such rule (71 FR 5989, February 6, 2006) as inventory available to researchers, to well as to the memo in the docket titled information with their critical use promote the continuing effort to assist applications. ‘‘Development of 2003 Nomination for a growers to transition critical use crops Critical Use Exemption for Methyl to alternatives. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Bromide for the United States of Reviews America’’ for further elaboration. As G. Emissions Minimization explained in those documents, EPA’s Previous Decisions of the Parties have A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory interpretation of this term has several stated that critical users shall employ Planning and Review and Executive dimensions, including looking at emission minimization techniques such Order 13563: Improving Regulation and potential effects on both demand and as virtually impermeable films, barrier Regulatory Review supply for a commodity, evaluating film technologies, deep shank injection Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 potential losses at both an individual and/or other techniques that promote (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this level and at an aggregate level, and environmental protection, whenever proposal is a ‘‘significant regulatory evaluating potential losses in both technically and economically feasible. action’’ because it was deemed to raise relative and absolute terms. EPA developed a comprehensive novel legal or policy issues. The remaining considerations are strategy for risk mitigation through the Accordingly, EPA submitted this action addressed in the nomination documents 2009 Reregistration Eligibility Decision to the Office of Management and Budget including: The lack of available (RED) for methyl bromide, which is (OMB) for review under Executive technically and economically feasible implemented through restrictions on Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, alternatives under the circumstance of how methyl bromide products can be January 21, 2011) and any changes made the nomination; efforts to minimize use used. This approach means that methyl in response to interagency and emissions of methyl bromide where bromide labels require that treated sites recommendations have been technically and economically feasible; be tarped (except for California orchard documented in the docket for this the development of research and replant where EPA instead requires action. transition plans; and the requests in deep (18 inches or greater) shank Decision Ex. I/4 paragraphs 5 and 6 that applications). The RED also B. Paperwork Reduction Act Parties consider and implement MBTOC incorporated incentives for applicators This action does not impose any new recommendations, where feasible, on to use high-barrier tarps, such as information collection burden. The reductions in the critical use of methyl virtually impermeable film (VIF), by application, recordkeeping, and bromide and include information on the allowing smaller buffer zones around reporting requirements have already methodology they use to determine those sites. In addition to minimizing been established under previous critical economic feasibility. emissions, use of high-barrier tarps has use exemption rulemakings. This rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13015

does propose to remove requirements C. Regulatory Flexibility Act rule on small entities, small entity is related to the recordkeeping and defined as: (1) A small business as reporting of critical stock allowances The RFA generally requires an agency defined by the Small Business which would decrease the information to prepare a regulatory flexibility Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR collection burden. The Office of analysis of any rule subject to notice- 121.201 (see Table below); (2) a small Management and Budget (OMB) has and-comment rulemaking requirements governmental jurisdiction that is a under the Administrative Procedure Act previously approved the information government of a city, county, town, or any other statute unless the agency collection requirements contained in the school district or special district with a certifies that the rule will not have a existing regulations at 40 CFR part 82 population of less than 50,000; and (3) under the provisions of the Paperwork significant economic impact on a a small organization that is any not-for- Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. substantial number of small entities. profit enterprise which is independently and has assigned OMB control number Small entities include small businesses, 2060–0482. The OMB control numbers small organizations, and small owned and operated and is not for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are governmental jurisdictions. For dominant in its field. listed in 40 CFR part 9. purposes of assessing the impacts of this

NAICS small business size standard Category NAICS code in number of employees or millions of dollars)

Agricultural production ...... 1112—Vegetable and Melon farming ...... $0.75 million. 1113—Fruit and Nut Tree Farming. 1114—Greenhouse, Nursery, and Floriculture Production. Storage Uses ...... 115114—Postharvest Crop activities (except Cotton Ginning) ...... $7 million. 311211—Flour Milling ...... 500 employees. 311212—Rice Milling ...... 500 employees. 493110—General Warehousing and Storage ...... $25.5 million. 493130—Farm Product Warehousing and Storage ...... $25.5 million. Distributors and Applicators ...... 115112—Soil Preparation, Planting and Cultivating ...... $7 million. Producers and Importers ...... 325320—Pesticide and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing ...... 500 employees.

Agricultural producers of minor crops a substantial number of small entities. would relieve regulatory burden for all and entities that store agricultural In determining whether a rule has a small entities. commodities are categories of affected significant economic impact on a D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act entities that contain small entities. This substantial number of small entities, the proposed rule would only affect entities impact of concern is any significant This action contains no Federal that applied to EPA for an exemption to adverse economic impact on small mandates under the provisions of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform the phaseout of methyl bromide. In most entities, since the primary purpose of Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– cases, EPA received aggregated requests the regulatory flexibility analyses is to 1538 for State, local, or tribal for exemptions from industry consortia. identify and address regulatory On the exemption application, EPA governments or the private sector. The alternatives ‘‘which minimize any action imposes no enforceable duty on asked consortia to describe the number significant economic impact of the and size distribution of entities their any State, local or tribal governments or proposed rule on small entities.’’ (5 the private sector. Instead, this action application covered. EPA estimated that U.S.C. 603–604). Thus, an agency may 3,218 entities petitioned EPA for an would provide an exemption for the certify that a rule will not have a manufacture and use of a phased out exemption for the 2005 control period. significant economic impact on a EPA revised this estimate in 2011 down compound and would not impose any substantial number of small entities if to 1,800 end users of critical use methyl new requirements on any entities. the rule relieves a regulatory burden, or bromide. EPA believes that the number Therefore, this action is not subject to otherwise has a positive economic effect continues to decline as growers cease the requirements of sections 202 or 205 on all of the small entities subject to the of the UMRA. This action is also not applying for the critical use exemption. subject to the requirements of section Since many applicants did not provide rule. Since this rule would allow the use 203 of UMRA because it contains no information on the distribution of sizes of methyl bromide for approved critical regulatory requirements that might of entities covered in their applications, uses after the phaseout date of January significantly or uniquely affect small EPA estimated that, based on the above 1, 2005, this action would confer a governments. definition, between one-fourth and one- benefit to users of methyl bromide. EPA third of the entities may be small estimates in the Regulatory Impact E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Assessment found in the docket to this businesses. In addition, other categories This action does not have federalism rule that the reduced costs resulting of affected entities do not contain small implications. It will not have substantial businesses based on the above from the de-regulatory creation of the direct effects on the States, on the description. exemption are approximately $22 relationship between the national After considering the economic million to $31 million on an annual government and the States, or on the impacts of this proposed rule on small basis (using a 3% or 7% discount rate distribution of power and entities, I certify that this action will not respectively). We have therefore responsibilities among the various have a significant economic impact on concluded that this proposed rule levels of government, as specified in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13016 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

Executive Order 13132. This proposed Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May EPA has determined that this rule is expected to affect producers, 22, 2001)) because it is not likely to proposed rule will not have suppliers, importers, and exporters and have a significant adverse effect on the disproportionately high and adverse users of methyl bromide. Thus, supply, distribution, or use of energy. human health or environmental effects Executive Order 13132 does not apply This proposed rule does not pertain to on minority or low-income populations, to this proposed rule. In the spirit of any segment of the energy production because it affects the level of Executive Order 13132, and consistent economy nor does it regulate any environmental protection equally for all with EPA policy to promote manner of energy use. Therefore, we affected populations without having any communications between EPA and State have concluded that this proposed rule disproportionately high and adverse and local governments, EPA specifically is not likely to have any adverse energy human health or environmental effects solicits comment on this proposed effects. on any population, including any action from State and local officials. I. National Technology Transfer and minority or low-income population. F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation Advancement Act Any ozone depletion that results from this proposed rule will impact all and Coordination With Indian Tribal Section 12(d) of the National Governments affected populations equally because Technology Transfer and Advancement ozone depletion is a global This action does not have tribal Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law environmental problem with implications, as specified in Executive 104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) environmental and human effects that Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, directs EPA to use voluntary consensus are, in general, equally distributed 2000). This rule does not significantly or standards in its regulatory activities across geographical regions in the uniquely affect the communities of unless to do so would be inconsistent United States. Indian tribal governments nor does it with applicable law or otherwise impose any enforceable duties on impractical. Voluntary consensus List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82 communities of Indian tribal standards are technical standards (e.g., Environmental protection, Chemicals, materials specifications, test methods, governments. Thus, Executive Order Exports, Imports, Ozone depletion. 13175 does not apply to this action. EPA sampling procedures, and business specifically solicits additional comment practices) that are developed or adopted Dated: February 14, 2014. on this proposed action from tribal by voluntary consensus standards Gina McCarthy, officials. bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide Administrator. Congress, through OMB, explanations G. Executive Order No. 13045: when the agency decides not to use For the reasons stated in the Protection of Children From available and applicable voluntary preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is proposed to Environmental Health and Safety Risks consensus standards. This proposed be amended as follows: This action is not subject to EO 13045 rulemaking does not involve technical PART 82—PROTECTION OF (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because standards. Therefore, EPA is not STRATOSPHERIC OZONE it is not economically significant as considering the use of any voluntary defined in EO 12866, and because the consensus standards. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 82 Agency does not believe the J. Executive Order 12898: Federal continues to read as follows: environmental health or safety risks Actions To Address Environmental addressed by this action present a Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671– Justice in Minority Populations and disproportionate risk to children. This 7671q. Low-Income Populations rule affects the level of environmental § 82.3 [Amended] protection equally for all affected Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR populations without having any 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal ■ 2. Amend § 82.3 by removing the disproportionately high and adverse executive policy on environmental definitions for ‘‘Critical stock allowance human health or environmental effects justice. Its main provision directs (CSA)’’, ‘‘Critical stock allowance (CSA) on any population. federal agencies, to the greatest extent holder’’ and ‘‘Unexpended critical stock practicable and permitted by law, to allowance (CSA)’’. H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That make environmental justice part of their ■ 3. Amend § 82.8 by revising the table Significantly Affect Energy Supply, mission by identifying and addressing, in paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows: Distribution, or Use as appropriate, disproportionately high This proposed rule is not a and adverse human health or § 82.8 Grant of essential use allowances and critical use allowances. ‘‘significant energy action’’ as defined in environmental effects of their programs, Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions policies, and activities on minority * * * * * Concerning Regulations That populations and low-income (c) * * * Significantly Affect Energy Supply, populations in the United States. (1) * * *

2014 Critical use 2014 Critical use 2015 Critical use 2015 Critical use allowances for allowances for allowances for allowances for Company pre-plant uses * post-harvest uses * pre-plant uses * post-harvest uses * (kilograms) (kilograms) (kilograms) (kilograms)

Great Lakes Chemical Corp. A Chemtura Company ...... 252,236 16,572 227,073 1,969 Albemarle Corp ...... 103,725 6,815 93,378 810 ICL–IP America ...... 57,321 3,766 51,602 447 TriCal, Inc ...... 1,785 117 1,607 14

Total ...... 415,067 27,270 373,660 3,240 * For production or import of Class I, Group VI controlled substance exclusively for the Pre-Plant or Post-Harvest uses specified in appendix L to this subpart for the appropriate control period.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13017

* * * * * transfer essential-use allowances for Article 5 allowances, critical use ■ 4. Amend § 82.12 by revising CFCs to a metered dose inhaler allowances (pre-plant), critical use paragraph (a) and removing paragraph company solely for the manufacture of allowances (post-harvest), and amount (e) to read as follows: essential MDIs. After January 1, 2005, of essential-use allowances and any critical use allowance holder destruction and transformation credits § 82.12 Transfers of allowances for class I (‘‘transferor’’) may transfer critical use conferred at the end of that quarter; controlled substances. allowances to any other person * * * * * (a) Inter-company transfers. (1) Until (‘‘transferee’’). (g) * * * January 1, 1996, for all class I controlled * * * * * (4) * * * substances, except for Group VI, and ■ 5. Amend § 82.13 by: (vii) The importer’s total sum of until January 1, 2005, for Group VI, any ■ a. Revising paragraphs (f)(3)(iv) and expended and unexpended person (‘‘transferor’’) may transfer to (g)(4)(vii); and consumption allowances by chemical as any other person (‘‘transferee’’) any ■ b. Removing and reserving paragraphs of the end of that quarter and the total amount of the transferor’s consumption (bb)(2)(iv) and (cc)(2)(iv) sum of expended and unexpended allowances or production allowances, The revised text reads as follows. critical use allowances (pre-plant) and and effective January 1, 1995, for all unexpended critical use allowances class I controlled substances any person § 82.13 Recordkeeping and reporting (post-harvest); (‘‘transferor’’) may transfer to any other requirements for class I controlled * * * * * person (‘‘transferee’’) any amount of the substances. ■ 6. Amend Subpart A by revising transferor’s Article 5 allowances. After * * * * * Appendix L to read as follows: January 1, 2002, any essential-use (f) * * * allowance holder (including those (3) * * * Appendix L to Subpart A of Part 82— persons that hold essential-use (iv) The producer’s total of expended Approved Critical Uses and Limiting allowances issued by a Party other than and unexpended production Critical Conditions for Those Uses for the United States) (‘‘transferor’’) may allowances, consumption allowances, the 2014 and 2015 Control Periods

Column A Column B Column C Limiting critical conditions that exist, or that the approved Approved critical Approved critical user, location of use, and control period critical user reasonably expects could arise without methyl uses bromide fumigation:

PRE-PLANT USES

Strawberry Fruit ...... California growers. Control periods 2014 and 2015 ...... Moderate to severe black root rot or crown rot. Moderate to severe yellow or purple nutsedge infestation. Moderate to severe nematode infestation. Local township limits prohibiting 1,3-dichloropropene.

POST-HARVEST USES

Food Processing ...... (a) Rice millers in the U.S. who are members of the USA Moderate to severe beetle, weevil, or moth infestation. Rice Millers Association. Control period 2014. Presence of sensitive electronic equipment subject to cor- rosion. (b) Pet food manufacturing facilities in the U.S. who are Moderate to severe beetle, moth, or cockroach infestation. members of the Pet Food Institute. Control period 2014. Presence of sensitive electronic equipment subject to cor- rosion. (c) Members of the North American Millers’ Association in Moderate to severe beetle infestation. the U.S. Control period 2014. Presence of sensitive electronic equipment subject to cor- rosion. Commodities ...... California entities storing walnuts, dried plums, figs, raisins, Rapid fumigation required to meet a critical market window, and dates (in Riverside county only) in California. Control such as during the holiday season. period 2014. Dry Cured Pork Members of the National Country Ham Association and the Red legged ham beetle infestation. Products. Association of Meat Processors, Nahunta Pork Center Cheese/ham skipper infestation. (North Carolina), and Gwaltney and Smithfield Inc. Con- Dermested beetle infestation. trol periods 2014 and 2015. Ham mite infestation.

[FR Doc. 2014–04882 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] ACTION: Proposed program letter. DATES: Comments on the proposed BILLING CODE 6560–50–P program letter are due April 7, 2014. SUMMARY: This proposed program letter serves as a companion to 45 CFR part ADDRESSES: Written comments must be 1626. The proposed program letter submitted to Stefanie K. Davis, Assistant General Counsel, Legal Services LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION should have been published in the Federal Register with the further notice Corporation, 3333 K Street NW., 45 CFR Part 1626 of proposed rulemaking (FNPRM) on Washington, DC 20007; (202) 337–6519 February 5, 2014, 79 FR 6859. LSC seeks (fax) or [email protected]. Restrictions on Legal Assistance to comments on the proposed program Electronic submissions are preferred via Aliens letter. Additional information on the email with attachments in Acrobat PDF request for comments is located in the format. Written comments sent to any AGENCY: Legal Services Corporation. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. other address or received after the end

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13018 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

of the comment period may not be program letter was intended to Act (VAWA) and other anti-abuse considered by LSC. accompany the FNPRM. The comment statutes. period for this program letter will FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Special Considerations Stefanie K. Davis, Assistant General remain open for thirty days from the Counsel, Legal Services Corporation, date of publication of the letter in the Victims of trafficking are covered by 3333 K Street NW., Washington, DC Federal Register. Because this different provisions of 45 C.F.R. 20007, (202) 295–1563 (phone), (202) document does not affect the substance § 1626.4 depending on the nature of the 337–6519 (fax), [email protected] of the FNPRM, the deadline for trafficking activity. Recipients should SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 2003, comments on the FNPRM will remain determine whether an alien is a victim LSC added a list of documents March 7, 2014. of trafficking under VAWA or section 101(a)(15)(U) of the Immigration and establishing the eligibility of aliens for Draft Program Letter [#] legal assistance from LSC funding Nationality Act, or a victim of severe recipients as an appendix to part 1626. TO: All LSC Program Directors forms of trafficking under the 68 FR 55540, Sept. 26, 2003. The FROM: James J. Sandman, President Trafficking Victims Protection Act, 22 appendix has not changed since 2003, DATE: [ ], 2014 U.S.C. § 7101 et seq. The facts of an although immigration documents and SUBJECT: Alien Eligibility under LSC alien’s situation may indicate that the forms have changed and Congress has Regulation Part 1626 alien is eligible for assistance under one authorized LSC recipients to provide LSC published a final rule revising 45 or more of these statutes. legal assistance to new categories of C.F.R. Part 1626, ‘‘Restrictions on Legal Eligibility for assistance based on eligible aliens. LSC believes that the Assistance to Aliens,’’ on [DATE]. qualifying for a U-visa or being a victim frequently changing nature of Revised Part 1626 was published of severe forms of trafficking requires immigration documents and forms without the Appendix. The information consideration of other statutory factors requires a more flexible and responsive contained in the Appendix will be in addition to the qualifying crime. See means of informing recipients of the published instead as a Program Letter 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(U); 22 U.S.C. changes than the informal rulemaking and an accompanying chart describing § 7105(b)(1)(C). Recipients must process provides. Consequently, in a the categories of aliens eligible for legal document that an alien meets all notice of proposed rulemaking assistance from LSC recipients and relevant statutory factors. containing a non-exhaustive list of published on August 21, 2013, LSC Additional Resources announced its intention to remove the examples of acceptable documentation appendix to part 1626 and publish the showing eligibility under Part 1626. If you have any questions or concerns information contained in the appendix These documents should be read regarding this Program Letter or for as a program letter. 78 FR 51696, Aug. together with Part 1626 in making further guidance, please contact LSC 21, 2013. Because the initial revision of eligibility determinations. General Counsel Ronald S. Flagg. the appendix and reclassification as a Additional information regarding the Documentation program letter is a change to the documentation contained in the chart regulation, it is being done pursuant to The documents identified as can be found at the U.S. Customs and the LSC rulemaking protocol. As such, acceptable to establish eligibility fall Immigration Service Web site (http:// LSC is publishing the program letter in into one of two categories: 1) documents www.uscis.gov) and at the Anti- the Federal Register for public regarding the immigration status of an Trafficking in Persons Division of the comment. alien; or 2) documents providing Office of Refugee Resettlement within LSC published a FNPRM on February evidence that the alien has experienced the Department of Health and Human 5, 2014 proposing requesting comment qualifying abuse or otherwise meets the Services Web site (http:// on additional revisions to part 1626. 79 requirements of 45 C.F.R. § 1626.4 www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/orr/ FR 6859, Feb. 5, 2014. The proposed regarding the Violence Against Women programs/anti-trafficking).

ALIEN ELIGIBILITY FOR REPRESENTATION BY LSC-FUNDED PROGRAMS

Regulatory authorization Alien category Statutory authorization of eligibility in 45 CFR part Verification documents 1626

Lawful Permanent Resi- 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20) ...... § 1626.5(a) ...... (1) Alien Registration Receipt Card: Form I–551 or dent. Form I–151; or (2) Memorandum of Creation of Record of Lawful Permanent. Residence: Form I–181 with approval stamp; or (3) Passport bearing immigrant visa or stamp indicating admission for lawful permanent residence; or (4) Order granting residency or adjustment of status; or (5) Permit to Reenter the United States: Form I–327; or (6) Arrival/Departure Record: CBP Form I–94 with stamp indicating admission for lawful permanent residence; or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13019

ALIEN ELIGIBILITY FOR REPRESENTATION BY LSC-FUNDED PROGRAMS—Continued

Regulatory authorization Alien category Statutory authorization of eligibility in 45 CFR part Verification documents 1626

(7) Any verification of lawful permanent residence in the U.S. to include any one of the following: authoritative document from the United States Immi- gration and Naturalization Service (INS);1 or the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including online or email verification. Spouse of a U.S. citizen, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(b)(3), 1255, § 1626.5(b) ...... (1) Proof of filing of a qualifying application for ad- or a parent of a U.S. cit- 1255a, 1259. justment of status to permanent residency, which izen, or an unmarried may include one or more of the following: a fee re- child under 21 of U.S. ceipt or an online or email printout showing that citizen; and who has the application was filed with the INS prior to filed an application for 2003, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service adjustment of status to (USCIS), the Department of Homeland Security lawful permanent resi- (DHS), or the immigration court; or a filing stamp dent. showing that the application was filed; or a grant of a fee waiver for such application, a biometrics appointment notice indicating such pending application, a printout from the USCIS online service, or a copy of the application accompanied by a no- tarized statement signed by the alien that such form was filed; and (2) Proof of relationship to U.S. citizen, which may include one or more of the following: a copy of the person’s marriage certificate accompanied by proof of the spouse’s U.S. citizenship; or a copy of the birth certificate, baptismal certificate, adoption decree, or other document demonstrating the individual is under the age of 21, accompanied by proof that the individual’s parent is a U.S. citizen; or a copy of Petition for Alien Relative: Form I– 130, or Petition for American, Widow(er) or Spe- cial Immigrant: Form I–360 containing information demonstrating the individual is related to such U.S. citizen, accompanied by proof of filing. Asylee ...... 8 U.S.C. § 1158 ...... § 1626.5(c) ...... (1) Arrival/Departure Record: Form I–94 or passport stamped ‘‘asylee’’ or ‘‘§ 208’’; or (2) Order granting asylum from INS 2, DHS, immigration judge, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), or federal court; or (3) Refugee Travel Document: Form I–571; or (4) Employment Authorization Card: Form I–688B 3 or Employment Authorization Document: Form I– 766 coded ‘‘8 CFR § 274a.12(a)(5)(asylee)’’ or ‘‘A5’’; or (5) Any verification of lawful presence in the U.S. or other authoritative document from INS or DHS, including online or email verification. Refugee ...... 8 U.S.C. § 1157 ...... § 1626.5(c) ...... (1) Arrival/Departure Record: Form I–94 or passport stamped ‘‘refugee’’ or ‘‘§ 207’’; or (2) Employment Authorization Card: Form I–688B 4 or Employment Authorization Document: Form I– 766 coded ‘‘8 CFR § 274a.12(a)(3)(refugee)’’ or ‘‘A3’’ or ‘‘8 CFR § 274a.12(a)(4) (paroled refugee)’’ or ‘‘A4’’; or (3) Refugee Travel Document: Form I–571; or (4) Any verification of lawful presence in the U.S. or other authoritative document from INS or DHS, including online or email verification.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13020 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

ALIEN ELIGIBILITY FOR REPRESENTATION BY LSC-FUNDED PROGRAMS—Continued

Regulatory authorization Alien category Statutory authorization of eligibility in 45 CFR part Verification documents 1626

Individual Granted With- 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3) (with- § 1626.5(e) ...... (1) Arrival/Departure Record: Form I–94 stamped holding of Deportation, holding of removal); former ‘‘§ 243(h)’’ or ‘‘§ 241(b)(3)’’; or Exclusion, or Removal. INA section 243(h) (with- (2) Order granting withholding of deportation/deferral holding of deportation or ex- of removal from DHS, U.S. Immigration and Cus- clusion). toms Enforcement (ICE), immigration court, BIA, or federal court; or (3) Temporary Resident Card: Form I–688 5 or Em- ployment Authorization Document: Form I–766 coded ‘‘8 CFR § 274a.12(a)(10) (withholding of deportation)’’ or ‘‘A10’’; or (4) Any verification of lawful presence in the U.S. or other authoritative document from INS or DHS, including online email verification. Conditional Entrant ...... 8 U.S.C. 1153(a)(7) 6 ...... § 1626.5(d) ...... (1) Arrival/Departure Record: Form I–94 or passport stamped ‘‘conditional entrant’’; or (2) Any verification of lawful presence in the U.S. or other authoritative document from INS or DHS, including online or email verification. Special Agricultural Work- 8 U.S.C. 1160 ...... § 1626.10(d) ...... (1) Temporary Resident Card: Form I–688 7, I–688A, er Temporary Resident. Employment Authorization Card: Form I–688B 8, or Employment Authorization Document: Form I–766 indicating issuance under INA § 210 (or under 8 C.F.R. § 274a.12(a)(2) or coded ‘‘A2,’’ with other evidence indicating eligibility under INA § 210); or (2) Any verification of lawful presence in the U.S. or other authoritative document from INS or DHS, including online or email verification. H–2A Temporary Agricul- 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H) ...... § 1626.11(a) ...... (1) Arrival/Departure Record: Form I–94 or passport tural Worker. stamped ‘‘H–2A’’; or (2) Any verification of lawful presence in the U.S. or other authoritative document from INS or DHS, including online or email verification. H–2B Temporary Non-Ag- 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H) ...... § 1626.11(b) ...... (1) Arrival/Departure Record: Form I–94 or passport ricultural Worker. stamped ‘‘H–2B’’ and evidence that the worker is employed in forestry; or (2) Any verification of lawful presence in the U.S. or other authoritative document from INS or DHS, including online or email verification. Aliens subjected to bat- Pub. L. 104–208, Div. A, Tit. V, § 1626.4(c)(1), (c)(2) ...... (1) A decision or other authoritative document from tery, extreme cruelty, § 502(a)(2)(C), 110 Stat. INS, DHS, USCIS, immigration judge, BIA, federal sexual assault, or traf- 2009, 3009–60; Pub. L. 109– or state court finding or verifying that a person has ficking. 162, § 164, 119 Stat. 2960, been a victim of the qualifying abuse; or 2978.. (2) An affidavit or unsworn written statement made by the alien; a written summary of a statement or interview of the alien taken by others, including the recipient; a report or affidavit from police, judges, and other court officials, medical personnel, school officials, clergy, social workers, other social service agency personnel; an order of protection or other legal evidence of steps taken to end the qualifying abuse; evidence that a person sought safe haven in a shelter or similar refuge from the qualifying abuse; photographs; documents or other evidence of a series of acts that establish a pattern of qualifying abuse; or (3) An application for administrative or judicial relief including an assertion that the applicant has been a victim of the qualifying abuse, but only if such application is accompanied or supplemented by any of the evidence described in the preceding paragraph (2).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13021

ALIEN ELIGIBILITY FOR REPRESENTATION BY LSC-FUNDED PROGRAMS—Continued

Regulatory authorization Alien category Statutory authorization of eligibility in 45 CFR part Verification documents 1626

Victims of severe forms of 22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(1)(B) ...... § 1626.4(c)(3) ...... (1) An affidavit or unsworn written statement made trafficking. by the alien; a written summary of a statement or interview of the alien taken by others, including the recipient; a report or affidavit from police, judges, and other court officials, medical personnel, school officials, clergy, social workers, other social service agency personnel; an order of protection or other legal evidence of steps taken to end the severe forms of trafficking; evidence that a person sought safe haven in a shelter or similar refuge from the severe forms of trafficking; photographs; documents or other evidence of a series of acts that establish a pattern of severe forms of trafficking; or (2) An application for administrative or judicial relief including an assertion that the applicant has been a victim of severe forms of trafficking, but only if such application is accompanied or supplemented by any of the evidence described in the preceding paragraph (1); or (3) Certification letter from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); or (4) Telephonic verification of certification by calling the HHS trafficking verification line, (202) 401– 5510, or (866) 401–5510. Minor victims of severe 22 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(1)(B) ...... § 1626.4(c)(3) ...... (1) Eligibility letter from HHS; or forms of trafficking. (2) Interim Eligibility Letter from HHS; or (3) An affidavit or unsworn written statement made by the alien; a written summary of a statement or interview of the alien taken by others, including the recipient; a report or affidavit from police, judges, and other court officials, medical personnel, school officials, clergy, social workers, other social service agency personnel; an order of protection or other legal evidence of steps taken to end severe forms of trafficking; evidence that the alien sought safe haven in a shelter or similar refuge from severe forms of trafficking; photographs; documents or other evidence of a series of acts that establish a pattern of severe forms of trafficking; or Certain family members of 22 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(1)(B) ...... § 1626.4(c)(3) ...... (1) Application for Immediate Family Member of T–1 victims of severe forms Recipient: Form I–914, Supplement A; or of trafficking (‘‘derivative (2) Notice of Action: Form I–797, visa, Arrival/Depar- T-visa holders’’). ture Form: Form I–94, or passport stamped T–2, T–3, T–4, or T–5, or T–6; or (3) Employment Authorization Card: Form I–688B or Employment Authorization Document: Form I–766 coded ‘‘(c)(25)’’; or (4) Documentary evidence showing that the primary applicant for immigration relief is a victim of severe forms of trafficking as described above; and credible evidence showing that the alien is a qualified family member of the primary applicant. Aliens qualified for a U- Pub. L. 109–162, § 164, 119 § 1626.4(c)(4) ...... (1) Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status: Form I–918; visa. Stat. 2960, 2978; 8 U.S.C. or § 1101(a)(15)(U). (2) Petition for Immediate Family Member of U–1 Recipient: Form I–918, Supplement A; or (3) Notice of Action: Form I–797, visa, Arrival/Depar- ture Record: Form I–94, or passport stamped U–1, U–2, U–3, U–4, or U–5; or (4) Employment Authorization Card: Form I–688B or Employment Authorization Document: Form I–766 coded ‘‘(a)(19)’’ (principal) or ‘‘(a)(20)’’ (derivative); or (5) A decision or other authoritative document from INS, DHS, USCIS, immigration judge, BIA, federal or state court finding or verifying that a person qualifies for a U-visa; or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13022 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

ALIEN ELIGIBILITY FOR REPRESENTATION BY LSC-FUNDED PROGRAMS—Continued

Regulatory authorization Alien category Statutory authorization of eligibility in 45 CFR part Verification documents 1626

(6) An affidavit or unsworn written statement made by the alien; a written summary of a statement or interview of the alien taken by others, including the recipient; a report or affidavit from police, judges, and other court officials, medical personnel, school officials, clergy, social workers, other social service agency personnel; an order of protection or other legal evidence of steps taken to end the qualifying abuse; evidence that the alien sought safe haven in a shelter or similar refuge from the qualifying abuse; photographs; documents or other evidence of a series of acts that establish a pattern of qualifying abuse; or (7) An application for administrative or judicial relief including an assertion that the applicant qualifies for a U-visa, but only if such application is accompanied or supplemented by any of the evidence described in the preceding paragraph (6); or (8) Documentary evidence showing that the primary applicant for immigration relief qualifies for a U- visa as described above; and credible evidence showing that the alien is a qualified family member of the primary applicant. 1 For any immigration status document obtained prior to March 1, 2003. 2 Supra note 1. 3 Dated before April 3, 2009. 4 Supra note 3. 5 Supra note 3. 6 As in effect prior to April 1, 1980. 7 Infra note 3. 8 Infra note 3.

Dated: March 4, 2014. launches from San Nicolas Island (SNI) Confidential Business Information or Stefanie K. Davis, from June 2014 through June 2019. otherwise sensitive or protected Assistant General Counsel. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal information. [FR Doc. 2014–05008 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is NMFS will accept anonymous BILLING CODE 7050–01–P requesting comments on its proposal to comments (enter N/A in the required issue regulations and subsequent Letters fields if you wish to remain of Authorization (LOAs) to the Navy to anonymous). Attachments to electronic DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE incidentally harass marine mammals. comments will be accepted in Microsoft DATES: Comments and information must Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe National Oceanic and Atmospheric be received no later than April 21, 2014. PDF file formats only. Administration ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, An electronic copy of the Navy’s identified by 0648–BD80, by either of application may be obtained by writing 50 CFR Part 217 the following methods: to the address specified above, • telephoning the contact listed below [Docket No. 131120978–4146–01] Electronic submissions: submit all electronic public comments via the (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), RIN 0648–BD80 Federal eRulemaking Portal (http:// or visiting the Internet at: http:// www.regulations.gov) www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to • Hand delivery or mailing of paper, incidental.htm#applications. Specified Activities; U.S. Navy Missile disk, or CD–ROM comments should be Documents cited in this notice may also Launches From San Nicolas Island, addressed to Jolie Harrison, Incidental be viewed, by appointment, during California Take Program Supervisor, Permits and regular business hours, at the aforementioned address. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Conservation Division, Office of Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Protected Resources, National Marine FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Michelle Magliocca, Office of Protected Commerce. Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. ACTION: Proposed rule, request for Instructions: All comments received SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: comments and information. are part of the public record and will generally be posted to http:// Background SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request www.regulations.gov without change. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the from the U.S. Navy (Navy), Naval Air All Personal Identifying Information MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct Warfare Center Weapons Division (e.g., name, address, etc.) voluntarily the Secretary of Commerce to allow, (NAWCWD) for authorization to take submitted by the commenter may be upon request, the incidental, but not marine mammals incidental to missile publicly accessible. Do not submit intentional, taking of small numbers of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13023

marine mammals by U.S. citizens who The Navy is currently operating under located about 105 kilometers (km) engage in a specified activity (other than an authorization to take marine southwest of Point Mugu. Missile commercial fishing) within a specified mammals incidental to missile launches launches would occur from the western geographical region if certain findings from SNI, which expires June 2, 2014 part of SNI (see Figure 2 in the Navy’s are made and either regulations are (74 FR 26587). LOA application). The missiles fly issued or, if the taking is limited to generally westward through the Point harassment, a notice of a proposed Description of the Specified Activity Mugu Sea Range. The primary launch authorization is provided to the public Overview locations are the Alpha Launch for review. Complex, which is located on the west- The Navy plans to continue a launch Authorization for incidental takings central part of SNI, and Building 807 program for missiles and targets from shall be granted if NMFS finds that the Launch Complex, which is located at several launch sites on SNI. Missiles taking will have a negligible impact on the western end of SNI. Other launch vary from tactical and developmental the species or stock(s), will not have an pads are located nearby. unmitigable adverse impact on the weapons to target missiles used to test availability of the species or stock(s) for defensive strategies and other weapons Detailed Description of Activities subsistence uses (where relevant), and if systems. Some launch events involve a Missiles included in the Navy’s the permissible methods of taking and single missile, while others involve the request range from relatively small and requirements pertaining to the launch of multiple missiles either in quieter missiles like the Rolling mitigation, monitoring, and reporting of quick succession or at intervals of a few Airframe Missile to larger and louder such takings are set forth. NMFS has hours. Up to 200 missiles may be missiles like the Terrier Black-Brant. defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR launched over the 5-year period, but the While other missiles may be launched 216.103 as ‘‘an impact resulting from number and type of launch varies in the future, the largest missile the specified activity that cannot be depending on operational needs. analyzed here is 23,000 kilograms (kg). reasonably expected to, and is not The purpose of these launches is to The following is a description of the reasonably likely to, adversely affect the support testing and training activities types of missiles that may be launched species or stock through effects on associated with operations on the at SNI during the 5-year period. annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’ NAWCWD Point Mugu Sea Range. The Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM)—The The National Defense Authorization Sea Range is used by the U.S. and allied Navy/Raytheon RAM is a supersonic, Act of 2004 (NDAA) (Pub. L. 108–136) military services to test and evaluate lightweight, quick-reaction missile. This removed the ‘‘small numbers’’ and sea, land, and air weapon systems; to relatively small missile uses the infrared ‘‘specified geographical region’’ provide realistic training opportunities; seeker of the Stinger missile and the limitations indicated above and and to maintain operational readiness of warhead, rocket motor, and fuse from amended the definition of ‘‘harassment’’ these forces. Some of the launches are the Sidewinder missile. It has a high- as it applies to a ‘‘military readiness used for practicing defensive drills tech radio-to-infrared frequency guiding activity’’ to read as follows (Section against the types of weapons simulated system. The RAM is a solid-propellant 3(18)(B) of the MMPA): (i) Any act that by these missiles and some launches are rocket 12.7 centimeters (cm) in diameter injures or has the significant potential to conducted for the related purpose of and 2.8 m long. Its launch weight is 73.5 injure a marine mammal or marine testing new types of targets. kg, and operational versions have warheads that weigh 11.4 kg. mammal stock in the wild [Level A Dates and Duration Harassment]; or (ii) Any act that At SNI, RAMs are launched from the disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine Launches of this type have been Building 807 Launch Complex, near the mammal or marine mammal stock in the occurring at SNI for many years and are shoreline. Previous RAM launches have wild by causing disruption of natural expected to continue indefinitely into resulted in flat-weighted sound pressure behavioral patterns, to a point where the future. The Navy has requested a 5- levels up to 126 decibels (dB) near the such behavioral patterns are abandoned year Letter of Authorization for missile launcher and 99 dB at a nearshore site or significantly altered [Level B launches taking place between June located 1.6 km from the three- Harassment]. 2014 and June 2019. The timing of these dimensional closest point of approach. launches is variable and subject to Flat-weighted sound exposure level Summary of Request testing and training requirements and ranged from 84 to 97 dB reference 20 On July 24, 2013, NMFS received an meteorological and logistical micropascals (20 mPa), and M-weighted application from the Navy for the taking limitations. To meet the Navy’s sound exposure levels for pinnipeds in of marine mammals incidental to operational testing and training air ranged from 76 to 96 dB reference 20 missile launches from San Nicolas requirements, launches may be required micropascals squared per second (20 Island (SNI). NMFS determined that the at any time of year and any time of day. mPa2s). Peak pressure ranged from 104 application was adequate and complete Up to 200 missiles (40 missiles per year) to 117 dB re 20 mPa. The reference on November 18, 2013. may be launched over the 5-year period sound pressure (20 mPa) used here and The Navy proposes to continue a and the Navy is proposing that up to 10 throughout the document is standard for launch program for missiles and targets launches per year may occur at night. airborne sounds. from several launch sites on SNI. The Given the launch acceleration and flight GQM–163A ‘‘Coyote’’—The Coyote, proposed activity would occur between speed of the missiles, most launch designated GQM–163A, is an June 2014 and June 2019 and may events are of extremely short duration. expendable SSST powered by a ducted- involve up to 40 launches per year. Strong launch sounds are typically rocket ramjet. It has replaced the Take, by Level B Harassment only, of detectable near the surrounding beaches Vandal, which was used as the primary individuals of northern elephant seal for no more than a few seconds per missile during launches from 2001 to (Mirounga angustirostris), Pacific harbor launch (Holst et al., 2005a, 2008, 2011). 2005, and is similar in size and seal (Phoca vitulina), and California sea performance. The Coyote is capable of lion (Zalophus californianus) is Specified Geographic Region flying at low altitudes (4 m cruise anticipated to result from the specified SNI is one of the eight Channel altitude) and supersonic speeds (Mach activity. Islands in the Southern California Bight, 2.5) over a flight range of 83 km. This

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13024 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

missile is designed to provide a ground at an altitude of 3 km, and Black Brant stage for the SM–3 missile, containing a launched aerial target system to burnout occurs after 44.5 seconds at an dual pulse rocket motor for the early simulate a supersonic, sea-skimming altitude of 37.7 km. The Lynx is 36 cm exo-atmospheric phase of flight. Testing Anti-Ship Cruise missile threat. The in diameter and 279 cm long. This of SM–3 missiles may begin during this SSST assembly consists of two primary missile reaches an altitude of 84 km and proposed authorization period and subsystems: Mk 70 solid propellant has a range of 99 km. Lynx burnout launch sounds are expected to be within booster and the GQM–163A target occurs after 58.5 seconds at 43.5 km. the range of existing missiles. missile. The solid-rocket booster is The Improved Orion motor is 36 cm in Other Missile Launches—The Navy about 46 centimeters (cm) in diameter diameter and 280 cm long. On SNI, this may also launch other missiles to and is of the type used to launch the class of missile target is typically simulate various types of threat missiles Navy’s ‘‘Standard’’ surface-to-air launched vertically or near-vertically and aircraft, and to test other systems. missile. The GQM–163A target missile from the Building 807 Launch Complex. For example, in 2002, a Tactical is 5.5 m long and 36 cm in diameter, Since these missiles use the same Tomahawk was launched from Building exclusive of its air intakes. It consists of Terrier MK 70 booster as the Coyote, 807 Launch Complex. The Tomahawk a solid fuel Ducted Rocket (DR) ramjet launch sound levels are generally produced a flat-weighted sound subsystem, Control and Fairing similar to those from the Coyote. Given pressure level of 93 dB re 20 mPa, a flat- Subassemblies, and the Front End the near-vertical launch elevation, weighted sound exposure level of 107 Subsystem, which includes an explosive sounds in the immediate vicinity may dB re 20 mPa2s, and an M-weighted destruct system to terminate flight if be prolonged, though the missile sound exposure level of 105 dB re 20 required. reaches high altitude very quickly after mPa2s at a distance of 539 m from the The Coyote uses the Vandal launcher, launch. closest point of approach. The peak currently installed at the Alpha Launch A Terrier-Orion produced a flat- pressure was 111 dB 20 mPa. A Falcon Complex on SNI. Previous Coyote weighted sound pressure level of 91 dB was launched from the Alpha Launch launches produced flat-weighted sound re 20 mPa, a flat-weighted sound Complex in 2006, producing a flat- 2 pressure levels ranging from 126 to 134 exposure level of 96 dB 20 mPa s, and weighted sound pressure level of 84 dB 2 dB re mPa s at distances of 0.8 to 1.7 km an M-weighted sound exposure level of m 2 re 20 Pa, a flat-weighted sound from the closest point of approach of the 92 dB re 20 mPa s at a distance of 2.4 exposure level of 88 dB 20 mPa2s, and vehicle, and 82 to 93 dB at distances of km from the closest point of approach. an M-weighted sound exposure level of 2.4 to 3.2 km. Flat-weighted sound The peak pressure was 104 dB 20 mPa. 82 dB re 20 mPa2s at a beach located exposure levels ranged from 87 to 119 During previous Terrier-Black Brant north of the launch azimuth. Near the m 2 dB re 20 Pa s. M-weighted sound launches, the flat-weighted sound launcher, the flat-weighted sound exposure levels ranged from 60 to 114 pressure level ranged from 102.7 to 115 pressure level was 128 dB re 20 mPa, the dB re20 mPa2s, and peak pressures dB, and M-weighted sound exposure flat-weighted sound exposure level was ranged from 100 to 144 dB 20 mPa. level ranged from 106.5 to 118.4 dB at 126 dB 20 mPa2s, and the M-weighted Multi-stage Sea Skimming Target pinniped haul-out sites located at 0.6 to sound exposure level was 125 dB re 20 (MSST)—The MSST is a subsonic cruise 1.3 km from the closest point of mPa2s. missile with a supersonic terminal stage approach. Sounds near the launcher that approaches its target at low-level at reached 134 dB flat-weighted sound Missiles of the BQM–34 or BQM–74 Mach 2.8. The MSST is expected to pressure level and 132.3 dB 20 mPa2s M- type could also be launched. These are replace the Coyote as the primary target weighted sound exposure level. During small, unmanned aircraft that are missile launched from SNI in the future. previous Terrier-Lynx launches, flat- launched using jet-assisted take-off It consists of a subsonic winged ‘‘cruise weighted sound pressure level rocket bottles and then continue bus,’’ which releases a supersonic measured 85.9 to 114.4 dB re 20 mPa at offshore powered by small turbojet ‘‘sprint vehicle’’ for terminal approach. sites located 0.6 to 5.1 km from the engines. The larger of these, the BQM– The sprint vehicle is based on the closest point of approach of the 34, is 7 m long and has a mass of 1,134 Coyote target missile. launched vehicle and M-weighted kg plus the jet-assisted take-off rocket The MSST is launched from the sound exposure levels ranged from 90.5 bottle. The smaller BQM–74 is up to 420 Alpha Launch Complex on SNI. to 118 dB re 20 mPa. cm long and has a mass of 250 kg plus Previous MSST launches had flat- RIM–161 Standard Missile 3 (SM–3)— the solid propellant jet-assisted take-off weighted sound pressure levels of 78.7 The SM–3 is a ship-based missile rocket bottles. Burgess and Greene to 96.6 dB re 20 mPa and M-weighted system used to intercept short- to (1998) reported that A-weighted sound sound exposure levels of 62.3 to 83.3 re intermediate-range ballistic missiles as a pressure levels ranged from 92 dBA re 20 mPa2s at sites 1.3 to 2.7 km from the part of Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense 20 mPa at a closest point of approach closest point of approach. System. Although primarily designed as distance of 370 m, to 145 dB at 15 m for Terrier (Black Brant, Lynx, Orion)— an anti-ballistic missile defensive a launch in 1997. If launches of other The Terrier class missiles consist of the weapon, the SM–3 has also been missile types occur, they would be Terrier Mark 70 booster with a variety employed in an anti-satellite capacity included within the total of 40 launches of second stage rockets (e.g., Terrier- against a satellite at the lower end of anticipated per year. Black Brant). The solid-rocket booster is low Earth orbit. The SM–3 evolved from General Launch Operations—Aircraft about 46 cm in diameter, 394 cm long, the proven SM–2 Block IV design. The and helicopter flights between the Point and weighs 1,038 kg. The three most SM–3 uses the same booster and dual Mugu airfield on the mainland, the likely Terrier class missiles that would thrust rocket motor as the Block IV airfield on SNI, and the target sites in be launched include the Terrier-Black missile for the first and second stages the Sea Range are a routine part of a Brant, Terrier-Lynx, and Terrier-Orion. and the same steering control section planned launch operation. These flights The Black Brant has a diameter of 44 and midcourse missile guidance for generally do not pass at low level over cm, is 533 cm long, and weighs 1,265 maneuvering in the atmosphere. To the beaches where pinnipeds are kg. This missile reaches an altitude of support the extended range of an exo- expected to be hauled out. Therefore, 203 km and has a range of 264 km. atmospheric intercept, additional these flights are not further considered Terrier burnout occurs after 6.2 seconds missile thrust is provided in a new third in this document.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13025

Movements of personnel are restricted Description of Marine Mammals in the the MMPA; and the eastern distinct near the launch sites at least several Area of the Specified Activity population segment of Steller sea lion hours prior to a launch for safety was delisted from the ESA in 2013. The reasons. No personnel are allowed on There are seven species of marine northern fur seal, Guadalupe fur seal, the western end of SNI during launches. mammals with possible or confirmed and Steller sea lion are considered rare Movements of personnel or missiles occurrence in the area of the specified at SNI and takes of these species have near the island’s beaches are also activity: Northern elephant seals, harbor not been observed under the Navy’s seals, California sea lion, northern fur restricted at other times of the year for current MMPA authorization. Therefore, seals (Callorhinus ursinus), Guadalupe purposes of environmental protection these three species will not be fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi), and preservation of cultural resource considered further. The southern sea Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), sites. Launch monitoring equipment otter is managed by the U.S. Fish and and southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris would be deployed and activated prior Wildlife Service and is also not nereis). The northern fur seal is considered further in this proposed rule to the launches. considered depleted under the MMPA; notice. Table 1 includes species-specific the Guadalupe fur seal is listed as information on the three species likely threatened under the Endangered to occur in the area of the specified Species Act (ESA) and depleted under activity.

TABLE 1—SPECIES INFORMATION ON THE MARINE MAMMALS LIKELY TO OCCUR IN THE AREA OF THE SPECIFIED ACTIVITY

Common name Scientific name Status Occurrence Seasonality Range Abundance

Northern elephant sea .... Mirounga angustirostris ...... Common ...... Year-round ... Mexico to Alaska ...... 124,000 Harbor seal ...... Phoca vitulina ...... Common ...... Year-round ... Baja California to Aleu- 30,196 tian Islands. California sea lion ...... Zalophus californianus ...... Common ...... Year-round ... Mexico to Canada ...... 296,750

Further information on the biology ‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental (2) The noise may be audible but not and local distribution of these species Harassment’’ section, the ‘‘Proposed strong enough to elicit any overt can be found in the Navy’s application Mitigation’’ section, and the behavioral response; (see ADDRESSES), and the NMFS Marine ‘‘Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal (3) The noise may elicit reactions of Mammal Stock Assessment Reports, Habitat’’ section to draw conclusions variable conspicuousness and variable which are available online at: http:// regarding the likely impacts of this relevance to the well-being of the www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/. activity on the reproductive success or marine mammal; these can range from survivorship of individuals and from temporary alert responses to active Potential Effects of the Specified that on the affected marine mammal avoidance reactions, such as stampedes Activity on Marine Mammals populations or stocks. into the sea from terrestrial haul-out This section includes a summary and Potential effects of the specified sites; discussion of the ways that the types of activity on marine mammals involve (4) Upon repeated exposure, a marine stressors associated with the specified both acoustic and non-acoustic effects. mammal may exhibit diminishing activity (e.g., missile launch noise) have Acoustic effects are related to sound responsiveness (habituation), or been observed to impact marine produced by the engines of all launch disturbance effects may persist; the mammals. This discussion may also vehicles, and, in some cases, their latter is most likely with sounds that are include reactions that we consider to booster rockets. Potential non-acoustic highly variable in characteristics, rise to the level of a take and those that effects could result from the physical infrequent and unpredictable in we do not consider to rise to the level presence of personnel during placement occurrence (as are vehicle launches), of a take (for example, with acoustics, of video and acoustical monitoring and associated with situations that a we may include a discussion of studies equipment. However, careful marine mammal perceives as a threat; that showed animals not reacting at all deployment of monitoring equipment is (5) Any anthropogenic noise that is to sound or exhibiting barely not expected to result in any strong enough to be heard has the measurable avoidance). This section is disturbance to pinnipeds hauled out potential to reduce (mask) the ability of intended as a background of potential nearby. Any visual disturbance caused a marine mammal to hear natural effects and does not consider either the by passage of a vehicle overhead is sounds at similar frequencies, including specific manner in which this activity likely to be minor and brief as the calls from conspecifics, and underwater will be carried out or the mitigation that launch vehicles are relatively small and environmental sounds such as surf will be implemented, and how either of move at great speed. noise; those will shape the anticipated impacts (6) If marine mammals remain in an from this specific activity. The Acoustic Impacts area because it is important for feeding, ‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental breeding, or some other biologically Harassment’’ section later in this The effects of noise on marine important purpose even though there is document will include a quantitative mammals are highly variable, and can chronic exposure to noise, it is possible analysis of the number of individuals be categorized as follows (based on that there could be noise-induced that are expected to be taken by this Richardson et al., 1995): physiological stress; this might in turn activity. The ‘‘Negligible Impact (1) The noise may be too weak to be have negative effects on the well-being Analysis’’ section will include the heard at the location of the animal (i.e., or reproduction of the animals involved; analysis of how this specific activity lower than the prevailing ambient noise and will impact marine mammals and will level, the hearing threshold of the (7) Very strong sounds have the consider the content of this section, the animal at relevant frequencies, or both); potential to cause temporary or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13026 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

permanent reduction in hearing Behavioral Reactions of Pinnipeds to from 2011 through 2012. In particular, sensitivity. In terrestrial mammals, and Missile Launches northern elephant seals seem very presumably marine mammals, received Acoustic impacts of the specified tolerant of acoustic disturbances sound levels must far exceed the activity could result from sound (Stewart 1981; Holst et al., 2008) and animal’s hearing threshold for there to produced by the engines of all launch were removed from the list of target be any temporary threshold shift (TTS) vehicles, and, in some cases, their species for monitoring on SNI in 2010. in its hearing ability. For transient booster rockets. Noises with sudden In contrast, harbor seals are more easily sounds, the sound level necessary to onset or high amplitude relative to the disturbed. Based on SNI launch cause TTS is inversely related to the ambient noise level may elicit a monitoring results from 2001 to 2007, duration of the sound. Received sound behavioral response from pinnipeds most pinnipeds—especially northern levels must be even higher for there to resting on shore. Some pinnipeds elephant seals—would be expected to be risk of permanent hearing tolerate high sound levels without exhibit no more than short-term alter or startle responses (Holst et al., 2005, impairment. reacting strongly, whereas others may When considering the influence of 2008, 2011). Any localized react strongly when sound levels are various kinds of sound on the marine displacement would be of short lower. Published papers and available environment, it is necessary to duration, although some harbor seals technical reports describing behavioral understand that different kinds of may leave their haul-out site until the responses of pinnipeds to the types of marine life are sensitive to different following low tide. However, Holst and sound recorded near haul-out sites on frequencies of sound. Based on available Lawson (2002) noted that numbers SNI indicate that there is much behavioral data, audiograms have been occupying haul-out sites on the next day variability in the responses. Responses derived using auditory evoked were similar to pre-launch numbers. potentials, anatomical modeling, and can range from momentary startle The most common type of reaction to other data, Southall et al. (2007) reactions to animals fleeing into the missile launches at SNI is expected to designate ‘‘functional hearing groups’’ water or otherwise away from their be a momentary ‘‘alert’’ response. When for marine mammals and estimate the resting sites in what has been termed a the animals hear or otherwise detect the lower and upper frequencies of stampede. Studies of pinnipeds during launch, they are likely to become alert, functional hearing of the groups. The missile launch events have and (at least momentarily) to interrupt functional groups and the associated demonstrated that different pinniped prior activities in order to pay attention frequencies are indicated below (though species, and even different individuals to the launch. Animals that are well to animals are less sensitive to sounds at in the same haul-out group, can exhibit the side of the launch trajectory are the outer edge of their functional range a range of responses from alert to likely to not show any additional and most sensitive to sounds of stampede. It is this variation that makes reaction. Animals that are closer to the frequencies within a smaller range setting reaction criteria difficult. An trajectory may show a momentary alert somewhere in the middle of their acoustic stimulus with sudden onset response, or they may react more functional hearing range): (such as a sonic boom) may be strongly. Previous observations indicate • Low-frequency cetaceans (13 analogous to a looming visual stimulus that elephant seals, in particular, will species of mysticetes): functional (Hayes and Saif, 1967), which can be rarely if ever show more than a hearing is estimated to occur between especially effective in eliciting flight or momentary alert reaction (Stewart, approximately 7 Hz and 22 kHz other responses (Berrens et al., 1988). 1981; Stewart et al., 1994; Holst et al., (however, a study by Au et al. (2006) of Missile launches are unlike many other 2005, 2008)—even when exposed to humpback whale songs indicate that the forms of disturbance because of their noise levels or types that caused nearby range may extend to at least 24 kHz); sudden sound onsets, high peak levels harbor seals and California sea lions to • Mid-frequency cetaceans (32 in some cases, and short durations flee. species of dolphins, six species of larger (Cummings, 1993). Video recordings of pinnipeds around toothed whales, and 19 species of Previous to the start of monitoring the periphery of western SNI during beaked and bottlenose whales): work at SNI under an Incidental launches on SNI in 2001–2012 have functional hearing is estimated to occur Harassment Authorization issued in shown that some pinnipeds react to a between approximately 150 Hz and 160 2001, most existing data on reactions of nearby launch by moving into the water kHz; hauled-out pinnipeds to sonic booms or or along the shoreline (Holst et al., 2005, • High-frequency cetaceans (eight launch noise involved far larger launch 2008, 2010, 2011; Ugoretz and Greene, species of true porpoises, six species of missiles than the Coyotes and other 2012). Pinniped behavioral responses to river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana, missiles that would be launched from launch sounds were usually brief and of and four species of cephalorhynchids): SNI. In most cases, where the species of low magnitude, especially for northern functional hearing is estimated to occur pinnipeds occurring in the Sea Range elephant seals. California sea lions between approximately 200 Hz and 180 have been exposed to the sounds of (especially the young animals) exhibited kHz; and large missile launches (such as the Titan more reaction than elephant seals, and • Pinnipeds in water: functional IV from Vandenberg Air Force Base), harbor seals were the most responsive of hearing is estimated to occur between animals did not flush into the sea unless the three species. approximately 75 Hz and 75 kHz, with the sound level to which they were Northern elephant seals exhibited the greatest sensitivity between exposed was relatively high. The little reaction to launch sounds (Holst et approximately 700 Hz and 20 kHz. reactions of harbor seals to even these al., 2005, 2008, 2010, 2011). Most As mentioned previously in this large missile launches have been limited individuals merely raised their heads document, three marine mammal to short-term (5–30 minute) briefly upon hearing the launch sounds species (pinnipeds only) are likely to abandonment of haul-out sites. and then quickly returned to their occur in the proposed action area. A Holst et al. (2005, 2008, 2010, and previous activity pattern (usually species functional hearing group is a 2011) summarize the systematic sleeping). During some launches, a consideration when we analyze the monitoring results from SNI from mid- small proportion of northern elephant effects of exposure to sound on marine 2001 through February 2011. Ugoretz seals moved a short distance on the mammals. and Green (2012) summarize results beach, away from their resting site, but

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13027

settled within minutes. Because of this, These harbor seals flushed into the have not affected use of coastal areas at elephant seals are no longer targeted for water in response to some sonic booms Vandenberg Air Force Base where monitoring during launches, but are and to a few of the overflights by light similar missile launches occur. often in the field of view when aircraft, jets above 244 meters (m) and Pinnipeds do not feed when hauled monitoring other species. helicopters below 305 m. Sometimes the out on these beaches and the airborne As expected, responses of California harbor seals did not return to land until launch sounds will not persist in the sea lions to the launches varied by the next day, although they more water near the island for more than a individual and age group (Holst et al., commonly returned the same day. These few seconds. Therefore, it is not 2005, 2008, 2010, 2011). Some sea lions authors postulated that such expected that the launch activities will exhibited brief startle responses and disturbance-induced stampedes or other have any impact on the food or feeding increased vigilance for a short period mother-pup separations could be a success of these pinnipeds. after each launch. Other sea lions, source of increased mortality. However, Boosters from missiles may be particularly pups that were previously observations during actual sonic booms jettisoned shortly after launch and fall playing in groups along the margin of and tests with a carbide cannon on the island, but are not expected to the haul-out beaches, appeared to react simulating sonic booms at San Miguel impact beaches. Fuel contained in these more vigorously. A greater proportion of and SNI provide no evidence of such boosters is consumed rapidly and hauled-out sea lions typically pinniped injury or mortality (Stewart, completely, so there would be no risk of responded and/or entered the water 1982) and no mortality has been contamination even in the very unlikely when launch sounds were louder (Holst observed during missile launches (Holst event that a booster did land on a beach. et al., 2005, 2008, 2010, 2011; Ugoretz et al., 2005, 2008, 2010, 2011; Ugoretz Thus, the proposed activity is not and Greene, 2012). Adult sea lions and Greene, 2012). expected to have any effects on marine already hauled out would mill about on It is possible, although unlikely, that mammal habitat. the beach for a short period before launch-induced stampedes could have settling, whereas those in the shallow adverse impacts on individual Proposed Mitigation water near the beach did not come pinnipeds on the west end of SNI. In order to issue an incidental take ashore. However, during missile launches in authorization (ITA) under section During the majority of launches at 2001–2012, there was no evidence of 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA, NMFS must SNI, most harbor seals within the launch-related injuries or deaths (Holst set forth the permissible methods of audible range of the launch left their et al., 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012; Ugoretz taking pursuant to such activity, and haul-out sites on rocky ledges to enter and Greene, 2012). On several other means of effecting the least the water and did not return during the occasions, harbor seals and California practicable impact on such species or duration of the video-recording period sea lion adults moved over pups as the stock and its habitat, paying particular (which sometimes extended up to animals moved in response to the attention to rookeries, mating grounds, several hours after the launch) (Holst et launches, but the pups did not appear and areas of similar significance, and on al., 2005, 2008, 2010, 2011; Ugoretz and to be injured. Given the large numbers the availability of such species or stock Greene, 2012). During monitoring the of pinnipeds giving birth on SNI, it is for taking for certain subsistence uses day after a launch, harbor seals were expected that injuries and deaths will (where relevant). usually hauled out again at these sites occur as a result of natural causes. For The NDAA of 2004 amended the (Holst and Lawson, 2002). example, during the 1997–1998 El Nin˜ o MMPA as it relates to military-readiness The type of missile being launched is event, pup mortality reached almost 90 activities and the ITA process such that also important in determining the percent for northern fur seals at nearby ‘‘least practicable adverse impact’’ shall nature and extent of pinniped reactions San Miguel Island, and some adults may include consideration of personnel to launch sounds. Holst et al. (2008) have died as well (Melin et al., 2005). safety, practicality of implementation, showed that significantly more Pup mortality also increased during this California sea lions responded during period for California sea lions. Indirect and impact of the effectiveness of the Coyote launches than during other evidence that launches have not caused ‘‘military readiness activity.’’ The missile launches; AGS launches caused mortality comes from the fact that activities described in the Navy’s the fewest reactions. Elephant seals populations of northern elephant seals application are considered military showed significantly less reaction and especially California sea lions on readiness activities. during launches involving missiles SNI are growing rapidly despite similar As during launches conducted under other than Vandals. The BQM–34 and launches for many years. Harbor seal previous regulations, where practicable, especially the BQM–74 subsonic drone numbers have also increased and new the Navy proposes the following missiles that may be launched from SNI harbor seal haul-out sites have been mitigation measures, provided that are smaller and less noisy than Coyotes. established at locations directly under doing so will not compromise Launches of BQM–34 drones from NAS and near the launch tracks of missiles. operational safety, human safety, Point Mugu have not normally resulted national security, or other requirements Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal in harbor seals leaving their haul-out or mission goals: Habitat area at the mouth of Mugu Lagoon about (1) Limit activities near the beaches in 3.2 kilometers (km) to the side of the During the period of the proposed advance of launches; launch track (Lawson et al., 1998). activity, three species of pinnipeds will (2) Avoid launch activities during use various beaches around SNI as harbor seal pupping season (February Stampede-Related Injury or Mortality places to rest, molt, and breed. These through April); From Missile Launches beaches consist of sand, rock ledges, (3) Limit launch activities during Bowles and Stewart (1980) reported and rocky cobble. Pinnipeds continue to other pinniped pupping seasons; that harbor seals on San Miguel Island use beaches around the western end of (4) Not launch missiles from the reacted to low-altitude jet overflights SNI, and are expanding their use of Alpha Complex at low elevation (less with alert postures and often with rapid some beaches, despite ongoing launch than 305 m) on launch azimuths that movement across the haul-out sites, activities for many years. Similarly, it pass close to pinniped haul-out sites especially when aircraft were visible. appears that sounds from prior launches when occupied;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13028 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

(5) Avoid launching multiple missiles 4. A reduction in the intensity of the mitigation zone (thus allowing for in quick succession over haul-out sites, exposures (either total number or more effective implementation of the especially when young pups are number at biologically important time mitigation) and in general to generate present; and or location) to received levels of noise, more data to contribute to the analyses (6) Aircraft and helicopter flight paths or other activities expected to result in mentioned below. during missile launch operations would the take of marine mammals (this goal 2. An increase in our understanding maintain a minimum altitude of 305 m may contribute to a, above, or to of how many marine mammals are from pinniped haul-outs and rookeries, reducing the severity of harassment likely to be exposed to levels of noise except in emergencies or for real-time takes only). that we associate with specific adverse security incidents (e.g., search-and- 5. Avoidance or minimization of effects, such as behavioral harassment, rescue, fire-fighting, adverse weather adverse effects to marine mammal TTS, or PTS. conditions), which may require habitat, paying special attention to the 3. An increase in our understanding approaching pinniped haul-outs and food base, activities that block or limit of how marine mammals respond to rookeries closer than 305 m. passage to or from biologically stimuli expected to result in take and important areas, permanent destruction how anticipated adverse effects on Mitigation Conclusions of habitat, or temporary destruction/ individuals (in different ways and to NMFS has carefully evaluated the disturbance of habitat during a varying degrees) may impact the applicant’s proposed mitigation biologically important time. population, species, or stock measures and considered a range of 6. For monitoring directly related to (specifically through effects on annual other measures in the context of mitigation—an increase in the rates of recruitment or survival) through ensuring that NMFS prescribes the probability of detecting marine any of the following methods: mammals, thus allowing for more means of effecting the least practicable a. Behavioral observations in the effective implementation of the impact on the affected marine mammal presence of stimuli compared to mitigation. species and stocks and their habitat. Our observations in the absence of stimuli evaluation of potential measures Based on our evaluation of the applicant’s proposed measures, as well (need to be able to accurately predict included consideration of the following received level, distance from source, factors in relation to one another: as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily determined and other pertinent information). • The manner in which, and the that the proposed mitigation measures b. Physiological measurements in the degree to which, the successful provide the means of effecting the least presence of stimuli compared to implementation of the measure is practicable impact on marine mammal observations in the absence of stimuli expected to minimize adverse impacts species or stocks and their habitat, (need to be able to accurately predict to marine mammals; paying particular attention to rookeries, received level, distance from source, • The proven or likely efficacy of the mating grounds, and areas of similar and other pertinent information). specific measure to minimize adverse significance, while also considering c. Distribution and/or abundance impacts as planned; and personnel safety, practicality of comparisons in times or areas with • The practicability of the measure implementation, and impact on the concentrated stimuli versus times or for applicant implementation, including effectiveness of the military readiness areas without stimuli. consideration of personnel safety, activity. 4. An increased knowledge of the practicality of implementation, and affected species. impact on the effectiveness of the Proposed Monitoring and Reporting 5. An increase in our understanding military readiness activity. In order to issue an ITA for an of the effectiveness of certain mitigation Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed activity, section 101(a)(5)(A) of the and monitoring measures. by NMFS should be able to accomplish, MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, Proposed Monitoring Measures have a reasonable likelihood of ‘‘requirements pertaining to the accomplishing (based on current monitoring and reporting of such The Navy proposes to conduct the science), or contribute to the taking.’’ The MMPA implementing following monitoring measures, which accomplishment of one or more of the regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) are further detailed in section 13 of their general goals listed below: indicate that requests for ITAs must application: 1. Avoidance or minimization of include the suggested means of • The Navy would continue a injury or death of marine mammals accomplishing the necessary monitoring standard, ongoing, land-based wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may and reporting that will result in monitoring program to assess effects on contribute to this goal). increased knowledge of the species and harbor seals, northern elephant seals, 2. A reduction in the numbers of of the level of taking or impacts on and California sea lions on SNI. This marine mammals (total number or populations of marine mammals that are monitoring would occur at up to three number at biologically important time expected to be present in the proposed sites at different distances from the or location) exposed to received levels action area. The Navy submitted a launch site before, during, and after of noise, or other activities expected to marine mammal monitoring plan as part each launch, depending upon presence result in the take of marine mammals of their application. It can be found in of pinnipeds during each launch. The (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or section 13 of their application. The plan monitoring would be via autonomous to reducing harassment takes only). may be modified or supplemented based video or Forward Looking Infrared 3. A reduction in the number of times on comments or new information (FLIR) cameras. Pinniped behavior on (total number or number at biologically received from the public during the the beach would be documented prior to important time or location) individuals public comment period. the planned launch operations, during would be exposed to received levels of Monitoring measures prescribed by the launch, and following the launch. noise, or other activities expected to NMFS should accomplish one or more Northern elephant seals would not be result in the take of marine mammals of the following general goals: specifically targeted for monitoring, (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or 1. An increase in the probability of though may be present in the field of to reducing harassment takes only). detecting marine mammals, both within view when monitoring other species.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13029

• During each launch, the Navy simultaneous observations at up to three animals, as beaches were monitored would obtain calibrated recordings of different locations, and would provide a repeatedly over the course of the year the sounds of the launches as received permanent record that could be during numerous launches. However, at different distances from the missile’s reviewed in detail. No specific effort some animals that displayed behavioral flightline. The Navy anticipates that would be made to monitor elephant reactions may have been missed, as not acoustic data would be acquired at each seals, though they may be present in all areas can be monitored during the video monitoring location, to estimate mixed groups when monitoring other launches. Pinnipeds that were sounds received by pinnipeds, and at species. potentially affected left the haul-out site the launch site to estimate maximum Acoustical Monitoring—The Navy in response to the launch, left the water potential sound received. These would take acoustical recordings during at a vigorous pace, or exhibited recordings would provide for a thorough each monitored launch. These prolonged movement or behavioral description of launch sounds as recordings would be suitable for changes relative to their behavior received at different locations on quantitative analysis of the levels and immediately prior to the launch. western SNI, and of the factors that characteristics of the received launch Estimated Take by Incidental affect received sound levels. By analysis sounds. The Navy would use up to four Harassment of the paired data on behavioral autonomous audio recorders to make observations and received sound levels, acoustical measurements. During each The NDAA of 2004 (Pub. L. 103–136) the Navy would further characterize the launch, these would be located as close removed the ‘‘small numbers’’ and relationship between the two. If there is as practical to monitored pinniped haul- specified ‘‘geographical region’’ a clear correlation, the Navy would out sites and near the launch pad itself. limitations indicated above and determine the ‘‘dose-response’’ The monitored haul-out sites would amended the definition of ‘‘harassment’’ relationship. typically include one site as close as as it applies to a ‘‘military readiness Visual Monitoring—The Navy possible to the missile’s planned flight activity’’ to read as follows (section proposes to conduct marine mammal path and one or two locations farther 3(18)(B) of the MMPA): (i) Any act that and acoustic monitoring during from the flight path within the area of injures or has the significant potential to launches from SNI, using simultaneous potential impact with pinnipeds injure a marine mammal or marine video recording of pinniped behavior present. mammal stock in the wild [Level A and audio recording of launch sounds. Harassment]; or (ii) Any act that The land-based monitoring would Reporting Measures disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine provide data required to characterize the The Navy would submit annual mammal or marine mammal stock in the extent and nature of the takes. In interim technical reports to NMFS no wild by causing disruption of natural particular, the monitoring would later than December 31 for the duration behavioral patterns, including, but not provide the information needed to of the regulations. These reports would limited to, migration, surfacing, nursing, document the occurrence, nature, provide full documentation of methods, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to a frequency, and duration of any changes results, and interpretation pertaining to point where such behavioral patterns in pinniped behavior that might result all monitoring tasks for launches during are abandoned or significantly altered from missile launches. Components of each calendar year. However, only [Level B Harassment]. this documentation would include the preliminary information would be Any takes of marine mammals are following: included for any launches during the most likely to result from operational • Identify and document any change 60-day period immediately preceding noise as launch missiles pass near haul- in behavior or movements that may submission. out sites, and/or associated visual cues. occur at the time of the launch; The Navy would submit a draft This section estimates maximum • Compare received levels of launch comprehensive technical report to potential take and the likely annual take sound with pinniped responses, based NMFS 180 days prior to the expiration of marine mammal species during the on acoustic and behavioral data from up of the regulations, providing full proposed missile launch program at to three monitoring sites at different documentation of the methods, results, SNI. distances from the launch site and and interpretation of all monitoring The launch sounds could be received missile path during each launch and tasks for launches to date. A revised for several seconds and, to be attempt to establish the dose-response final comprehensive technical report, conservative, are considered to be relationship for launch sounds under including all monitoring results during prolonged rather than transient sounds. different launch conditions; the entire period of the regulations Given the variety of responses • Ascertain periods or launch would be due 90 days after the documented previously for the sounds conditions when pinnipeds are most regulations expire. of man-made activities lasting several and least responsive to launch activities; The Navy would ensure that NMFS is seconds, a sound exposure level of 100 and notified immediately if an injured or dB re 20 microPascals 2 per second is • Document take by harassment and, dead marine mammal is judged to result considered appropriate as a disturbance although unlikely, any mortality or from launch activities at any time. criterion for pinnipeds hauled out at the injury. west end of SNI, particularly for The launch monitoring program Monitoring Results From Previously California sea lions and northern would include remote video recordings Authorized Activities elephant seals. Some pinnipeds that before, during, and after launches when Between 2001 and 2012, a maximum haul-out on the western end of SNI are pinnipeds are present in the area of of 1,990 California sea lions, 395 harbor expected to be within the area where potential impact, and visual assessment seals, and 130 northern elephant seals sound exposure levels exceed 100 dB. by trained observers before and after the were estimated to have been potentially Far fewer pinnipeds are expected to launch. Remote cameras are essential harassed in any single monitoring year occur within this area and none of the during launches because safety rules incidental to missile launches at SNI recorded sound exposure levels appear prevent personnel from being present in (Holst et al., 2008, 2010, 2011; Ugoretz to be high enough to induce TTS. most of the areas of interest. In addition, and Greene, 2012). These numbers may Based on the reaction criterion, the video techniques would allow represent multiple exposures of single distance to which it is assumed to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13030 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

extend, and the estimated numbers of seals haul out on different beaches at population has remained relatively pinnipeds exposed to sound exposure various times during the year, stable. Previous monitoring from 2001– levels at or above 100 dB, the Navy sometimes within and sometimes 2012 showed that most monitored estimated the number of pinnipeds on outside the area exposed to levels at or harbor seals entered the water in the west end of SNI that might be taken. above 100 dB, then the number of times response to launches. Previous The Navy made an additional an individual elephant seal might be monitoring also indicates that about 70 adjustment for harbor seals, as they are exposed to strong launch sounds would percent of harbor seals that haul out on known to sometimes react strongly to be reduced. However, the total number SNI use the beaches within areas K, L, sound exposure levels below 100 dB. of individuals that would be exposed at and M. The Navy conservatively The Navy considered the percentage of least once over the course of the year estimates that 80 percent of harbor seals animals that actually responded to would probably be increased. on SNI may be impacted by missile launch noise in previous monitoring Movements from one beach to another launches. Therefore, the Navy estimates years in order to estimate the number of may be more likely for juveniles than for that a maximum of 686 harbor seals animals potentially harassed. Recorded older seals, given that this has been might be taken by Level B harassment sound exposure levels in different areas observed in other pinniped species during a 1-year period. of SNI were compared to ground-based (such as for harbor seal pups; Thompson census data of pinnipeds. These et al. 1994). California Sea Lion censuses were typically conducted Published studies and results from the To estimate the maximum potential seasonally when maximum numbers of 2001–2012 monitoring at SNI indicate number of sea lions that might be pinnipeds were known to occur on land. that elephant seals are more tolerant of hauled out within areas exposed to transient noise and other forms of Northern Elephant Seal sound levels at or above 100 dB, the disturbance than are California sea lions Navy calculated the maximum number To estimate the potential maximum or harbor seals. If so, the actual impact of sea lions occurring within map areas numbers of northern elephant seals that zone is smaller than assumed here, and K, L, and M (Figure 16 of the Navy’s might be exposed to sound levels at or the number of elephant seals that might application) in any year from 2001– above 100 dB in 2014, the highest pup be taken by harassment would be 2011. The Navy adjusted this maximum, counts within map areas K, L, and M substantially lower than the number of 14,963 sea lions, for a population (see Figure 16 of the Navy’s application) seals present within the area where growth rate of 5.6 percent per year, in any year between 2000 and 2010 sound levels are at or above 100 dB. For which results in a maximum of 20,749 were used (yielding a total of 1,854), example, during the 2001–2012 launch sea lions of all ages and sexes that might and a continuing growth rate of 7.3 program, the majority of northern be hauled out within the areas exposed percent since 2010 was applied. This elephant seals did not exhibit more than to sound levels at or above 100 dB in a results in a maximum potential pup brief startle reactions in response to single year. For most of the year, only count of 2,458 for those map areas in launches (Holst et al. 2005, 2008, 2010, females and pups are expected to be 2014. Based on data collected from 1988 2011; Ugoretz and Greene, 2012). Most ashore, so the number of animals to 2010, the total count of all age classes individuals merely raised their heads exposed to these sound levels from any expected to be hauled out is briefly upon hearing the launch sounds one launch is likely less than the approximately twice the number of and then quickly returned to their estimated total number. pups hauled out. Therefore, the previous activity pattern (usually maximum number hauled out in areas sleeping). During some launches, a Based on past monitoring, of potential impact for 2014 was small proportion (typically much less approximately 10 percent of the approximated by doubling the than 10 percent) of northern elephant California sea lions exposed to launch maximum potential calculated pup seals moved a short distance (<10 m) sounds during each year of launch count. Thus, the maximum expected away from their resting site, but settled activity might exhibit behavioral number of elephant seals that may be within minutes. Elephant seals rarely disturbance. Therefore, the Navy exposed to sound levels at or above 100 moved or reacted more than this. estimates that a maximum of 2,740 dB during 2014 is estimated to be 4,916. Therefore, the Navy estimates that up California sea lions on SNI might be In the absence of any contrary data, it to 10 percent of 4,916 elephant seals (or taken by Level B harassment during a 1- is assumed that elephant seals exhibit 492 seals) might be taken by Level B year period. high site fidelity when they return to harassment during each year of planned Summary shore, and that the 4,916 elephant seals launch operations. calculated above represent the NMFS proposes to authorize take maximum total number that might be Harbor Seals according to the Navy’s estimates. The exposed to ‘‘strong’’ (at or above 100 dB) To determine the potential numbers estimated take numbers are provided in sounds during the year, assuming of harbor seals that might be taken by Table 2 below for each marine mammal missiles are launched when all animals harassment, the Navy used the species. These take estimates do not are hauled out and all beaches within maximum total harbor seal count for take mitigation measures into the area receive strong sounds. If some SNI (858) and assumed that the consideration.

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED AND PROPOSED TAKE OF MARINE MAMMALS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS

Percentage of Estimated take stock Common species name by level B Abundance of potentially Population harassment stock affected trend (percent)

Northern elephant seal ...... 492 124,000 <1 unknown. Harbor seal ...... 686 30,196 2.3 stable.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13031

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED AND PROPOSED TAKE OF MARINE MAMMALS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS—Continued

Percentage of Estimated take stock Common species name by level B Abundance of potentially Population harassment stock affected trend (percent)

California sea lion ...... 2,740 296,750 <1 increasing.

Analysis and Preliminary specified activity that prescribe the Navy’s request for an MMPA Determinations means of effecting the least practicable authorization. adverse impact on marine mammals and Negligible Impact their habitat and set forth requirements Classification Negligible impact is ‘‘an impact pertaining to the monitoring and The Office of Management and Budget resulting from the specified activity that reporting of that taking. has determined that this proposed rule cannot be reasonably expected to, and is Based on the analysis contained is not significant for purposes of not reasonably likely to, adversely affect herein of the likely effects of the Executive Order 12866. the species or stock through effects on specified activity on marine mammals annual rates of recruitment or survival and their habitat, and taking into Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact consideration the implementation of the Act (RFA), the Chief Counsel for finding is based on the lack of likely proposed monitoring and mitigation Regulation of the Department of adverse effects on annual rates of measures, NMFS preliminarily finds Commerce has certified to the Chief recruitment or survival (i.e., population- that the total marine mammal take from Counsel for Advocacy of the Small level effects). An estimate of the number the Navy’s missile launches will have a Business Administration that this of Level B harassment takes, alone, is negligible impact on the affected marine proposed rule, if adopted, would not not enough information on which to mammal species or stocks. have a significant economic impact on base an impact determination. In a substantial number of small entities. addition to considering estimates of the Impact on Availability of Affected The RFA requires federal agencies to number of marine mammals that might Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses prepare an analysis of a rule’s impact on be ‘‘taken’’ through behavioral There are no relevant subsistence uses small entities whenever the agency is harassment, NMFS must consider other of marine mammals implicated by this required to publish a notice of proposed factors, such as the likely nature of any action. Therefore, NMFS has rulemaking. However, a federal agency responses (their intensity, duration, determined that the total taking of may certify, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), etc.), the context of any responses affected species or stocks would not that the action will not have a (critical reproductive time or location, have any unmitigable adverse impact on significant economic impact on a migration, etc.), as well as the number the availability of such species or stocks substantial number of small entities. and nature of estimated Level A for taking for subsistence purposes. The Navy is the sole entity that would harassment takes, the number of Endangered Species Act (ESA) be affected by this rulemaking, and the estimated mortalities, and effects on Navy is not a small governmental habitat. No species listed under the ESA are jurisdiction, small organization, or small NMFS has preliminarily determined expected to be affected by these business, as defined by the RFA. Any that target and missile launch activities activities. Therefore, NMFS has requirements imposed by an LOA and aircraft and helicopter operations determined that a section 7 consultation issued pursuant to these regulations, from SNI, as described in this document under the ESA is not required. and any monitoring or reporting and in the Navy’s application, will requirements imposed by these result in no more than Level B National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations, would be applicable only to harassment of northern elephant seals, the Navy. NMFS does not expect the harbor seals, and California sea lions. In May 2009, NMFS prepared an issuance of these regulations or the The effects of these military readiness Environmental Assessment on the associated LOAs to result in any activities will be limited to short-term, Navy’s missile launches at SNI. NMFS impacts to small entities pursuant to the localized changes in behavior, including is currently updating this analysis, RFA. Because this action, if adopted, temporarily vacating haul-outs, and pursuant to NEPA, to determine would directly affect the Navy and not possible temporary threshold shift in whether or not this proposed activity any small entities, NMFS concludes that the hearing of any pinnipeds that are in may have a significant effect on the the action would not result in a close proximity to a launch pad at the human environment. This analysis will significant economic impact on a time of a launch. These effects are not be completed prior to the issuance or substantial number of small entities. likely to have a significant or long-term denial of an authorization. impact on feeding, breeding, or other Therefore, an Initial Regulatory Request for Public Comments important biological functions. No take Flexibility Analysis is not required and by injury or mortality is anticipated, and NMFS requests comment on our none has been prepared. the potential for permanent hearing analysis, the draft authorization, and List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 217 impairment is unlikely. Harassment any other aspect of the Notice of takes will be at the lowest level Proposed Rulemaking for the Navy’s Exports, Fish, Imports, Incidental practicable due to incorporation of the missile launch activities at SNI. Please take, Indians, Labeling, Marine proposed mitigation measures include with your comments any mammals, Navy, Penalties, Reporting mentioned previously in this document. supporting data or literature citations to and recordkeeping requirements, NMFS has proposed regulations for the help inform our final decision on the Seafood, Sonar, Transportation.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13032 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

Dated: February 25, 2014. and targets from Building 807 on San possible, launch activities during harbor Samuel D. Rauch III, Nicolas Island, California. seal pupping season (February to April), Deputy Assistant Administrator for unless constrained by factors including, § 217.51 Effective dates. Regulatory Programs, National Marine but not limited to, human safety, Fisheries Service. (a) Regulations in this subpart become national security, or for vehicle launch effective upon issuance of the final rule. trajectory necessary to meet mission For reasons set forth in the preamble, (b) [Reserved]. 50 CFR Part 217 is proposed to be objectives. (3) The holder of the Letter of amended as follows: § 217.52 Permissible methods of taking. (a) Under Letters of Authorization Authorization must limit, whenever PART 217—REGULATIONS issued pursuant to § 216.106 and 217.57 possible, launch activities during other GOVERNING THE TAKE OF MARINE of this chapter, the Holder of the Letter pinniped pupping seasons, unless MAMMALS INCIDENTAL TO of Authorization may incidentally, but constrained by factors including, but not SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES not intentionally, take marine mammals limited to, human safety, national by harassment, within the area security, or for vehicle launch trajectory ■ 1. The authority citation for part 217 described in § 217.50, provided the necessary to meet mission objectives. (4) The holder of the Letter of continues to read as follows: activity is in compliance with all terms, Authorization must not launch vehicles conditions, and requirements of the Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. from the Alpha Complex at low regulations and the appropriate Letter of ■ 2. Subpart F is added to part 217 to elevation (less than 1,000 feet (305 m)) read as follows: Authorization. (b) The activities identified in on launch azimuths that pass close to Subpart F—Taking of Marine Mammals § 217.50 must be conducted in a manner pinniped haul-out sites when occupied. (5) The holder of the Letter of Incidental to Target and Missile Launch that minimizes, to the greatest extent Authorization must avoid, where Activities From San Nicolas Island, CA practicable, any adverse impacts on practicable, launching multiple target Sec. marine mammals and their habitat. 217.50 Specified activity and specified (c) The incidental take of marine missiles in quick succession over haul- geographical region. mammals is authorized for the species out sites, especially when young pups 217.51 Effective dates. listed in § 217.50(b) and is limited to are present. 217.52 Permissible methods of taking. Level B Harassment. (6) The holder of the Letter of 217.53 Prohibitions. Authorization must limit launch 217.54 Mitigation. § 217.53 Prohibitions. activities during nighttime hours, except 217.55 Requirements for monitoring and Notwithstanding takings when required by the test objectives. reporting. (7) Aircraft and helicopter flight paths 217.56 Applications for Letters of contemplated in § 217.50 and Authorization. authorized by a Letter of Authorization must maintain a minimum altitude of 217.57 Letters of Authorization. issued under §§ 216.106 and 217.57 of 1,000 feet (305 m) from pinniped haul- 217.58 Renewal of Letters of Authorization. this chapter, no person in connection outs and rookeries, except in 217.59 Modifications to Letters of with the activities described in § 217.50 emergencies or for real-time security Authorization. may: incidents (e.g., search-and-rescue, fire- (a) Take any marine mammal not fighting), which may require Subpart F—Taking of Marine Mammals specified in § 217.50(b); approaching pinniped haul-outs and Incidental to Target and Missile (b) Take any marine mammal rookeries closer than 1,000 feet (305 m). Launch Activities From San Nicolas specified in § 217. 50(b) other than by (8) If post-launch surveys determine Island, CA incidental, unintentional harassment; that an injurious or lethal take of a § 217.50 Specified activity and specified (c) Take a marine mammal specified marine mammal has occurred or there is geographical region. in § 217.50(b) if such taking results in an indication that the distribution, size, more than a negligible impact on the or productivity of the potentially (a) Regulations in this subpart apply species or stocks of such marine affected pinniped populations has been only to the incidental taking of marine mammal; or affected, the launch procedure and the mammals specified in paragraph (b) of (d) Violate, or fail to comply with, the monitoring methods must be reviewed, this section by the Naval Air Warfare terms, conditions, and requirements of in cooperation with NMFS, and, if Center Weapons Division, U.S. Navy, this subpart or a Letter of Authorization necessary, appropriate changes must be and those persons it authorizes to issued under §§ 216.106 and 217.57 of made through modification to a Letter of engage in target missile launch activities this chapter. Authorization, prior to conducting the and associated aircraft and helicopter next launch of the same vehicle under operations at the Naval Air Warfare § 217.54 Mitigation. that Letter of Authorization. Center Weapons Division facilities on (a) When conducting operations (9) Additional mitigation measures as San Nicolas Island, California. identified in § 217.50(c), the mitigation contained in a Letter of Authorization. (b) The incidental take of marine measures contained in the Letter of (b) [Reserved] mammals under the activity identified Authorization issued under §§ 216.106 in paragraph (a) of this section is limited and 217.57 must be implemented. These § 217.55 Requirements for monitoring and to the following species: northern mitigation measures include, but are not reporting. elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris), limited to: (a) The Holder of the Letter of harbor seals (Phoca vitulina), and (1) The holder of the Letter of Authorization issued pursuant to California sea lions (Zalophus Authorization must prohibit personnel §§ 216.106 and 217.57 of this chapter for californianus). from entering pinniped haul-out sites activities described in § 217.50 are (c) This Authorization is valid only below the missile’s predicted flight path required to cooperate with NMFS, and for activities associated with the for 2 hours prior to planned missile any other federal, state, or local agency launching of a total of 40 Coyote (or launches. with authority to monitor the impacts of similar sized) vehicles from Alpha (2) The holder of the Letter of the activity on marine mammals. Unless Launch Complex and smaller missiles Authorization must avoid, whenever specified otherwise in the Letter of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13033

Authorization, the Holder of the Letter (iv) Documentation, both via Office of Protected Resources and of Authorization must notify the autonomous video camera and human Southwest Regional Office, NMFS, 180 Administrator, Southwest Region, observer, will consist of: days prior to the expiration of the NMFS, by letter or telephone, at least 2 (A) Numbers and sexes of each age regulations in this subpart, providing weeks prior to activities possibly class in focal subgroups; full documentation of the methods, involving the taking of marine (B) Description and timing of launch results, and interpretation of all mammals. If the authorized activity activities or other disruptive event(s); monitoring tasks for launches to date identified in § 217.50 is thought to have (C) Movements of pinnipeds, plus preliminary information for missile resulted in the mortality or injury of any including number and proportion launches during the first 6 months of marine mammals or in any take of moving, direction and distance moved, the regulations. marine mammals not identified in and pace of movement; (4) A revised final comprehensive § 217.50(b), then the Holder of the Letter (D) Description of reactions; technical report, including all of Authorization must notify the (E) Minimum distances between monitoring results during the entire Director, Office of Protected Resources, interacting and reacting pinnipeds; period of the Letter of Authorization NMFS, or designee, by telephone (301– (F) Study location; will be due 90 days after the end of the 427–8401), and the Administrator, (G) Local time; period of effectiveness of the regulations Southwest Region, NMFS, or designee, (H) Substratum type; in this subpart. by telephone (562–980–3232), within 48 (I) Substratum slope; (5) Both the 60-day and final reports hours of the discovery of the injured or (J) Weather condition; will be subject to review and comment dead animal. (K) Horizontal visibility; and by NMFS. Any recommendations made (L) Tide state. by NMFS must be addressed in the final (b) The National Marine Fisheries (2) Acoustic Monitoring. comprehensive technical report prior to Service must be informed immediately (i) During all target missile launches, acceptance by NMFS. of any changes or deletions to any calibrated recordings of the levels and (f) Activities related to the monitoring portions of the proposed monitoring characteristics of the received launch described in paragraphs (c) and (d) of plan submitted, in accordance with the sounds will be obtained from three this section, or in the Letter of Letter of Authorization. different locations of varying distances Authorization issued under §§ 216.106 (c) The holder of the Letter of from the target missile’s flight path. To and 217.57 of this chapter, including the Authorization must designate the extent practicable, these acoustic retention of marine mammals, may be biologically trained, on-site recording locations will correspond conducted without the need for a individual(s), approved in advance by with the haul-out sites where video and separate scientific research permit. NMFS, to record the effects of the human observer monitoring is done. (g) In coordination and compliance launch activities and the resulting noise (ii) Acoustic recordings will be with appropriate Navy regulations, at its on pinnipeds. supplemented by the use of radar and discretion, the NMFS may place an (d) The holder of the Letter of telemetry systems to obtain the observer on San Nicolas Island for any Authorization must implement the trajectory of target missiles in three activity involved in marine mammal following monitoring measures: dimensions. monitoring either prior to, during, or (1) Visual Land-Based Monitoring. (iii) Acoustic equipment used to after a missile launch in order to monitor the impact on marine (i) Prior to each missile launch, an record launch sounds will be suitable mammals. observer(s) will place three autonomous for collecting a wide range of parameters, including the magnitude, digital video cameras overlooking § 217.56 Applications for Letters of chosen haul-out sites located varying characteristics, and duration of each Authorization target missile. distances from the missile launch site. To incidentally take marine mammals (e) The holder of the Letter of Each video camera will be set to record pursuant to the regulations in this Authorization must implement the a focal subgroup within the larger haul- subpart, the U.S. citizen (as defined by following reporting requirements: out aggregation for a maximum of 4 § 216.06 of this chapter) conducting the (1) For each target missile launch, the hours or as permitted by the videotape activity identified in § 217.50 (the U.S. lead contractor or lead observer for the capacity. Navy) must apply for and obtain either holder of the Letter of Authorization an initial LOA in accordance with (ii) Systematic visual observations, by must provide a status report to NMFS, § 217.57 or a renewal under § 217.58. those individuals, described in Southwest Regional Office, providing paragraph (c) of this section, on reporting items found under the Letter § 217.57 Letters of Authorization. pinniped presence and activity will be of Authorization, unless other (a) A Letter of Authorization, unless conducted and recorded in a field arrangements for monitoring are agreed logbook a minimum of 2 hours prior to suspended or revoked, will be valid for upon in writing. a period of time not to exceed the period the estimated launch time and for no (2) The Navy shall submit an annual less than 1 hour immediately following of validity of this subpart. report describing their activities and (b) Each Letter of Authorization will the launch of Coyote and similar types including the following information: set forth: of target missiles. (i) Timing, number, and nature of (1) Permissible methods of incidental (iii) Systematic visual observations, launch operations; taking; by those individuals, described in (ii) Summary of mitigation and (2) Means of effecting the least paragraph (c) of this section, on monitoring implementation; practicable adverse impact on the pinniped presence and activity will be (iii) Summary of pinniped behavioral species, its habitat, and on the conducted and recorded in a field observations; and availability of the species for logbook a minimum of 2 hours prior to (iv) Estimate of the amount and nature subsistence uses (i.e., mitigation); and launch, during launch, and for no less of all takes by harassment or by other (3) Requirements for mitigation, than 1 hour after the launch of the means. monitoring, and reporting. BQM–34, BQM–74, Tomahawk, RAM (3) The Navy shall submit a draft (c) Issuance and renewal of the Letter target and similar types of missiles. comprehensive technical report to the of Authorization will be based on a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13034 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules

determination that the total number of changes made pursuant to the adaptive mitigation, monitoring, and reporting marine mammals taken by the activity management provision of this chapter) measures in an LOA: as a whole will have no more than a that do not change the findings made for (A) Results from the Navy’s negligible impact on the affected species the regulations or result in no more than monitoring from the previous year(s); or stock of marine mammal(s). a minor change in the total estimated (B) Results from other marine number of takes (or distribution by mammal and/or sound research or § 217.58 Renewals and Modifications of species or years), NMFS may publish a Letters of Authorization. studies; or notice of proposed LOA in the Federal (C) Any information that reveals (a) A Letter of Authorization issued Register, including the associated marine mammals may have been taken under §§ 216.106 and 217.57 of this analysis illustrating the change, and in a manner, extent, or number not chapter for the activity identified in solicit public comments before issuing authorized by these regulations or § 217.50 will be renewed or modified the LOA. subsequent LOAs. upon request of the applicant, provided (c) An LOA issued under §§ 216.106 (ii) If, through adaptive management, that: the modifications to the mitigation, (1) The proposed specified activity and 217.57 of this chapter for the monitoring, or reporting measures are and mitigation, monitoring, and activity identified in § 217.50 may be substantial, NMFS will publish a notice reporting measures as well as the modified by NMFS under the following of proposed LOA in the Federal anticipated impacts, are the same as circumstances: Register and solicit public comment. those described and analyzed for these (1) Adaptive Management—NMFS (2) Emergencies—If NMFS determines regulations (excluding changes made may modify (including augment) the that an emergency exists that poses a pursuant to the adaptive management existing mitigation, monitoring, or significant risk to the well-being of the provision of this chapter), and; reporting measures (after consulting (2) NMFS determines that the with the Navy regarding the species or stocks of marine mammals mitigation, monitoring, and reporting practicability of the modifications) if specified in § 217.50(b), a Letter of measures required by the previous LOA doing so creates a reasonable likelihood Authorization may be modified without under these regulations were of more effectively accomplishing the prior notice or opportunity for public implemented. goals of the mitigation and monitoring comment. Notice would be published in (b) For LOA modification or renewal set forth in the preamble for these the Federal Register within 30 days of requests by the applicant that include regulations. the action. changes to the activity or the mitigation, (i) Possible sources of data could [FR Doc. 2014–04996 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] monitoring, or reporting (excluding contribute to the decision to modify the BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:32 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 13035

Notices Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 45

Friday, March 7, 2014

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER 3A–03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, must take and the information that must contains documents other than rules or Riverdale, MD 20737–1238. be included in the petition. proposed rules that are applicable to the Supporting documents and any APHIS has received a petition (APHIS public. Notices of hearings and investigations, comments we receive on this docket Petition Number 13–290–01p) from the committee meetings, agency decisions and Monsanto Company (Monsanto) of St. rulings, delegations of authority, filing of may be viewed at http:// petitions and applications and agency www.regulations.gov/ Louis, MO, seeking a determination of statements of organization and functions are # !docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0007 or nonregulated status of maize (Zea mays) examples of documents appearing in this in our reading Room, which is located designated as event MON 87411, which section. in Room 1141 of the USDA South has been genetically engineered for Building, 14th Street and Independence protection against corn rootworm and Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal resistance to the herbicide glyphosate. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 The Monsanto petition states that p.m., Monday through Friday, except information collected during field trials Animal and Plant Health Inspection holidays. To be sure someone is there to and laboratory analyses indicates that Service help you, please call (202) 799–7039 MON 87411 maize is not likely to be a [Docket No. APHIS–2014–0007] before coming. plant pest and therefore should not be The petition is also available on the a regulated article under APHIS’ Monsanto Co.; Availability of Petition APHIS Web site at: http:// regulations in 7 CFR Part 340. for Determination of Nonregulated www.aphis.usda.gov/biotechnology/ As described in the petition, Status of Maize Genetically Engineered petitions_table_pending.shtml under Monsanto developed MON 87411 maize For Protection Against Corn Rootworm APHIS petition number 13–290–01p. by adding a suppression cassette that and Resistance to Glyphosate expresses an inverted repeat sequence FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. designed to match the sequence of corn AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health John Turner, Director, Environmental rootworm. The expression of the Inspection Service, USDA. Risk Analysis Programs, Biotechnology suppression cassette results in the ACTION: Notice. Regulatory Services, APHIS, 4700 River formation of a double-stranded RNA Road, Unit 147, Riverdale, MD 20737– (dsRNA) transcript containing the Snf7 SUMMARY: We are advising the public 1236; (301) 851–3954, email: gene. Upon consumption, the plant- that the Animal and Plant Health [email protected]. To obtain produced dsRNA in MON 87411 results Inspection Service has received a copies of the petition, contact Ms. Cindy in corn rootworm mortality. MON 87411 petition from the Monsanto Company Eck at (301) 851–3892, email: maize also contains a cry3Bb1 gene that seeking a determination of nonregulated [email protected]. produces a modified Bacillus status of maize designated as event SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: thuringiensis (subsp. kumamotoensis) MON 87411, which has been genetically Cry3Bb1 protein to protect against corn engineered for protection against corn Background rootworm larval feeding. In addition, rootworm and resistance to the Under the authority of the plant pest MON 87411 maize contains the cp4 herbicide glyphosate. The petition has provisions of the Plant Protection Act (7 epsps gene from Agrobacterium sp. been submitted in accordance with our U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), the regulations in strain CP4 that confers resistance to the regulations concerning the introduction 7 CFR Part 340, ‘‘Introduction of herbicide glyphosate. MON 87411 maize of certain genetically engineered Organisms and Products Altered or is currently regulated under 7 CFR Part organisms and products. We are making Produced Through Genetic Engineering 340. Interstate movements and field the Monsanto Company petition Which Are Plant Pests or Which There tests of MON 87411 maize have been available for review and comment to Is Reason to Believe Are Plant Pests,’’ conducted under notifications help us identify potential environmental regulate, among other things, the acknowledged by APHIS. and interrelated economic issues and introduction (importation, interstate Field tests conducted under APHIS impacts that the Animal and Plant movement, or release into the oversight allowed for evaluation in a Health Inspection Service may environment) of organisms and products natural agricultural setting while determine should be considered in our altered or produced through genetic imposing measures to minimize the risk evaluation of the petition. engineering that are plant pests or that of persistence in the environment after DATES: We will consider all comments there is reason to believe are plant pests. completion of the tests. Data are that we receive on or before May 6, Such genetically engineered (GE) gathered on multiple parameters and 2014. organisms and products are considered used by the applicant to evaluate ADDRESSES: You may submit comments ‘‘regulated articles.’’ agronomic characteristics and product by either of the following methods: The regulations in § 340.6(a) provide performance. These and other data are • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to that any person may submit a petition used by APHIS to determine if the new http://www.regulations.gov/ to the Animal and Plant Health variety poses a plant pest risk. # !documentDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0007- Inspection Service (APHIS) seeking a Paragraph (d) of § 340.6 provides that 0001. determination that an article should not APHIS will publish a notice in the • Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: be regulated under 7 CFR Part 340. Federal Register providing 60 days for Send your comment to Docket No. Paragraphs (b) and (c) of § 340.6 public comment for petitions for a APHIS–2014–0007, Regulatory Analysis describe the form that a petition for a determination of nonregulated status. and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station determination of nonregulated status On March 6, 2012, we published in the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13036 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

Federal Register (77 FR 13258–13260, analysis of any potential environmental ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Docket No. APHIS–2011–0129) a impacts associated with the petition Six Rivers National Forest Office, 1330 notice 1 describing our process for request. For petitions for which APHIS Bayshore Way, Eureka, California. soliciting public comment when prepares an EA, APHIS will follow our Written comments may be submitted considering petitions for determinations published process for soliciting public as described under SUPPLEMENTARY of nonregulated status for GE organisms. involvement (see footnote 1) and INFORMATION. All comments, including In that notice we indicated that APHIS publish a separate notice in the Federal names and addresses when provided, would accept written comments Register announcing the availability of are placed in the record and are regarding a petition once APHIS APHIS’ EA and plant pest risk available for public inspection and deemed it complete. assessment. Should APHIS determine copying. The public may inspect In accordance with § 340.6(d) of the that an EIS is necessary, APHIS will comments received at Six Rivers regulations and our process for complete the NEPA EIS process in National Forest Office. Please call ahead soliciting public input when accordance with Council on to facilitate entry into the building. considering petitions for determinations Environmental Quality regulations (40 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of nonregulated status for GE organisms, CFR Part 1500–1508) and APHIS’ NEPA Lynn Wright, RAC Coordinator, by we are publishing this notice to inform implementing regulations (7 CFR Part phone at 707–441–3562 or via email at the public that APHIS will accept 372). [email protected]. written comments regarding the petition Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781– Individuals who use for a determination of nonregulated 7786; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and telecommunication devices for the deaf status from interested or affected 371.3. (TDD) may call the Federal Information persons for a period of 60 days from the Done in Washington, DC, this 28th day of Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 date of this notice. The petition is February 2014. between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., available for public review and Kevin Shea, Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday. Please make requests in comment, and copies are available as Administrator, Animal and Plant Health indicated under ADDRESSES and FOR Inspection Service. advance for sign language interpreting, FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT assistive listening devices or other above. [FR Doc. 2014–04968 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] We are interested in receiving reasonable accomodation for access to BILLING CODE 3410–34–P comments regarding potential the facility or procedings by contacting environmental and interrelated the person listed above. economic issues and impacts that DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: APHIS may determine should be Additional RAC information, including considered in our evaluation of the Forest Service the meeting agenda and the meeting petition. We are particularly interested summary/minutes can be found at the in receiving comments regarding Humboldt County Resource Advisory following Web site: http:// biological, cultural, or ecological issues, Committee Meeting www.fs.usda.gov/srnf. The agenda will and we encourage the submission of AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. include time for people to make oral scientific data, studies, or research to statements of three minutes or less. ACTION: Notice of meetings. support your comments. We also Individuals wishing to make an oral request that, when possible, SUMMARY: The Humboldt County statement should request in writing to commenters provide relevant Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) be scheduled on the agenda 5 days prior information regarding specific localities will meet in Eureka, California. The to the meeting. Anyone who would like or regions as corn growth, crop committee is authorized under the to bring related matters to the attention management, and crop utilization may Secure Rural Schools and Community of the committee may file written vary considerably by geographic region. Self-Determination Act (Pub. L. 110– statements with the committee staff After the comment period closes, 343) (the Act) and operates in before or after the meeting. Written APHIS will review all written comments compliance with the Federal Advisory comments and requests for time for oral received during the comment period Committee Act. The purpose of the comments must be sent to Lynn Wright, and any other relevant information. Any committee is to improve collaborative RAC Coordinator, 1330 Bayshore Way, substantive issues identified by APHIS relationships and to provide advice and Eureka, California 95501; or by email at based on our review of the petition and recommendations to the Forest Service [email protected]; or via facsimile at our evaluation and analysis of concerning projects and funding 707–445–8677. comments will be considered in the consistent with the title II of the Act. Meeting Accommodations: If you are development of our decisionmaking The meeting is open to the public. The a person requiring reasonable documents. purpose of the meetings are to provide accommodation, please make requests As part of our decisionmaking process updates regarding status of Secure Rural in advance for sign language regarding a GE organism’s regulatory Schools Title II program and funding, interpreting, assistive listening devices status, APHIS prepares a plant pest risk discuss funding strategies and review or other reasonable accommodation for assessment to assess its plant pest risk and recommend potential projects access to the facility or proceedings by and the appropriate environmental eligible for funding. contacting the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION documentation—either an DATES: The meetings will start at 5:30 CONTACT. All reasonable environmental assessment (EA) or an p.m. and be held on the following dates: environmental impact statement (EIS)— • accommodation requests are managed April 9, 2014. on a case by case basis. in accordance with the National • April 15, 2014. Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), to Dated: February 28, 2014. provide the Agency with a review and All RAC meetings are subject to cancellation. For status of meeting prior Tyrone Kelley, Forest Supervisor. 1 To view the notice, go to http:// to attendance, please contact the person www.regulations.gov/# !docketDetail;D=APHIS- listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION [FR Doc. 2014–04969 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] 2011-0129. CONTACT. BILLING CODE 3411–15–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13037

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE reasonable accomodation for access to Public Law 103–465, Public Law 106–36 the facility or procedings by contacting and Public Law 108–429 (‘‘the Act’’). Forest Service the person listed above. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Del Norte Resource Advisory Supriya Kumar, Subsidies Enforcement Additional RAC information, including Committee Office; phone number: (202) 482–3530; the meeting agenda and the meeting fax number: (202) 501–7952; and email AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. summary/minutes can be found at the address: [email protected]. ACTION: Notice of meetings. following Web site: http:// www.fs.usda.gov/srnf. The agenda will SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant SUMMARY: The Del Norte Resource include time for people to make oral to the Act, the Departments of the Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in statements of three minutes or less. Interior and Commerce (‘‘the Eureka, California. The committee is Individuals wishing to make an oral Departments’’) share responsibility for authorized under the Secure Rural statement should request in writing to the allocation of duty exemptions Schools and Community Self- be scheduled on the agenda 5 days prior among program producers in the United Determination Act (Pub. L. 110–343) to the meeting. Anyone who would like States territories of Guam, American (the Act) and operates in compliance to bring related matters to the attention Samoa and the Northern Mariana with the Federal Advisory Committee of the committee may file written Islands. Act. The purpose of the committee is to statements with the committee staff In accordance with section 303.3(a) of improve collaborative relationships and before or after the meeting. Written the regulations (15 CFR 303.3(a)), the to provide advice and recommendations comments and requests for time for oral total quantity of duty-free insular to the Forest Service concerning projects comments must be sent to Lynn Wright, watches and watch movements for and funding consistent with the title II RAC Coordinator, 1330 Bayshore Way, calendar year 2013 is 1,866,000 units for of the Act. The meeting is open to the Eureka, California 95501; by email at the USVI. This amount was established public. The purpose of the meetings are [email protected]; or via facsimile at in Changes in Watch, Watch Movement to provide updates regarding status of 707–445–8677. and Jewelry Program for the U.S. Insular Secure Rural Schools Title II program Meeting Accommodations: If you are Possessions, 65 FR 8048 (February 17, and funding, discuss funding strategies a person requiring reasonable 2000). There are currently no program and review and recommend potential accommodation, please make requests producers in Guam, American Samoa or projects eligible for funding. in advance for sign language the Northern Mariana Islands. DATES: The meetings will all start at 6:00 interpreting, assistive listening devices The criteria for the calculation of the p.m. on the following dates: or other reasonable accommodation for calendar year 2014 duty-exemption • April 1, 2014 access to the facility or proceedings by allocations among program producers • April 8, 2014 contacting the person listed in the within a particular territory are set forth • April 24, 2014 section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION in section 303.14 of the regulations (15 CONTACT. All reasonable All RAC meetings are subject to CFR 303.14). The Departments have accommodation requests are managed cancellation. For status of meeting prior verified and, where appropriate, on a case by case basis. to attendance, please contact the person adjusted the data submitted in listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Dated: February 28, 2014. application form ITA–334P by USVI CONTACT. Tyrone Kelley, program producers and have inspected Forest Supervisor. these producers’ operations in ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at accordance with section 303.5 of the [FR Doc. 2014–04979 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] the Del Norte County Unified School regulations (15 CFR 303.5). District, Redwood Room, 301 West BILLING CODE 3411–15–P In calendar year 2013, USVI program Washington Boulevard, Crescent City, producers shipped 62,424 watches and California. watch movements into the customs Written comments may be submitted DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE territory of the United States under the as described under SUPPLEMENTARY Act. The dollar amount of corporate INFORMATION. All comments, including International Trade Administration income taxes paid by USVI program names and addresses when provided, producers during calendar year 2013, are placed in the record and are DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR and the creditable wages and benefits available for public inspection and paid by these producers during calendar copying. The public may inspect Allocation of Duty-Exemptions for year 2013 to residents of the territory comments received at Six Rivers Calendar Year 2014 for Watch was a combined total of $1,087,105. The National Forest Office. Please call ahead Producers Located in the United States calendar year 2014 USVI annual duty to facilitate entry into the building. Virgin Islands exemption allocations, based on the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, data verified by the Departments, are as Lynn Wright, RAC Coordinator, by International Trade Administration, follows: phone at 707–441–3562 or via email at Department of Commerce; Office of [email protected]. Insular Affairs, Department of the Program producer Annual Individuals who use Interior. allocation telecommunication devices for the deaf ACTION: Notice. (TDD) may call the Federal Information Belair Quartz, Inc...... 500,000 Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 SUMMARY: This action allocates calendar between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., year 2014 duty exemptions for watch The balance of the units allocated to Eastern Standard Time, Monday assembly producers (‘‘program the USVI is available for new entrants through Friday. Please make requests in producers’’) located in the United States into the program or existing program advance for sign language interpreting, Virgin Islands (‘‘USVI’’) pursuant to producers who request a supplement to assistive listening devices or other Public Law 97–446, as amended by their allocation.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13038 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

Dated: February 26, 2014. amending those final and amended final Department published the Final Carole Showers, determinations with respect to the 29 Determination and on February 1, 2005, Director, Office of Policy Enforcement and plaintiffs that were party to the the Department published the Amended Compliance, International Trade litigation.8 Final 1 and Order, assigning a final Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective February 28, 2014. separate rate of 53.68 percent to 39 Dated: February 28, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: companies to which we granted separate Nikolao Pula, Irene Gorelik, Office V, Enforcement rate status. On August 17, 2006, the Director of Office of Insular Affairs, and Compliance, International Trade Department published a second Department of the Interior. Administration, U.S. Department of amended final determination, wherein [FR Doc. 2014–05013 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution we granted separate rate status to an additional 11 companies which were BILLING CODE 3510–DS–4310–93–P Avenue NW., Washington, DC, 20230; telephone: (202) 482–6905. not granted a separate rate in the Final Determination or the Amended Final 1 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE and Order.12 Of all the companies to Background which we granted separate rate status in International Trade Administration Amended Final 1 and Order and On January 27, 2004, the Department Amended Final 2, 29 companies (the [A–570–893] initiated the antidumping duty ‘‘SR companies’’) are plaintiffs subject investigations of certain frozen and Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp to this Remand Opinion and Order. canned warmwater shrimp from Brazil, After the issuance of the Amended Final From the People’s Republic of China: Ecuador, India, Thailand, the People’s Notice of Court Decision Not in 1 and Order, the Department’s Final Republic of China and the Socialist Determination was challenged at the Harmony With the Final Determination Republic of Vietnam.9 On July 16, 2004, and Amended Final Determination of CIT by the mandatory respondents and the Department published the was subsequently remanded to the the Antidumping Duty Investigation 10 Preliminary Determination, wherein Department for redeterminations.13 The we assigned a separate rate margin of AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, resulting recalculations of the 49.09 percent to 21 non-selected formerly Import Administration, mandatory respondents’ investigation companies eligible for a separate rate. International Trade Administration, dumping margins were reduced to 5.07 Subsequently, we amended the Department of Commerce. percent, 7.20 percent, and 8.45 Preliminary Determination to include percent.14 Consequently, as a result of SUMMARY: On February 18, 2014, the two additional non-examined United States Court of International the SR companies’ litigation, in the companies to which we granted separate Remand Opinion and Order the Trade (‘‘CIT’’) sustained the Department rate status.11 On December 8, 2004, the of Commerce’s (‘‘the Department’’) Department recalculated the weighted- 1 average margin assigned to the SR results of redetermination, pursuant to 8 These companies are: Beihai Zhengwu Industry the CIT’s Remand Opinion and Order.2 Co., Ltd.; Chaoyang Qiaofeng Group Co Ltd companies based on the revised Consistent with the decision of the (Shantou City Qiaofeng Group Co Ltd); Hainan Fruit mandatory respondents’ investigation United States Court of Appeals for the Vegetable Food Allocation Co., Ltd.; Pingyang dumping margins. Xinye Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; Shantou Jinhang Federal Circuit (‘‘CAFC’’) in Timken,3 as On September 11, 2013, the Aquatic Industry Co., Ltd.; Shantou Longfeng Department released the draft clarified by Diamond Sawblades,4 the Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.; Shantou Ocean Freezing Department is notifying the public that Industry And Trade General Corporation; Shantou redetermination of remand and invited the final judgment in this case is not in Ruiyuan Industry Co., Ltd.; Shantou Sez Xu Hao interested parties to comment. The Fastness Freeze Aquatic Factory Co., Ltd.; Shantou harmony with the Department’s Final Department received no comments on Shengping Oceanstar Business Co., Ltd.; Shantou the draft redetermination 15 and issued Determination,5 Amended Final 1 & Wanya Food Factory Co., Ltd.; Shantou Yuexing Order,6 and Amended Final 2 7 and is Enterprise Company; Taizhou Zhonghuan Industrial Co., Ltd.; Yantai Wei-Cheng Food Co., Than Fair Value: Certain Frozen and Canned Ltd.; Zhejiang Cereals, Oils, Foodstuffs Import Warmwater Shrimp From the People’s Republic of 1 See Final Results Of Redetermination Pursuant Export Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang Daishan Baofa Aquatic China, 69 FR 53409 (September 1, 2004). To Court Remand, Court No. 05–00182, dated Product Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang Evernew Seafood Co., 12 See Amended Final 2. September 26, 2013, available at: http:// Ltd.; Zhejiang Taizhou Lingyang Aquatic Products 13 See Allied Pacific Food (Dalian) Co. v. United enforcement.trade.gov/remands/index.html Co.; Zhejiang Zhenglong Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.; States, 716 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (CIT 2010); Shantou (‘‘Beihai Final Remand Redetermination’’). Zhoushan Cereals Oils Foodstuffs Import Export Red Garden Foodstuff Co. v. United States, 880 F. 2 See Beihai Zhengwu Indus. Co. v. United States, Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Diciyuan Aquatic Products Co., Supp. 2d 1332 (CIT 2012); see also Certain Frozen Consol. Court No. 05–00182 (CIT Aug. 13,2013) Ltd.; Zhoushan Haichang Food Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Warmwater Shrimp From the People’s Republic of (‘‘Remand Opinion and Order’’). Huading Seafood Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Industrial China: Notice of Amended Final Determination of 3 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Juntai Foods Co., Ltd.; Sales at Less Than Fair Value Pursuant to Court (Fed. Cir. 1990) (‘‘Timken’’). Zhoushan Lizhou Fishery Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Decision, 76 FR 30100 (May 24, 2011) (‘‘Allied and 4 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. Putuo Huafa Sea Products Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Yelin Remand’’) and Certain Frozen Warmwater United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) Xifeng Aquatic Co., Ltd.; and Zhoushan Zhenyang Shrimp From the People’s Republic of China: (‘‘Diamond Sawblades’’). Developing Co., Ltd. Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the 5 See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 9 See Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Final Determination and Amended Final Less Than Fair Value: Certain Frozen and Canned Shrimp From Brazil, Ecuador, India, Thailand, the Determination of the Antidumping Duty Warmwater Shrimp From the People’s Republic of People’s Republic of China and the Socialist Investigation, 77 FR 66434 (November 5, 2012) China, 69 FR 70997 (December 8, 2004) (‘‘Final Republic of Vietnam, 69 FR 3876 (January 27, 2004) (‘‘Red Garden Remand’’). Determination’’). (‘‘Initiation’’). 14 See Allied and Yelin Remand and Red Garden 6 See Notice of Amended Final Determination of 10 See Notice of Preliminary Determination of Remand. Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Partial Affirmative 15 See ‘‘Memorandum to the File, from Irene Duty Order: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp Preliminary Determination of Critical Gorelik, Senior Analyst, re: Remand From the People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 5149 Circumstances and Postponement of Final Redetermination in the Antidumping Duty (February 1, 2005) (‘‘Amended Final 1 & Order’’). Determination: Certain Frozen and Canned Administrative Review of Certain Frozen 7 See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the Warmwater Shrimp From the People’s Republic of Warmwater Shrimp From the People’s Republic of People’s Republic of China: Notice of Second China, 69 FR 42654 (July 16, 2004) (‘‘Preliminary China’’ and ‘‘Memorandum to the File, from Irene Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Determination’’). Gorelik, Senior Analyst, re; Recalculation of the Than Fair Value, 71 FR 47484 (August 17, 2006) 11 See Notice of Amended Preliminary Investigation Separate Rate Margin,’’ both dated (‘‘Amended Final 2’’). Antidumping Duty Determination of Sales at Less September 11, 2013.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13039

the unchanged Beihai Final Remand with a Department determination and expiration of the period of appeal or, if Redetermination on September 26, must suspend liquidation of entries appealed, pending a final and 2013. No party contested the pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. conclusive court decision. The cash Department’s remand redetermination. The CIT’s February 18, 2014, judgment deposit rate will remain the company- On February 18, 2014, the CIT affirmed sustaining the Beihai Final Remand specific rate established for the all aspects of the Department’s remand Redetermination constitutes a final subsequent and most recent period redetermination.16 decision of that court that is not in during which the respondent was harmony with the Final Determination, reviewed. Timken Notice Amended Final 1 & Order, and In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at Amended Final 2. This notice is Amended Final Determination 341, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, published in fulfillment of the the CAFC has held that, pursuant to publication requirements of Timken. Because there is now a final court section 516A(e) of the Act, the Accordingly, the Department will decision with respect to the 29 litigants, Department must publish a notice of a continue the suspension of liquidation the revised separate rate dumping court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’ of the subject merchandise pending the margin is as follows:

Weighted-average Manufacturer/exporter margin (percent)

Beihai Zhengwu Industry Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Chaoyang Qiaofeng Group Co., Ltd. (Shantou Qiaofeng (Group) Co., Ltd.) (Shantou/Chaoyang Qiaofeng) ...... 6.70 Hainan Fruit Vegetable Food Allocation Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Pingyang Xinye Aquatic Products Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Shantou Jinhang Aquatic Industry Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Shantou Long Feng Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. (Shantou Longfeng Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.) ...... 6.70 Shantou Ocean Freezing Industry and Trade General Corporation ...... 6.70 Shantou Ruiyuan Industry Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Shantou SEZ Xu Hao Fastness Freeze Aquatic Factory Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Shantou Shengping Oceanstar Business Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Shantou Wanya Food Factory Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Shantou Yuexing Enterprise Company ...... 6.70 Taizhou Zhonghuan Industrial Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Yantai Wei-Cheng Food Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhejiang Cereals, Oils & Foodstuff Import & Export Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhejiang Daishan Baofa Aquatic Product Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhejiang Evernew Seafood Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhejiang Taizhou Lingyang Aquatic Products Co ...... 6.70 Zhejiang Zhenglong Foodstuffs Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhoushan Cereals Oils and Foodstuffs Import and Export Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhoushan Diciyuan Aquatic Products Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhoushan Haichang Food Co. Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhoushan Huading Seafood Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhoushan Industrial Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhoushan Juntai Foods Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhoushan Lizhou Fishery Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhoushan Putuo Huafa Sea Products Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhoushan Xifeng Aquatic Co., Ltd ...... 6.70 Zhoushan Zhenyang Developing Co., Ltd ...... 6.70

This notice is issued and published in DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration, accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), Department of Commerce. 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. International Trade Administration SUMMARY: On February 19, 2014, the Dated: February 28, 2014. [C–570–968] United States Court of International Trade (CIT) sustained the Department of Paul Piquado, Aluminum Extrusions From the Commerce’s (Department’s) results of Assistant Secretary, for Enforcement and People’s Republic of China: Notice of redetermination, which recalculated the Compliance. Court Decision Not in Harmony With countervailable subsidy rate for the [FR Doc. 2014–05018 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Zhongya Companies 1 in the BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Determination and Notice of Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty countervailing duty (CVD) investigation Determination of aluminum extrusions from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) 2 AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, pursuant to the CIT’s remand order in formerly Import Administration, Zhaoqing.3 Consistent with the decision

16 See Beihai Zhengwu Indus. Co. v. United Aluminum HK Holding Ltd., and Karlton 3 See Zhaoqing New Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd. States, Slip Op. 14–18, Ct. No. 05–00182 (CIT Aluminum Company Ltd. v. United States, 929 F. Supp. 2d 1324 (CIT 2013) 2014). 2 See Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s (July 17, 2013) (Zhaoqing); see also Zhaoqing New 1 The Zhongya Companies are Zhaoqing New Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd. v. United States, Duty Determination, 76 FR 18521 (April 4, 2011) Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd, Zhongya Shaped Continued (Final Determination).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13040 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

of the United States Court of Appeals for Thai industrial land values as its Final Determination for the Zhongya the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Timken,4 benchmarks for comparison with the Companies.13 The Department finds the as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,5 the land-use rights acquired by the Zhongya following revised net subsidy rate Department is notifying the public that Companies for reconsideration or exists: the final CIT judgment in this case is not further explanation.9 in harmony with the Department’s Final In its final results of redetermination Determination and is therefore pursuant to Zhaoqing, the Department amending its Final Determination. reconsidered, and revised, the land Ad Valorem 6 benchmark used to determine the Company net subsidy DATES: Effective March 3, 2014. rate benefit received by the Zhongya FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Companies in 2006. Specifically, we Robert Copyak, Office III, AD/CVD Zhaoqing New Zhongya Alu- 4.89 percent recalculated the countervailable subsidy Operations, Enforcement and minum Co., Ltd., Zhongya ad valorem provided to the Zhongya Companies Compliance, U.S. Department of Shaped Aluminum HK Hold- using, instead of Thai industrial land ing Ltd., and Karlton Alu- Commerce, C129, 14th Street and prices, a benchmark based on the ‘‘non- minum Company Ltd. (col- Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, infrastructure’’ land price listed for lectively, the Zhongya Com- DC 20230; telephone: 202–482–2209. Subic Bay Freeport in the Philippines. panies). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April As a result of this revision, the total net 4, 2011, the Department published the subsidy rate calculated for the Zhongya The cash deposit rate for the Zhongya Final Determination. In the Final Companies changed from 8.02 percent Companies will be the rate listed above, Determination, the Department ad valorem to 4.89 percent ad effective March 3, 2014, and the determined that the Zhongya valorem.10 Department will instruct U.S. Customs Companies received a countervailable On February 19, 2014, the CIT and Border Protection accordingly. This subsidy with regard to the Government affirmed the Department’s final results notice is issued and published in of China’s provision of land-use rights of redetermination pursuant to accordance with sections 516A(c)(1), located in the Zhaoqing High-Tech remand.11 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Industry Development Zone (ZHTIDZ) Dated: February 28, 2014. Timken Notice for less than adequate remuneration Paul Piquado, (LTAR) in 2006. Because the 12 In its decision in Timken as Assistant Secretary, for Enforcement and Department determined that it could not clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the Compliance. use Chinese or world market prices as CAFC has held that, pursuant to section [FR Doc. 2014–05020 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] a benchmark, it compared the price that 516A(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P the Zhongya Companies paid for its amended (the Act), the Department land-use rights with comparable market- must publish a notice of a court based prices for land purchases; decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE specifically, we used the ‘‘indicative a Department determination and must land values’’ for land in Thai industrial suspend liquidation of entries pending National Oceanic and Atmospheric estates, parks, and zones, which are a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s Administration published in the ‘‘Asian Industrial February 19, 2014, judgment in Property Market Flash’’ by Coldwell Zhaoqing II affirming the Department’s RIN 0648–XD132 Banker Richard Ellis (CBRE), for redetermination on remand to rely on a 7 Schedules for Atlantic Shark benchmark purposes. benchmark from the Philippines, and Identification Workshops and In Zhaoqing, the CIT held that it which results in a revised rate for the Protected Species Safe Handling, ‘‘cannot conclude that a reasonable Zhongya Companies (4.89 percent ad Release, and Identification Workshops reading of the record as a whole valorem), constitutes a final decision of supports Commerce’s rebuttal of that court that is not in harmony with AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Plaintiffs’ claim that the land they the Department’s Final Determination. Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and leased was undeveloped in 2006 and This notice is published in fulfillment Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), therefore not comparable to a fully of the publication requirements of Commerce. 8 developed industrial park’’ and Timken. Accordingly, the Department ACTION: Notice of public workshops. remanded the Department’s selection of will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise SUMMARY: Free Atlantic Shark Court No. 11–00181 (CIT 2014) (Order) (Zhaoqing pending expiration of the period of Identification Workshops and Protected II). appeal or, if appealed, pending a final Species Safe Handling, Release, and 4 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken). and conclusive court decision. Identification Workshops will be held in 5 April, May, and June of 2014. Certain See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. Amended Final Determination United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) fishermen and shark dealers are (Diamond Sawblades). Because there is now a final CIT 6 March 1, 2014, 10 days after the Court’s decision decision with respect to the Final 13 As a result of the CIT’s severance and was issued, falls on a Saturday. Therefore, the Determination, the Department amends consolidation of parties’ challenges to the Final effective date is Monday, March 3, 2014. See Notice Determination, the Final Determination was of Clarification: Application of ‘‘Next Business previously amended, in Aluminum Extrusions From 9 Day’’ Rule for Administrative Determination Id. the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Court Deadlines Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, As 10 See ‘‘Zhaoqing New Zhongya Aluminum Co., Decision Not in Harmony With Final Affirmative Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005). Ltd. and Zhongya Shaped Aluminum (HK) Holding Countervailing Duty Determination and Notice of 7 See Final Determination, and accompanying Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 11–00181; Slip Op. Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Issues and Decision Memorandum at ‘‘Provision of 13–83 (CIT 2013), Final Results of Redetermination Determination, 77 FR 74466 (December 14, 2012) Land-Use Rights and Fee Exemptions To Pursuant to Court Remand,’’ dated August 20, 2013 (Amended Final Determination). The Amended Enterprises Located in the ZHITDZ for LTAR’’ and at 8. Final Determination amended the ‘‘all others’’ rate Comment 24. 11 See Zhaoqing II at 2. but did not amend the Zhongya Companies’ net 8 See Zhaoqing, 929 F. Supp. 2d at 1329. 12 See Timken, 893 F.2d at 341. subsidy rate.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13041

required to attend a workshop to meet dealer opts to send a proxy, the dealer reporting form and increase the regulatory requirements and to maintain must designate a proxy for each place of accuracy of species-specific dealer- valid permits. Specifically, the Atlantic business covered by the dealer’s permit reported information. Reducing the Shark Identification Workshop is which first receives Atlantic sharks. number of unknown and improperly mandatory for all federally permitted Only one certificate will be issued to identified sharks will improve quota Atlantic shark dealers. The Protected each proxy. A proxy must be a person monitoring and the data used in stock Species Safe Handling, Release, and who is currently employed by a place of assessments. These workshops will train Identification Workshop is mandatory business covered by the dealer’s permit; shark dealer permit holders or their for vessel owners and operators who use is a primary participant in the proxies to properly identify Atlantic bottom longline, pelagic longline, or identification, weighing, and/or first shark carcasses. gillnet gear, and who have also been receipt of fish as they are offloaded from issued shark or swordfish limited access a vessel; and who fills out dealer Protected Species Safe Handling, permits. Additional free workshops will reports. Atlantic shark dealers are Release, and Identification Workshops be conducted during 2014 and will be prohibited from renewing a Federal announced in a future notice. shark dealer permit unless a valid Since January 1, 2007, shark limited- access and swordfish limited-access DATES: The Atlantic Shark Identification Atlantic Shark Identification Workshop Workshops will be held on April 10, certificate for each business location permit holders who fish with longline May 15, and June 4, 2014. that first receives Atlantic sharks has or gillnet gear have been required to The Protected Species Safe Handling, been submitted with the permit renewal submit a copy of their Protected Species Release, and Identification Workshops application. Additionally, trucks or Safe Handling, Release, and will be held on April 10, April 29, May other conveyances that are extensions of Identification Workshop certificate in 7, May 14, June 3, and June 27, 2014. a dealer’s place of business must order to renew either permit (71 FR See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for possess a copy of a valid dealer or proxy 58057; October 2, 2006). These further details. Atlantic Shark Identification Workshop certificate(s) are valid for 3 years. As ADDRESSES: The Atlantic Shark certificate. such, vessel owners who have not Identification Workshops will be held in Workshop Dates, Times, and Locations already attended a workshop and Wilmington, NC; Bohemia, NY; and received a NMFS certificate, or vessel Manahawkin, NJ. 1. April 10, 2014, 12 p.m.–4 p.m., owners whose certificate(s) will expire The Protected Species Safe Handling, Hampton Inn, 124 Old Eastwood prior to the next permit renewal, must Road, Wilmington, NC 28403. Release, and Identification Workshops attend a workshop to fish with, or 2. May 15, 2014, 12 p.m.–4 p.m., will be held in Manahawkin, NJ; Kitty renew, their swordfish and shark LaQuinta Inn & Suites, 10 Aero Road, Hawk, NC; Kenner, LA; Warwick, RI; limited-access permits. Additionally, Palm Coast, FL; and Ronkonkoma, NY. Bohemia, NY 11716. 3. June 4, 2014, 12 p.m.–4 p.m., Holiday new shark and swordfish limited-access See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for permit applicants who intend to fish further details on workshop locations. Inn, 151 Route 72 East, Manahawkin, NJ 08050. with longline or gillnet gear must attend FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick a Protected Species Safe Handling, Pearson by phone: (727) 824–5399, or by Registration Release, and Identification Workshop fax: (727) 824–5398. To register for a scheduled Atlantic and submit a copy of their workshop SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Shark Identification Workshop, please certificate before either of the permits workshop schedules, registration contact Eric Sander at esander@ will be issued. Approximately 172 free information, and a list of frequently peoplepc.com or at (386) 852–8588. Protected Species Safe Handling, asked questions regarding these Registration Materials Release, and Identification Workshops workshops are posted on the Internet at: have been conducted since 2006. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/ To ensure that workshop certificates workshops/. are linked to the correct permits, In addition to certifying vessel participants will need to bring the owners, at least one operator on board Atlantic Shark Identification following specific items to the vessels issued a limited-access Workshops workshop: swordfish or shark permit that uses Since January 1, 2008, Atlantic shark • Atlantic shark dealer permit holders longline or gillnet gear is required to dealers have been prohibited from must bring proof that the attendee is an attend a Protected Species Safe receiving, purchasing, trading, or owner or agent of the business (such as Handling, Release, and Identification bartering for Atlantic sharks unless a articles of incorporation), a copy of the Workshop and receive a certificate. valid Atlantic Shark Identification applicable permit, and proof of Vessels that have been issued a limited- Workshop certificate is on the premises identification. access swordfish or shark permit and of each business listed under the shark • Atlantic shark dealer proxies must that use longline or gillnet gear may not dealer permit that first receives Atlantic bring documentation from the permitted fish unless both the vessel owner and sharks (71 FR 58057; October 2, 2006). dealer acknowledging that the proxy is operator have valid workshop Dealers who attend and successfully attending the workshop on behalf of the certificates onboard at all times. Vessel complete a workshop are issued a permitted Atlantic shark dealer for a operators who have not already certificate for each place of business that specific business location, a copy of the attended a workshop and received a is permitted to receive sharks. These appropriate valid permit, and proof of NMFS certificate, or vessel operators certificate(s) are valid for 3 years. identification. Approximately 95 free Atlantic Shark whose certificate(s) will expire prior to Identification Workshops have been Workshop Objectives their next fishing trip, must attend a conducted since January 2007. The Atlantic Shark Identification workshop to operate a vessel with Currently, permitted dealers may send Workshops are designed to reduce the swordfish and shark limited-access a proxy to an Atlantic Shark number of unknown and improperly permits that uses longline or gillnet Identification Workshop. However, if a identified sharks reported in the dealer gear.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13042 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

Workshop Dates, Times, and Locations may prevent additional regulations on amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), 1. April 10, 2014, 9 a.m.–5 p.m., these fisheries in the future. and the regulations governing the Holiday Inn, 151 Route 72 East, Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 Manahawkin, NJ 08050. Dated: February 28, 2014. 2. April 29, 2014, 9 a.m.–5 p.m., CFR parts 222–226). Emily H. Menashes, Hilton Garden Inn, 5353 North Virginia The permit authorizes takes by Dare Trail, Kitty Hawk, NC 27949. Acting Director, Office of Sustainable harassment during aerial and vessel- 3. May 7, 2014, 9 a.m.–5 p.m., Hilton Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. based line-transect sampling, acoustic Inn, 901 Airline Drive, Kenner, LA [FR Doc. 2014–05016 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] sampling, behavioral observations, and 70062. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P vessel-based photo-identification and 4. May 14, 2014, 9 a.m.–5 p.m., Hilton biopsy sampling. Tissue samples Garden Inn, 1 Thurber Street, Warwick, collected in other countries may be RI 02886. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE imported into the U.S. The permit is 5. June 3, 2014, 9 a.m.–5 p.m., Hilton valid for five years from the date of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Garden Inn, 55 Town Center Boulevard, issuance. Administration Palm Coast, FL 32164. In compliance with the National 6. June 27, 2014, 9 a.m.–5 p.m., RIN 0648–XS35 Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 Clarion Inn, 3845 Veterans Memorial U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), a final Highway, Ronkonkoma, NY 11779. Marine Mammals; File No. 14450 determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically Registration AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and excluded from the requirement to To register for a scheduled Protected Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), prepare an environmental assessment or Species Safe Handling, Release, and Commerce. environmental impact statement. Identification Workshop, please contact As required by the ESA, issuance of ACTION: Angler Conservation Education at (386) Notice; issuance of permit. this permit was based on a finding that 682–0158. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a such permit: Registration Materials permit has been issued to the National (1) was applied for in good faith; (2) Marine Fisheries Service’s Southeast will not operate to the disadvantage of To ensure that workshop certificates Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC), 75 such endangered species; and (3) is are linked to the correct permits, Virginia Beach Drive, Miami, Florida consistent with the purposes and participants will need to bring the 33149 [Principal Investigator: Dr. Keith policies set forth in section 2 of the following specific items with them to Mullin] to conduct research on marine ESA. the workshop: • Individual vessel owners must mammals. Dated: March 4, 2014. bring a copy of the appropriate ADDRESSES: The permit and related Perry F. Gayaldo, swordfish and/or shark permit(s), a copy documents are available for review Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected of the vessel registration or upon written request or by appointment Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. documentation, and proof of in the following offices: [FR Doc. 2014–05014 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Permits and Conservation Division, identification. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P • Representatives of a business- Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, owned or co-owned vessel must bring 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, proof that the individual is an agent of Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301) COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM the business (such as articles of 427–8401; fax (301) 713–0376; PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR Northeast Region, NMFS, 55 Great incorporation), a copy of the applicable SEVERELY DISABLED swordfish and/or shark permit(s), and Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930; proof of identification. phone (978) 281–9328; fax (978) 281– Procurement List; Additions and • Vessel operators must bring proof of 9394; and Deletions identification. Southeast Region, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, Saint Petersburg, FL AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From Workshop Objectives 33701; phone (727) 824–5312; fax (727) People Who Are Blind or Severely The Protected Species Safe Handling, 824–5309. Disabled. Release, and Identification Workshops FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ACTION: Additions to and Deletions from are designed to teach longline and Kristy Beard, (301) 427–8401. the Procurement List. gillnet fishermen the required SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On SUMMARY: This action adds products to techniques for the safe handling and October 19, 2009, notice was published the Procurement List that will be release of entangled and/or hooked in the Federal Register (74 FR 53467) furnished by the nonprofit agency protected species, such as sea turtles, that a request for a permit to conduct employing persons who are blind or marine mammals, and smalltooth research on all cetacean species that have other severe disabilities, and sawfish. In an effort to improve occur in U.S. and international waters of deletes products and a service from the reporting, the proper identification of the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico and Procurement List previously furnished protected species will also be taught at Caribbean Sea had been submitted by by such agencies. these workshops. Additionally, the above-named applicant. The individuals attending these workshops requested permit has been issued under DATES: Effective April 7, 2014. will gain a better understanding of the the authority of the Marine Mammal ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase requirements for participating in these Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 From People Who Are Blind or Severely fisheries. The overall goal of these U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the regulations Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite workshops is to provide participants governing the taking and importing of 10800, Arlington, Virginia 22202–4149. with the skills needed to reduce the marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: mortality of protected species, which Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13043

603–7740, Fax: (703) 603–0655, or email determined that the products and OF ARTS, WASHINGTON, DC. [email protected]. service listed below are no longer Barry S. Lineback, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: suitable for procurement by the Federal Director, Business Operations. Government under 41 USC 8501–8506 Additions and 41 CFR 51–2.4. [FR Doc. 2014–04987 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] On January 24, 2014 (79 FR 4154– BILLING CODE 6353–01–P 4155), the Committee for Purchase From Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification People Who Are Blind or Severely I certify that the following action will Disabled published notice of proposed not have a significant impact on a BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL additions to the Procurement List. substantial number of small entities. PROTECTION After consideration of the material The major factors considered for this presented to it concerning capability of certification were: [Docket No: CFPB–2014–0005] qualified nonprofit agencies to provide the products and impact of the 1. The action will not result in Agency Information Collection additions on the current or most recent additional reporting, recordkeeping or Activities: Comment Request contractors, the Committee has other compliance requirements for small AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial determined that the products listed entities. below are suitable for procurement by 2. The action may result in Protection. the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. authorizing small entities to furnish the ACTION: Notice and request for comment. 8501–8506 and 41 CFR 51–2.4. products and service to the Government. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 3. There are no known regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 alternatives which would accomplish (PRA), the Consumer Financial I certify that the following action will the objectives of the Javits-Wagner- not have a significant impact on a Protection Bureau (Bureau) is proposing O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501–8506) in a new information collection titled, substantial number of small entities. connection with the products and The major factors considered for this ‘‘Debt Collection Survey from the service deleted from the Procurement Consumer Credit Panel.’’ certification were: List. 1. The action will not result in any DATES: Written comments are additional reporting, recordkeeping or End of Certification encouraged and must be received on or other compliance requirements for small before May 6, 2014 to be assured of entities other than the small Accordingly, the following products consideration. organization that will furnish the and service are deleted from the Procurement List: ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, products to the Government. identified by the title of the information 2. The action will result in Products collection, OMB Control Number (see authorizing small entity to furnish the Kit, Combination Dustpan and Broom below), and docket number (see above), products to the Government. by any of the following methods: 3. There are no known regulatory NSN: 7290–00–NIB–0002. NPA: New York City Industries for the Blind, • Electronic: http:// alternatives which would accomplish Inc., Brooklyn, NY. www.regulations.gov. Follow the the objectives of the Javits-Wagner- Contracting Activity: DEPARTMENT OF instructions for submitting comments. O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501–8506) in VETERANS AFFAIRS, NAC, HINES, IL. • Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: connection with the products proposed Tape, Electronic Data Processing Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for addition to the Procurement List. NSN: 7045–01–115–0502. (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street End of Certification NPA: North Central Sight Services, Inc., NW., Washington, DC 20552. Accordingly, the following products Williamsport, PA. Please note that comments submitted are added to the Procurement List: Contracting Activity: DEFENSE LOGISTICS by fax or email and those submitted AGENCY TROOP SUPPORT, after the comment period will not be Products PHILADELPHIA, PA. accepted. In general, all comments Tape, Electrical Insulation Card, Index received will be posted without change NSN: 5970–01–245–7042—Black, 1″ w × 108 NSN: 7530–00–281–1315. to regulations.gov, including any ft. NPA: Louisiana Association for the Blind, personal information provided. 3 ″ × NSN: 5970–01–013–9367—White, ⁄4 w 66 Shreveport, LA. Sensitive personal information, such as ft. Contracting Activity: GENERAL SERVICES account numbers or social security NPA: Cincinnati Association for the Blind, ADMINISTRATION, NEW YORK, NY. numbers, should not be included. Cincinnati, OH. Kit, Pre-Inked Stamps Contracting Activity: DEFENSE LOGISTICS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: AGENCY AVIATION, RICHMOND, VA. NSN: 7520–00–NIB–1090. Documentation prepared in support of Coverage: B-List for the Broad Government NSN: 7520–00–NIB–1099. this information collection request is Requirement as aggregated by the NSN: 7520–00–NIB–1105. available at www.regulations.gov. NSN: 7520–00–NIB–1107. Defense Logistics Agency Contracting Requests for additional information Office, Richmond, VA. NPA: The Lighthouse for the Blind, Inc. (Seattle Lighthouse), Seattle, WA. should be directed to the Consumer Deletions Contracting Activity: U.S. Postal Service, Financial Protection Bureau, (Attention: On January 24, 2014 (79 FR 4154– Washington, DC. PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552, (202) 435–9575, 4155) and January 31, 2014 (79 FR Service 5383), the Committee for Purchase From or email: [email protected]. Please do not Service Type/Location: Carpet Replacement submit comments to this mailbox. People Who Are Blind or Severely Service, Smithsonian National Gallery of Disabled published notices of proposed Art, 6th & Constitution Avenue NW., SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: deletions from the Procurement List. Washington, DC. Title of Collection: Debt Collection After consideration of the relevant NPA: UNKNOWN. Survey from the Consumer Credit Panel. matter presented, the Committee has Contracting Activity: NATIONAL GALLERY OMB Control Number: 3170–XXXX.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13044 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

Type of Review: New collection BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL 20552. Submissions must be (Request for a new OMB Control PROTECTION postmarked on or before 5:00 p.m. EST Number). on March 14, 2014. [Docket No. CFPB–2014–0001] • Affected Public: Individuals or Hand Delivery/Courier in Lieu of Mail: Christopher Banks, Consumer Households. Consumer Advisory Board and Councils Solicitation of Applications Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G Estimated Number of Respondents: for Membership Street NW., 6111 E–B, Washington, DC 3,400. 20552. Submissions must be received on Estimated Total Annual Burden AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial or before 5:00 p.m. EST on March 14, Hours: 1,133. Protection. 2014. Abstract: The CFPB plans to conduct ACTION: Notice; Extension of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: a mail survey of consumers to learn Application Period. Requests for additional information should be directed to Christopher about their experiences interacting with SUMMARY: On January 15, 2014, Director the debt collection industry. The survey Richard Cordray of the Consumer Banks, Program Analyst, Consumer will ask consumers about their Financial Protection Bureau (‘‘Bureau’’) Financial Protection Bureau, (202) 435– experiences with debt collectors, such published an invitation to the public for 9064. as whether they have been contacted by application to its Consumer Advisory SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: debt collectors in the past, whether they Board (the ‘‘Board’’), Community Bank I. Background recognized the debt that was being Advisory Council, and Credit Union collected, and about their interactions Advisory Council in the Federal The Bureau is charged with regulating ‘‘the offering and provision of consumer with the debt collectors. The survey will Register, as warranted in the Wall Street financial products or services under the also ask consumers about their Reform and Consumer Protection Act Federal consumer financial laws,’’ so as preferences for how they would like to (‘‘Dodd-Frank Act’’). The Consumer Advisory Board and Councils to ensure that ‘‘all consumers have be contacted by debt collectors, access to markets for consumer financial opinions about potential regulatory application deadline was February 28, 2014. To allow interested persons more products and services and that markets interventions in debt collection markets, for consumer financial products and and about their knowledge of their legal time to consider and submit an application for the Community Bank services are fair, transparent, and rights regarding debt collections. The competitive.’’ Pursuant to Section information collected through this Advisory Board and Credit Union Advisory Board, the Bureau has 1021(c) of the Wall Street Reform and survey will be used to inform a CFPB determined that an extension of the Consumer Protection Act, Public Law rulemaking concerning debt collection application until March 14, 2014 is 111–203 (‘‘Dodd-Frank Act’’), the and research purposes. appropriate. Bureau’s primary functions are: Request for Comments: Comments are 1. Conducting financial education DATES: The application deadline for the invited on: (a) Whether the collection of programs; Consumer Advisory Board and Councils information is necessary for the proper 2. Collecting, investigating, and Solicitation of Application published responding to consumer complaints; performance of the functions of the January 15, 2014, 79 FR 2636, is Bureau, including whether the 3. Collecting, researching, monitoring, extended. Complete application packets and publishing information relevant to information will have practical utility; must be received on or before 5:00 p.m. the function of markets for consumer (b) The accuracy of the Bureau’s on or before March 14, 2014. financial products and services to estimate of the burden of the collection ADDRESSES: Complete application identify risks to consumers and the of information, including the validity of packets are required from each proper functioning of such markets; the methods and the assumptions used; applicant. The three components of a 4. Supervising persons covered under (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, complete application are: a re´sume´, a the Dodd-Frank Act for compliance with and clarity of the information to be completed application, and a letter of Federal consumer financial law, and collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the recommendation from a third party. The taking appropriate enforcement action burden of the collection of information appropriate forms can be accessed at: to address violations of Federal on respondents, including through the http://www.consumerfinance.gov/blog/ consumer financial law; use of automated collection techniques extended-deadline-apply-to-our- 5. Issuing rules, orders, and guidance or other forms of information community-bank-advisory-council-and- implementing Federal consumer technology. Comments submitted in credit-union-advisory-council/. financial law; and response to this notice will be If electronic submission is not 6. Performing such support activities summarized and/or included in the possible, the completed application as may be needed or useful to facilitate request for Office of Management and packet may be mailed to Christopher the other functions of the Bureau. Budget (OMB) approval. All comments Banks, Consumer Financial Protection As described in more detail below, will become a matter of public record. Bureau, 1700 G Street NW., 6108 E–A, Section 1014 of the Dodd-Frank Act Washington, DC 20552. calls for the Director of the Bureau to Dated: February 26, 2014. All applications for membership on establish a Consumer Advisory Board to Ashwin Vasan, the Board and Advisory Council should advise and consult with the Bureau Chief Information Officer, Bureau of be sent: regarding its functions, and to provide Consumer Financial Protection. • Electronically: CFPB_ information on emerging trends and [FR Doc. 2014–05010 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] [email protected]. We practices in the consumer financial BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P strongly encourage electronic markets. submissions. • Mail: Christopher Banks, Consumer III. Qualifications Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G Pursuant to Section 1014(b) of the Street NW., 6111 E–B, Washington, DC Dodd-Frank Act, in appointing members

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13045

to the Board, ‘‘the Director shall seek to with total assets of more than $10 CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND assemble experts in consumer billion. COMMUNITY SERVICE protection, financial services, The Bureau has a special interest in Sunshine Act Notice community development, fair lending ensuring that women, minority groups, and civil rights, and consumer financial and individuals with disabilities are The Board of Directors of the products or services and representatives adequately represented on the Board Corporation for National and of depository institutions that primarily serve underserved communities, and and Councils, and therefore, encourages Community Service gives notice of the representatives of communities that applications from qualified candidates following meeting: have been significantly impacted by from these groups. The Bureau also has DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, March 11, higher-priced mortgage loans, and seek a special interest in establishing a Board 2014, 2:30–3:30 p.m. (ET). representation of the interests of that is represented by a diversity of PLACE: Corporation for National and covered persons and consumers, viewpoints and constituencies, and Community Service, 1201 New York without regard to party affiliation.’’ The therefore encourages applications from Avenue NW., Suite 8312, Washington, determinants of ‘‘expertise’’ shall qualified candidates who: DC 20525 (Please go to 10th floor depend, in part, on the constituency, 1. Represent the United States’ reception area for escort). interests, or industry sector the nominee geographic diversity; and CALL–IN INFORMATION: This meeting is seeks to represent, and where 2. Represent the interests of special available to the public through the appropriate, shall include significant following toll-free call-in number: 888– populations identified in the Dodd- experience as a direct service provider 790–3155 conference call access code Frank Act, including service members, to consumers. number 9145451. Any interested Pursuant to Section 5 of the older Americans, students, and member of the public may call this Community Bank Advisory Council traditionally underserved consumers number and listen to the meeting. Charter, in appointing members to the and communities. Callers can expect to incur charges for Advisory Council the Director shall seek IV. Application Procedures calls they initiate over wireless lines, to assemble experts in consumer and CNCS will not refund any incurred protection, financial services, Any interested person may apply for charges. Callers will incur no charge for community development, fair lending membership on the Board or Advisory calls they initiate over land-line and civil rights, and consumer financial Council. connections to the toll-free telephone products or services and representatives number. Replays are generally available of community banks that primarily A complete application packet must include: one hour after a call ends. The toll-free serve underserved communities, and phone number for the replay is 800– representatives of communities that 1. A recommendation letter from a 677–4660, replay passcode 5040. The have been significantly impacted by third party describing the applicant’s end replay date is March 18, 2014, 10:59 higher-priced mortgage loans, and shall interests and qualifications to serve on p.m. (CT). strive to have diversity in terms of the Board or Council; points of view. Only current bank or STATUS: Open. thrift employees (CEOs, compliance 2. A complete re´sume´ or curriculum MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: vitae for the applicant; and officers, government relations officials, I. Chair’s Opening Comments etc.) will be considered for membership. 3. A complete application. a. Call to Order, Welcome, and Preview of Membership is limited to employees of To evaluate potential sources of Today’s Meeting Agenda banks and thrifts with total assets of $10 b. Introduction and Acknowledgements conflicts of interest, the Bureau will ask c. Summary Status of Board interaction billion or less that are not affiliates of prospective candidates to provide depository institutions or credit unions II. Consideration of Previous Meeting’s information related to financial holdings with total assets of more than $10 Minutes and/or professional affiliations, and to III. CEO Report billion. allow the Bureau to perform a IV. Program Specific Public Testimony by Pursuant to section 5 of the Credit National Service Member Union Advisory Council Charter, in background check. The Bureau will not review applications and will not answer V. Public Comments appointing members to the Advisory VI. Final Comments and Adjournment Council the Director shall seek to questions from internal or external assemble experts in consumer parties regarding applications until the Members of the public who would like protection, financial services, application period has closed. to comment on the business of the Board may do so in writing or in person. community development, fair lending The Bureau will not entertain and civil rights, and consumer financial Individuals may submit written applications of federally registered comments to [email protected] subject products or services and representatives lobbyists and individuals who have of credit unions that primarily serve line: MARCH 2014 CNCS BOARD been convicted of a felony for a position MEETING by 4:00 p.m. (ET) on March underserved communities, and on the Board and Councils. representatives of communities that 7, 2014. Individuals attending the have been significantly impacted by Only complete applications will be meeting in person who would like to higher-priced mortgage loans, and shall given consideration for review of comment will be asked to sign-in upon strive to have diversity in terms of membership on the Board and Councils. arrival. Comments are requested to be limited to 2 minutes. points of view. Only current credit Dated: February 27, 2014. union employees (CEOs, compliance REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS: The Christopher D’Angelo, officers, government relations officials, Corporation for National and etc.) will be considered for membership. Chief of Staff, Bureau of Consumer Financial Community Service provides reasonable Membership is limited to employees of Protection. accommodations to individuals with credit unions with total assets of $10 [FR Doc. 2014–04999 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] disabilities where appropriate. Anyone billion or less that are not affiliates of BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P who needs an interpreter or other depository institutions or credit unions accommodation should notify Ida Green

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13046 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

at [email protected] or 202–606–6861 by 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. p.m. (ET) on December 13, 2013. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 601– Office of the Secretary 3740. CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jenny Mauk, Special Assistant to the [Transmittal Nos. 13–77] The following is a copy of a letter to CEO, Corporation for National and the Speaker of the House of 36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification Community Service, 1201 New York Representatives, Transmittals 13–77 Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20525. AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense with attached transmittal, policy Phone: 202–606–6615. Fax: 202–606– Security Cooperation Agency. justification, and Sensitivity of 3460. TTY: 800–833–3722. Email: ACTION: Notice. Technology. [email protected]. Dated: March 4, 2014. Dated: March 5, 2014. SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a Aaron Siegel, Valerie Green, section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison General Counsel. This is published to fulfill the Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. 2014–05109 Filed 3–5–14; 4:15 pm] requirements of section 155 of Public BILLING CODE 5001–06–P BILLING CODE 6050–28–P Law 104–164 dated July 21, 1996.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13047

BILLING CODE 5001–06–C (iii) Description and Quantity or and other related elements of logistics Transmittal No. 13–77 Quantities of Articles or Services under support. Consideration for Purchase: 36 AIM– Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of (iv) Military Department: Air Force 120C–7 Advanced Medium Range Air- Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the (YME) to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM), 8 Captive Arms Export Control Act, as amended (v) Prior Related Cases, if any: None Air Training Missiles (CATMs), (i) Prospective Purchaser: Norway containers, support equipment, spare (vi) Sales Commission, Fee, etc., Paid, Offered, or Agreed to be Paid: None (ii) Total Estimated Value: and repair parts, Common Munitions Major Defense Equipment* $69 million Bit/Reprogramming Equipment (vii) Sensitivity of Technology Other ...... $11 million (CMBRE), publications and technical Contained in the Defense Article or documentation, U.S. Government and Defense Services Proposed to be Sold: TOTAL ...... $80 million contractor logistics support services, See Attached Annex

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES EN07MR14.000 13048 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

(viii) Date Report Delivered to AMRAAM capabilities include look- 685–0079, Fax (202) 685–3920 or Congress: 26 February 2014 down/shoot-down, multiple launches [email protected]. * As defined in Section 47(6) of the against multiple targets, resistance to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Arms Export Control Act. electronic countermeasures, and meeting is being held under the interception of high- and low-flying and provisions of the Federal Advisory POLICY JUSTIFICATION maneuvering targets. The AMRAAM All Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C. Norway—AIM–120C–7 AMRAAM Up Round (AUR) is classified Appendix, as amended), the Missiles Confidential, major components and Government in the Sunshine Act of subsystems range from Unclassified to 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and The Government of Norway has Confidential, and technical data and 41 CFR 102–3.150. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. requested a possible sale of 36 AIM– other documentation are classified up to 552b and 41 CFR 102–3.140 through 120C–7 Advanced Medium Range Air- Secret. 102–3.165, and the availability of space, to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM), 8 Captive 2. A determination has been made this meeting is open to the public. Air Training Missiles (CATMs), that Norway can provide substantially The agenda will focus on curricula containers, support equipment, spare the same degree of protection for the changes at the National Defense and repair parts, Common Munitions sensitive information being released as University. Limited space made Bit/Reprogramming Equipment the U.S. Government. This sale is available for observers will be allocated (CMBRE), publications and technical necessary in furtherance of the U.S. on a first come, first served basis. documentation, U.S. Government and foreign policy and national security Pursuant to 41 CFR 102–3.105(j) and contractor logistics support services, objective outlined in the Policy 102–3.140, and section 10(a)(3) of the and other related elements of logistics Justification. Federal Advisory Committee Act of support. The estimated cost is $80 3. If a technologically advanced 1972, written statements to the million. adversary were to obtain knowledge of committee may be submitted to the The proposed sale will contribute to the specific hardware and software committee at any time or in response to the foreign policy and national security elements, the information could be used a stated planned meeting agenda by of the United States by helping to to develop countermeasures that might FAX or email to the point of contact improve the security of a NATO ally reduce weapon system effectiveness or person listed in the FOR FURTHER which has been, and continues to be, an be used in the development of a system INFORMATION CONTACT section. (Subject important force for political stability with similar or advanced capabilities. Line: Comment/Statement to the NDU and economic progress in Europe. 4. All defense articles and services BOV). The Government of Norway requires listed in this transmittal have been Due to events beyond the control of these capabilities for mutual defense, authorized for release and export to the the Designated Federal Officer, the regional security, force modernization, Government of Norway. meeting agenda for the scheduled and U.S. and NATO interoperability. meeting of National Defense University This sale will enhance the Royal [FR Doc. 2014–04989 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001–06–P Board of Visitors for March 14, 2014, the Norwegian Air Force’s ability to defend requirements of 41 CFR 102–3.150(a) Norway against future threats and were not met. Accordingly, the contribute to current and future NATO DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Advisory Committee Management operations. Officer for the Department of Defense, The proposed sale of this equipment Office of the Secretary pursuant to 41 CFR 102–3.150(b), and support will not alter the basic waives the 15-calendar day notification military balance in the region. Notification of an Open Meeting of the requirement. The principal contractor will be National Defense University Board of Raytheon Corporation in Waltham, Visitors (BOV) Dated: March 4, 2014. Massachusetts. There are no known Aaron Siegel, offset agreements proposed in AGENCY: National Defense University, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison connection with this potential sale. DoD. Officer, Department of Defense. Implementation of this proposed sale ACTION: Notice of open meeting. [FR Doc. 2014–04976 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] will not require the assignment of any BILLING CODE 5001–06–P additional U.S. Government or SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is contractor representatives to Norway. publishing this notice to announce that There will be no adverse impact on the following Federal Advisory DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY U.S. defense readiness as a result of this Committee meeting of the National proposed sale. Defense University Board of Visitors Proposed Agency Information (BOV) will take place. This meeting is Collection Transmittal No. 13–77 open to the public. AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy. Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of DATES: The meeting will be held on Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the Friday, March 14, 2014, from 2:30 p.m. ACTION: Notice and request for Arms Export Control Act to 4:30 p.m. comments. Annex ADDRESSES: The Board of Visitors SUMMARY: The Department of Energy Item No. vii meeting will be held at Lincoln Hall, (DOE) invites public comment on a Building 64, Room 2315, the National proposed collection of information that (vii) Sensitivity of Technology Defense University, 300 5th Avenue DOE is developing for submission to the 1. AIM–120C–7 Advanced Medium SW., Fort McNair, Washington, DC Office of Management and Budget Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM): 20319–5066. (OMB) pursuant to the Paperwork The AIM–120 is a radar guided missile FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Reduction Act of 1995. Comments are featuring digital technology and micro- point of contact for this notice of open invited on: (a) Whether the proposed miniature solid-state electronics. meeting is Ms. Joycelyn Stevens at (202) collection of information is necessary

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13049

for the proper performance of the section 302 of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Filed Date: 2/26/14. functions of the agency, including Act of 1978 (NNPA) enacted by Public Law Accession Number: 20140226–5225. whether the information shall have 95–242. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/31/14. practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Issued in Washington, DC, on February 27, Docket Numbers: ER14–696–002. agency’s estimate of the burden of the 2014. Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc. proposed collection of information, Richard Goorevich, Description: EES LBA Agreement including the validity of the Senior Policy Advisor, Office of Refile—Dow Plaq 2–26–2014 to be methodology and assumptions used; (c) Nonproliferation and International Security. effective 12/31/9998. ways to enhance the quality, utility, and [FR Doc. 2014–04984 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Filed Date: 2/26/14. clarity of the information to be BILLING CODE 6450–01–P Accession Number: 20140226–5224. collected; and (d) ways to minimize the Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/31/14. burden of the collection of information Docket Numbers: ER14–697–002. on respondents, including through the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc. use of automated collection techniques Description: EES LBA Agreement Federal Energy Regulatory or other forms of information Refile—Dow UC 2–26–2014 to be Commission technology. effective 12/31/9998. DATES: Comments regarding this Combined Notice of Filings #1 Filed Date: 2/26/14. proposed information collection must Accession Number: 20140226–5223. be received on or before May 6, 2014. Take notice that the Commission Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/31/14. If you anticipate difficulty in submitting received the following electric corporate Docket Numbers: ER14–700–002. comments within that period, contact filings: Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc. the person listed in ADDRESSES as soon Docket Numbers: EC14–61–000. Description: EES LBA Agreement as possible. Applicants: MACH Gen, LLC, New Refile—Oxy 2–26–2014 to be effective ADDRESSES: Written comments may be Harquahala Generating Company, LLC, 12/31/9998. sent to LaReina Parker, Office of New Athens Generating Company, LLC, Filed Date: 2/26/14. Nonproliferation and International Millennium Power Partners, L.P. Accession Number: 20140226–5222. Security, NA–24, National Nuclear Description: Application of MACH Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/31/14. Security Administration, Department of Gen, LLC, et. al. for Disposition of Docket Numbers: ER14–701–002. Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue Jurisdictional Facilities under Section Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc. SW., Washington, DC 20585, telephone, 203 of the FPA under. Description: EES LBA Agreement (202) 586–6493, or by fax at (202) 586– Filed Date: 2/27/14. Refile—SRW Cogen 2–25–2014 to be 2164, or by email at Part810.SNOPR@ Accession Number: 20140227–5128. effective 12/31/9998. hq.doe.gov. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/28/14. Filed Date: 2/26/14. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Take notice that the Commission Accession Number: 20140226–5230. Requests for additional information or received the following electric rate Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/31/14. copies of the information collection filings: Docket Numbers: ER14–702–002. instrument and instructions should be Docket Numbers: ER12–1179–018. Applicants: Entergy Arkansas, Inc. directed to LaReina Parker, Office of Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Description: EAI LBA Agreement Nonproliferation and International Inc. Refile—Calpine PB 2–26–2014 to be Security, NA–24, National Nuclear Description: Integrated Marketplace effective 12/31/9998. Security Administration, Department of Third Compliance Filing to be effective Filed Date: 2/26/14. Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue 3/1/2014. Accession Number: 20140226–5220. SW., Washington, DC 20585, telephone, Filed Date: 2/26/14. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/31/14. (202) 586–6493; Part810.SNOPR@ Accession Number: 20140226–5228. Docket Numbers: ER14–704–002. hq.doe.gov. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/14. Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Docket Numbers: ER13–1188–020. Description: EES LBA Agreement information collection request contains: Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Refile—Sabine Cogen 2–26–2014 to be (1) OMB No. 1901–0263; (2) Information Company. effective 12/31/9998. Collection Request Title: Assistance to Description: WDT2 and Western CoO Filed Date: 2/26/14. Foreign Atomic Energy Activities; (3) Settlement Compliance Filing to be Accession Number: 20140226–5226. Type of Request: Reinstatement; (4) effective 11/1/2013. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/31/14. Purpose: Information will be collected Filed Date: 1/15/14. Docket Numbers: ER14–772–002. from persons who directly or indirectly Accession Number: 20140115–5001. Applicants: Fortistar North engage or participate in the Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/20/14. Tonawanda Inc. development or production of special Docket Numbers: ER14–693–002. Description: Second Supplemental nuclear material outside the United Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc. Filing to be effective 2/26/2014. States. Information will be used to Description: EES LBA Agreement Filed Date: 2/26/14. inform commercial nuclear licensing Refile—EM BR 2–26–2014 to be Accession Number: 20140226–5179. and policy decisions; (5) Annual effective 12/31/9998. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/14. Estimated Number of Respondents: 145; Filed Date: 2/26/14. Docket Numbers: ER14–1040–000. (6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Accession Number: 20140226–5227. Applicants: Lumens Energy Supply Responses: 322; (7) Annual Estimated Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/31/14. LLC. Number of Burden Hours: 966; (8) Docket Numbers: ER14–694–002. Description: Supplement to January Annual Estimated Reporting and Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc. 17, 2014 Lumens Energy Supply LLC Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $999.50. Description: EES LBA Agreement tariff filing. Authority: Section 57 b.(2) of the Atomic Refile—EM BM 2–26–2014 to be Filed Date: 2/26/14. Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended by effective 12/31/9998. Accession Number: 20140226–5067.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13050 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/12/14. Corporation for Approval of Proposed Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Docket Numbers: ER14–1375–000. Reliability Standards for Interchange First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, Applicants: American Electric Power Scheduling and Coordination. in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 Service Corporation, Appalachian Filed Date: 2/27/14. of the Commission’s Rules of Practice Power Company, Kentucky Power Accession Number: 20140227–5129. and Proceduren (18 CFR 385.211 and Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/31/14. Company, Kingsport Power Company, 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to Ohio Power Company, Wheeling Power Docket Numbers: RD14–5–000. intervene or protest must serve a copy Applicants: North American Electric Company, Indiana Michigan Power of that document on the Applicant. Company, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Reliability Corporation. Notice is hereby given that the Description: AEP submits revisions to Description: Petition of the North PJM OATT Attachment H–14B Pt II American Electric Reliability deadline for filing protests with regard Worksheet O re PBOP to be effective 7/ Corporation for Approval of Proposed to the applicant’s request for blanket 1/2014. Reliability Standards MOD–032–1 and authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of Filed Date: 2/26/14. MOD–033–1. future issuances of securities and Accession Number: 20140226–5195. Filed Date: 2/25/14. assumptions of liability, is March 20, Accession Number: 20140225–5151. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/14. 2014. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/27/14. Docket Numbers: ER14–1376–000. The filings are accessible in the The Commission encourages Applicants: PacifiCorp. Commission’s eLibrary system by electronic submission of protests and Description: Termination of BPA clicking on the links or querying the interventions in lieu of paper, using the Construction Agreement (Summer Lake docket number. FERC Online links at http:// PMU) to be effective 5/6/2014. Any person desiring to intervene or www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic Filed Date: 2/26/14. protest in any of the above proceedings service, persons with Internet access Accession Number: 20140226–5215. must file in accordance with Rules 211 who will eFile a document and/or be Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/14. and 214 of the Commission’s listed as a contact for an intervenor Docket Numbers: ER14–1377–000. Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and must create and validate an Applicants: Red Wolf Energy Trading. 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern eRegistration account using the Description: cancellation to be time on the specified comment date. effective 3/1/2014. eRegistration link. Select the eFiling Protests may be considered, but link to log on and submit the Filed Date: 2/26/14. intervention is necessary to become a Accession Number: 20140226–5216. intervention or protests. party to the proceeding. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/14. eFiling is encouraged. More detailed Persons unable to file electronically Docket Numbers: ER14–1378–000. information relating to filing should submit an original and 5 copies Applicants: Old Dominion Electric requirements, interventions, protests, of the intervention or protest to the Cooperative, PJM Interconnection, service, and qualifying facilities filings Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, L.L.C. can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC Description: Original SA No. 3746 and docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For 20426. Cancellation of SA No. 3594 re ODEC– other information, call (866) 208–3676 The filings in the above-referenced DVP NITSA to be effective 4/1/2014. (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Filed Date: 2/26/14. proceeding are accessible in the Accession Number: 20140226–5229. Dated: February 27, 2014. Commission’s eLibrary system by Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/14. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., clicking on the appropriate link in the Docket Numbers: ER14–1379–000. Deputy Secretary. above list. They are also available for Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, [FR Doc. 2014–04964 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] review in the Commission’s Public Inc. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Reference Room in Washington, DC. Description: Ministerial Filing of Non- There is an eSubscription link on the Substantive Tariff Revisions to Web site that enables subscribers to Attachment AE (EIS) to be effective 8/ DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY receive email notification when a 20/2012. document is added to a subscribed Federal Energy Regulatory Filed Date: 2/26/14. docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Commission Accession Number: 20140226–5231. Online service, please email Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/14. [Docket No. ER14–1349–000] [email protected]. or call Docket Numbers: ER14–1380–000. (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Applicants: Public Service Company Union Carbide Corporation; (202) 502–8659. Supplemental Notice That Initial of New Mexico. Dated: February 28, 2014. Description: Executed NITSA/NOA Market-Based Rate Filing Includes between PNM and the Jicarilla Apache Request for Blanket Section 204 Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Nation to be effective 4/28/201. Authorization Deputy Secretary. Filed Date: 2/27/14. This is a supplemental notice in the [FR Doc. 2014–04966 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Accession Number: 20140227–5097. above-referenced proceeding Union BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/20/14. Carbide Corporation’s application for Take notice that the Commission market-based rate authority, with an received the following electric accompanying rate tariff, noting that reliability filings: such application includes a request for Docket Numbers: RD14–4–000. blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Applicants: North American Electric part 34, of future issuances of securities Reliability Corporation. and assumptions of liability. Description: Petition of the North Any person desiring to intervene or to American Electric Reliability protest should file with the Federal

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13051

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Online service, please email The filings in the above-referenced [email protected], or call proceeding are accessible in the Federal Energy Regulatory (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Commission’s eLibrary system by Commission (202) 502–8659. clicking on the appropriate link in the [Docket No. ER14–1373–000] Dated: February 28, 2014. above list. They are also available for Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., review in the Commission’s Public Energy Utility Group, LLC; Reference Room in Washington, DC. Deputy Secretary. Supplemental Notice That Initial There is an eSubscription link on the Market-Based Rate Filing Includes [FR Doc. 2014–04963 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Web site that enables subscribers to Request for Blanket Section 204 BILLING CODE 6717–01–P receive email notification when a Authorization document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY This is a supplemental notice in the Online service, please email above-referenced proceeding of Energy [email protected]. or call Utility Group, LLC’s application for Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call market-based rate authority, with an (202) 502–8659. accompanying rate tariff, noting that [Docket No. ER14–1348–000] such application includes a request for Dated: February 28, 2014. blanket authorization, under 18 CFR The Dow Chemical Company; Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Part 34, of future issuances of securities Supplemental Notice That Initial Deputy Secretary. and assumptions of liability. Market-Based Rate Filing Includes [FR Doc. 2014–04965 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Any person desiring to intervene or to Request for Blanket Section 204 BILLING CODE 6717–01–P protest should file with the Federal Authorization Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, This is a supplemental notice in the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 above-referenced proceeding of The of the Commission’s Rules of Practice Dow Chemical Company’s application Federal Energy Regulatory and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and for market-based rate authority, with an Commission accompanying rate tariff, noting that 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to [Docket No. RM98–1–000] intervene or protest must serve a copy such application includes a request for of that document on the Applicant. blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Records Governing Off-the-Record Notice is hereby given that the part 34, of future issuances of securities Communications; Public Notice deadline for filing protests with regard and assumptions of liability. to the applicant’s request for blanket Any person desiring to intervene or to This constitutes notice, in accordance authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of protest should file with the Federal with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt future issuances of securities and Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 of prohibited and exempt off-the-record assumptions of liability, is March 21, First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, communications. 2014. in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, The Commission encourages of the Commission’s Rules of Practice September 22, 1999) requires electronic submission of protests and and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Commission decisional employees, who interventions in lieu of paper, using the 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to make or receive a prohibited or exempt FERC Online links at http:// intervene or protest must serve a copy off-the-record communication relevant www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic of that document on the Applicant. to the merits of a contested proceeding, service, persons with Internet access Notice is hereby given that the to deliver to the Secretary of the who will eFile a document and/or be deadline for filing protests with regard Commission, a copy of the listed as a contact for an intervenor to the applicant’s request for blanket communication, if written, or a must create and validate an authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of summary of the substance of any oral eRegistration account using the future issuances of securities and communication. eRegistration link. Select the eFiling assumptions of liability, is March 20, Prohibited communications are link to log on and submit the 2014. included in a public, non-decisional file intervention or protests. The Commission encourages associated with, but not a part of, the Persons unable to file electronically electronic submission of protests and decisional record of the proceeding. should submit an original and 5 copies interventions in lieu of paper, using the Unless the Commission determines that of the intervention or protest to the FERC Online links at http:// the prohibited communication and any Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic responses thereto should become a part 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC service, persons with Internet access of the decisional record, the prohibited 20426. who will eFile a document and/or be off-the-record communication will not The filings in the above-referenced listed as a contact for an intervenor be considered by the Commission in proceeding are accessible in the must create and validate an reaching its decision. Parties to a Commission’s eLibrary system by eRegistration account using the proceeding may seek the opportunity to clicking on the appropriate link in the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling respond to any facts or contentions above list. They are also available for link to log on and submit the made in a prohibited off-the-record review in the Commission’s Public intervention or protests. communication, and may request that Reference Room in Washington, DC. Persons unable to file electronically the Commission place the prohibited There is an eSubscription link on the should submit an original and 5 copies communication and responses thereto Web site that enables subscribers to of the intervention or protest to the in the decisional record. The receive email notification when a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Commission will grant such a request document is added to a subscribed 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC only when it determines that fairness so docket(s). For assistance with any FERC 20426. requires. Any person identified below as

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13052 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

having made a prohibited off-the-record CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary communication shall serve the 385.2201(e)(1)(v). link. Enter the docket number, document on all parties listed on the The following is a list of off-the- excluding the last three digits, in the official service list for the applicable record communications recently docket number field to access the proceeding in accordance with Rule received by the Secretary of the document. For assistance, please contact 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010. Commission. The communications FERC, Online Support at Exempt off-the-record listed are grouped chronologically, in [email protected] or toll communications are included in the ascending order. These filings are free at (866) 208–3676, or for TTY, decisional record of the proceeding, available for review at the Commission contact (202) 502–8659. unless the communication was with a in the Public Reference Room or may be cooperating agency as described by 40 viewed on the Commission’s Web site at

Prohibited Docket No. Filed date Presenter or requester

1. P–2299–000 ...... 2–7–14 Modesto Irrigation District. 2. CP13–113–000 ...... 2–24–14 Alan Spahr.

Exempt Docket No. Filed date Presenter or requester

1. P–12790–002 ...... 2–11–14 FERC Staff.1 2. P–13590–000 ...... 2–12–14 FERC Staff.2 3. P–2305–036 ...... 2–24–14 Hon. Mary L. Landrieu. 4. CP13–25–000 ...... 2–27–14 FERC Staff.3 1 Telephone record. 2 Email record. 3 Telephone record.

Dated: February 28, 2014. EIS No. 20140055, Final Supplement, Period Ends: 04/07/2014, Contact: Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., USACE, FL, Jacksonville Harbor Kara Harris 202–502–6296. Navigation, Review Period Ends: 04/ Deputy Secretary. Amended Notices [FR Doc. 2014–04962 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] 07/2014, Contact: Samantha Borer BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 904–232–1066. EIS No. 20130381, Draft EIS, FHWA, EIS No. 20140056, Draft EIS, USFS, CO, TX, US 181 Harbor Bridge Project, Vail Mountain Recreation Comment Period Ends: 03/18/2014, Enhancements Project, Comment Contact: Gregory S. Punske 512–536– ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Period Ends: 04/21/2014, Contact: 5960. AGENCY Roger Poirier 970–945–3212. Revision to the FR Notice Published [ER–FRL–9013–8] EIS No. 20140057, Final EIS, BOEM, 00, 01/03/2014; Extending Comment Period PROGRAMMATIC—Geological and from 03/03/2014 to 03/18/2014. Environmental Impact Statements; Geophysical Activities in Federal Dated: March 4, 2014. Notice of Availability Waters of the Mid- and South Atlantic James G. Gavin, Outer Continental Shelf and Adjacent Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Environmental Protection Specialist, Office State Waters, Review Period Ends: 04/ of Federal Activities. Activities, General Information (202) 07/2014, Contact: Gary D. Goeke 504– 564–7146 or http://www.epa.gov/ 736–3233. [FR Doc. 2014–05011 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] compliance/nepa/. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact EIS No. 20140058, Final EIS, USFS, AZ, Statements Kaibab National Forest Plan Revision, Filed 02/24/2014 Through 02/28/2014 Review Period Ends: 06/05/2014, Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. Contact: Ariel Leonard 928–635–8283. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION EIS No. 20140059, Final Supplement, Notice NRC, WY, Ross In-Situ Leach Sunshine Act Meeting Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act Recovery (ISR) Project, Supplement to AGENCY: requires that EPA make public its the Generic Environmental Impact Federal Election Commission. comments on EISs issued by other Statement for In-Situ Leach Uranium DATE AND TIME: Thursday March 6, 2014 Federal agencies. EPA’s comment letters Milling Facilities, Review Period At The Conclusion Of The Open on EISs are available at: http:// Ends: 04/07/2014, Contact: Johari Meeting. www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ Moore 301–415–7694. PLACE: 999 E Street NW., Washington, eisdata.html. EIS No. 20140060, Draft Supplement, DC. USACE, MS, PROGRAMMATIC EIS— EIS No. 20140053, Draft EIS, FHWA, IL, STATUS: Mississippi Coastal Improvements This Meeting Will Be Closed To US 51 Pana to Centralia, Comment The Public. Period Ends: 04/21/2014, Contact: Program (MsCIP), Comprehensive Catherine A. Batey 217–492–4600. Barrier Island Restoration, Hancock, ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: EIS No. 20140054, Revised Draft EIS, Comment Period Ends: 04/21/2014, Compliance matters pursuant to 2 USFS, CA, Harris Vegetation Contact: Susan I. Rees 251–694–4141. U.S.C. 437g. Management Project, Comment Period EIS No. 20140061, Final EIS, FERC, NY, Information the premature disclosure Ends: 04/25/2014, Contact: Emelia H. Rockaway Delivery Lateral and of which would be likely to have a Barnum 530–926–4511 ext. 1600. Northeast Connector Projects, Review considerable adverse effect on the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13053

implementation of a proposed Background and Brief Description analyze aggregate data from the Commission action. The mission of the National Institute workforce to determine risk factors for * * * * * for Occupational Safety and Health abnormal lung health indices derived PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION: (NIOSH) is to promote safety and health from the medical test results. The Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: at work for all people through research individual results will be used by (202) 694–1220. and prevention. The Occupational employees and their personal physicians to make medical decisions, Shelley E. Garr, Safety and Health Act, Public Law 91– 596 (section 20[a][1]), authorizes NIOSH such as whether to pursue additional Deputy Secretary. to conduct research to advance the testing. The aggregate results will be [FR Doc. 2014–05042 Filed 3–5–14; 11:15 am] health and safety of workers. NIOSH is used by NIOSH, facility management, BILLING CODE 6715–01–P proposing to conduct a study regarding and employees in ongoing efforts to the lung health of workers at an indium- reduce exposures and monitor key tin oxide production facility. health indices. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Indium-tin oxide (ITO) is a sintered For this study, we will recruit all HUMAN SERVICES material used in the manufacture of current employees of the ITO Centers for Disease Control and devices such as liquid crystal displays, production facility. Participation is Prevention touch panels, solar cells, and voluntary. We anticipate approximately architectural glass. Indium lung disease 100 study participants. Employees who [30 Day–14–14CL] is a novel, potentially fatal industrial wish to participate in the questionnaire disease that has occurred in workers and medical testing will review and sign Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork making, using, or recycling ITO. This an informed consent document. Reduction Act Review project aims to understand and prevent Employees who wish to participate in The Centers for Disease Control and this occupational lung disease by the personal air sampling and would Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of investigating the relationship between like to receive personal results will information collection requests under exposure and lung health among current complete a contact information form. review by the Office of Management and ITO manufacturing workers. Participants who wish to release Budget (OMB) in compliance with the CDC requests Office of Management medical records to NIOSH or to have Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. and Budget (OMB) approval to collect NIOSH release the results of our Chapter 35). To request a copy of these standardized information from current medical testing to a personal physician requests, call (404) 639–7570 or send an employees of the ITO production will need to complete the appropriate email to [email protected]. Send written facility through an informed consent records release forms. comments to CDC Desk Officer, Office of document, an interviewer-administered The questionnaire will be Management and Budget, Washington, questionnaire, and a contact information administered privately at the workplace DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395–5806. form. As part of the same project, during normal working hours by trained Written comments should be received employees will be offered the NIOSH staff. Employees who are not within 30 days of this notice. opportunity to participate in medical available at the workplace during the testing and personal air sampling. Proposed Project study will be offered the opportunity to The questionnaire will collect contact respond to the questionnaire at a later An Investigation of Lung Health at an information, demographic information, date by telephone. Indium-Tin Oxide Production Facility— respiratory symptoms and diagnoses, New—National Institute for work history, and cigarette smoking There are no costs to participants Occupational Safety and Health history. The questionnaire will allow other than their time. (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control NIOSH to report individual medical test The total estimated burden for the and Prevention (CDC). results to each participant and to one-time collection of data is 254 hours.

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

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

Current ITO production facility employees ..... Recruitment letter ...... 100 1 5/60 Consent to participate in a research study .... 95 1 15/60 Authorization to disclose health information .. 95 1 5/60 Indium facility questionnaire ...... 95 1 20/60 Medical testing ...... 95 1 100/60 Script for collection of industrial hygiene 95 1 5/60 samples. Personal air sampling results contact infor- 95 1 5/60 mation form. Exposure monitoring ...... 95 1 5/60

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13054 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

Leroy Richardson, Background and Brief Description implementation, particularly related to Chief, Information Collection Review Office, In July 2009, the Centers for Disease the use of evidence-based strategies. The Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Control and Prevention’s Division of primary survey audience is CRCCP Associate Director for Science, Office of the Cancer Prevention and Control, National program grantees (program directors or Director, Centers for Disease Control and managers); however, the survey will Prevention. Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, funded the also be administered to a comparison [FR Doc. 2014–04970 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Colorectal Cancer Control Program group of states or tribes that do not BILLING CODE 4163–18–P (CRCCP) for a five-year period. Through currently receive CRCCP funding. a competitive application process, 22 Respondents for the non-CRCCP funded states and four tribal organizations survey group will be program directors DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND or managers from the National Breast HUMAN SERVICES received cooperative agreement awards. In 2010, three additional states were and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP), a comparable Centers for Disease Control and funded, bringing the total number of group with whom the Centers for Prevention grantees to 29. The purpose of the CRCCP is to promote colorectal cancer Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (CRC) screening to increase population- has an established relationship. [60Day–14–14LA] level screening rates to 80% and, The Web-based survey includes questions about respondent background, Proposed Data Collections Submitted subsequently, to reduce CRC incidence program activities, clinical service for Public Comment and and mortality (www.cdc.gov/cancer/ delivery, monitoring and evaluation, Recommendations crccp/). The CRCCP includes two program components: (1) CRC screening partnerships, training and technical assistance needs, and program In compliance with the requirement of low-income, uninsured and management and integration. Questions of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the underinsured people (screening are of various types including Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for provision) and (2) implementation of dichotomous and multiple response. opportunity for public comment on interventions to increase population- The estimated burden per response is 75 proposed data collection projects, the level screening rates (screening minutes. There are two versions of the Centers for Disease Control and promotion). survey: One for CRCCP-funded states Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic The CRCCP is based on a social- and tribal organizations, and one for summaries of proposed projects. To ecological framework that emphasizes states and tribal organizations that do request more information on the the implementation of evidence-based not currently receive CRCCP funding. proposed projects or to obtain a copy of strategies at the interpersonal, All information will be collected the data collection plans and organizational, community, and policy electronically. instruments, call 404–639–7570 or send levels. Grantees are strongly encouraged The assessment will enable CDC to comments to LeRoy Richardson, 1600 to implement one or more of the five gauge progress in meeting CRCCP Clifton Road, MS D–74, Atlanta, GA evidence-based strategies that are program goals, identify implementation 30333 or send an email to [email protected]. recommended in the Guide to Community Preventive Services activities, monitor efforts aimed at Comments are invited on: (a) Whether (Community Guide; impacting population-based screening, the proposed collection of information www.thecommunityguide.org/cancer/ identify technical assistance needs of is necessary for the proper performance index.html ). state, tribe and territorial health of the functions of the agency, including As a comprehensive, organized department cancer control programs, whether the information shall have screening program, the CRCCP supports and identify implementation models practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the activities including program with potential to expand and transition agency’s estimate of the burden of the management, partnership development, to new settings to increase program proposed collection of information; (c) public education and targeted outreach, impact and reach. ways to enhance the quality, utility, and screening and diagnostic services, The assessment will also identify clarity of the information to be patient navigation, quality assurance successful activities that should be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the and quality improvement, professional maintained, replicated, or expanded as burden of the collection of information development, data management and well as provide insight into areas that on respondents, including through the utilization, and program monitoring and need improvement. Current CRCCP use of automated collection techniques evaluation. For clinical service delivery, funding is through June 2015, however, or other forms of information grantees fund health care providers in CDC anticipates that the program will be technology. Written comments should their state or tribal organization to renewed. Data obtained from the be received within 60 days of this deliver colorectal cancer screening, unfunded states or tribes will provide notice. diagnostic evaluation, and treatment comparison data to facilitate Proposed Project referrals for those diagnosed with identification of similarities or cancer. Through direct screening efforts differences, if any, in colorectal cancer Annual Survey of Colorectal Cancer in the first three years of the CRCCP, screening activities, including the use of Control Activities Conducted by States 26,565 individuals were screened, 4,059 evidence-based strategies to promote and Tribal Organizations—New— cases of precancerous polyps were and provide cancer screening. OMB National Center for Chronic Disease detected and removed, and 74 cancers approval is requested for three years. Prevention and Health Promotion were diagnosed and treated. Participation in the survey is voluntary (NCCDPHP), Centers for Disease Control The purpose of the proposed data and there are no costs to respondents and Prevention (CDC). collection is to annually assess program other than their time.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13055

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

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

CRCCP Program Directors (PD) or CRCCP Grantee Survey of Program 29 1 75/60 36 Program Managers (PM). Implementation. PD or PM from States or Tribes that Survey of Colorectal Cancer Preven- 33 1 75/60 41 do not receive CRCCP funding. tion and Control Activities.

Total ...... 77

Leroy A. Richardson, Program (ECWHSP), and National Coal NIOSH utilizes a radiographic Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Workers’ Autopsy Study (NCWAS). classification system developed by the Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the The CWHSP is a congressionally- International Labour Office (ILO), in the Associate Director for Science, Office of the mandated medical examination program determination of pneumoconiosis Director, Centers for Disease Control and for monitoring the health of among underground coal miners. Prevention. underground coal miners, established Physicians (B Readers) fill out this form [FR Doc. 2014–04973 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] under the Federal Coal Mine Health and regarding their interpretations of the BILLING CODE 4163–18–P Safety Act of 1969, as amended in 1977 radiographs (each image has at least two and 2006, PL–95–164 (the Act). The Act separate interpretations). Based on prior provides the regulatory authority for the practice it takes the physician DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND administration of the CWHSP. This approximately three minutes per form. HUMAN SERVICES Program is useful in providing • Physician Application for information for protecting the health of Certification (2.12)—Physicians taking Centers for Disease Control and miners (whose participation is entirely the B Reader examination are asked to Prevention voluntary), and also in documenting complete this registration form which [30Day–14–0020] trends and patterns in the prevalence of provides demographic information as coal workers’ pneumoconiosis (‘black well as information regarding their Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork lung’ disease) among miners employed medical practices. It typically takes the Reduction Act Review in U.S. coal mines. The 4,420 estimated physician about 10 minutes to complete annualized hours of burden is based on this form. The Centers for Disease Control and the following: • Spirometry Testing—Miners Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of • Coal Mine Operators Plan (2.10)— participating in the ECWHSP information collection requests under Under 42 CFR 37.4, every coal operator component of the Program are asked to review by the Office of Management and and construction contractor for each perform a spirometry test which Budget (OMB) in compliance with the underground coal mine must submit a requires no additional paperwork on the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. coal mine operator’s plan every 3 years, part of the miner, but does require Chapter 35). To request a copy of these providing information on how they plan approximately 15 to 20 minutes for the requests, call (404) 639–7570 or send an to notify their miners of the opportunity test itself. Since spirometry testing is email to [email protected]. Send written to obtain the chest radiographic offered as part of the ECWHSP only, the comments to CDC Desk Officer, Office of examination. To complete this form 2,500 respondents listed in the burden Management and Budget, Washington, with all requested information table below account for about half of the DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395–5806. (including a roster of current total participants in the CWHSP. Written comments should be received employees) takes approximately 30 • Pathologist Invoice—42 CFR 37.202 within 30 days of this notice. minutes. specifies procedures for the NCWAS. • Facility Certification Document The invoice submitted by the Proposed Project (2.11)—X-ray facilities seeking NIOSH- pathologist must contain a statement Coal Workers’ Health Surveillance approval to provide miner radiographs that the pathologist is not receiving any Program (CWHSP)—(0920–0200, under the CWHSP must complete an other compensation for the autopsy. Expiration 06/30/2014)—Revision— approval packet which requires Each participating pathologist may use National Institute for Occupational approximately 30 minutes for their individual invoice as long as this Safety and Health (NIOSH), Centers for completion. statement is added. It is estimated that Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). • Miner Identification Document only five minutes is required for the (2.9)—Miners who elect to participate in pathologist to add this statement to the Background and Brief Description the CWHSP must fill out this document standard invoice that they routinely use. NIOSH would like to submit an which requires approximately 20 • Pathologist Report—42 CFR 37.203 Information Collection Request (ICR) to minutes. This document records provides the autopsy specifications. The revise the data collection instruments demographic and occupational history, pathologist must submit information being utilized within the Coal Workers’ as well as information required under found at autopsy, slides, blocks of Health Surveillance Program (CWHSP). the regulations from x-ray facilities in tissue, and a final diagnosis indicating The current ICR incorporates all four relation to coal miner examinations. In presence or absence of pneumoconiosis. components that fall under the CWHSP. addition to completing this form, the The format of the autopsy reports are Those four components include: Coal process of capturing the chest image variable depending on the pathologist Workers’ X-ray Surveillance Program takes approximately 15 minutes. conducting the autopsy. Since an (CWXSP), B Reader Program, Enhanced • Chest Radiograph Classification autopsy report is routinely completed Coal Workers’ Health Surveillance Form (2.8)—Under 42 CFR part 37, by a pathologist, the only additional

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13056 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

burden is the specific request for a • Consent, Release and History Form occupational history and smoking clinical abstract of terminal illness and (2.6)—This form documents written history. From past experience, it is final diagnosis relating to authorization from the next-of-kin to estimated that 15 minutes is required for pneumoconiosis. Therefore, only five perform an autopsy on the deceased the next-of-kin to complete this form. minutes of additional burden is miner. A minimum of essential There are no costs to respondents information is collected regarding the estimated for the pathologist’s report. other than their time. deceased miner including the

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

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

Coal Mine Operators ...... Form 2.10 ...... 200 1 30/60 X-ray Facility Supervisor ...... Form 2.11 ...... 100 1 30/60 X-ray—Coal Miners ...... No form required ...... 5,000 1 15/60 Coal Miners ...... Form 2.9 ...... 5,000 1 20/60 B Reader Physicians ...... Form 2.8 ...... 10,000 1 3/60 Physicians taking the B Reader Examination Form 2.12 ...... 100 1 10/60 Spirometry Test—Coal Miners ...... No form required ...... 2,500 1 20/60 Pathologist ...... Invoice—No standard form ...... 5 1 5/60 Pathologist ...... Pathology Report—No standard form ...... 5 1 5/60 Next-of-kin for deceased miner ...... Form 2.6 ...... 5 1 15/60

Leroy Richardson, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and Institutes of Health (NIH) funded the Chief, Information Collection Review Office, clarity of the information to be SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study. Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the collected; and (d) ways to minimize the The SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Associate Director for Science, Office of the burden of the collection of information Study began in 2000 as a multi-center, Director, Centers for Disease Control and on respondents, including through the epidemiological study, conducted in six Prevention. use of automated collection techniques geographically dispersed clinical study [FR Doc. 2014–04971 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] or other forms of information centers that reflected the racial and BILLING CODE 4163–18–P technology. Written comments should ethnic diversity of the U.S. Phases 1 be received within 60 days of this (2000–2005) and 2 (2005–2010) produced estimates of the prevalence DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND notice. and incidence of diabetes among youth HUMAN SERVICES Proposed Project age <20 years, according to diabetes Centers for Disease Control and SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study type, age, sex, and race/ethnicity, and Prevention (OMB No. 0920–0904, exp. 11/30/ characterized selected acute and chronic complications of diabetes and their risk 2014)—Revision—National Center for [60Day–14–0904] factors, as well as the quality of life and Chronic Disease Prevention and Health quality of health care. In Phases 1 and Proposed Data Collections Submitted Promotion (NCCDPHP), Centers for 2, the clinical centers and a data for Public Comment and Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). coordinating center were funded Recommendations Background and Brief Description through cooperative agreements. The In compliance with the requirement information collected at that time was of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Diabetes is one of the most common not provided directly to CDC. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for chronic diseases among children in the Phase 3 (2011–present) builds upon opportunity for public comment on United States. When diabetes strikes previous efforts. Five clinical sites proposed data collection projects, the during childhood, it is routinely collect patient-level information that is Centers for Disease Control and assumed to be type 1, or juvenile-onset, compiled by a data coordinating center. Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic diabetes. Type 1 diabetes (T1D) CDC obtained OMB approval to receive summaries of proposed projects. To develops when the body’s immune the information in 2011 (SEARCH for request more information on the system destroys pancreatic cells that Diabetes in Youth, OMB No. 0920–0904, proposed projects or to obtain a copy of make the hormone insulin. Type 2 exp. 11/30/2014). Phase 3 includes a the data collection plans and diabetes begins when the body develops case registry of youth <20 years of age instruments, call 404–639–7570 or send a resistance to insulin and no longer who have been diagnosed with diabetes, comments to Leroy Richardson, 1600 uses it properly. As the need for insulin and a longitudinal cohort research study Clifton Road, MS D–74, Atlanta, GA rises, the pancreas gradually loses its about SEARCH cases whose diabetes 30333 or send an email to [email protected]. ability to produce sufficient amounts of was incident in 2002 or later. To date, Comments are invited on: (a) Whether insulin to regulate blood sugar. Reports SEARCH Phase 3 has identified an the proposed collection of information of increasing frequency of both type 1 average of 1,361 incident cases of is necessary for the proper performance and type 2 diabetes in youth have been diabetes among youth under 20 years of the functions of the agency, including among the most concerning aspects of each year of the study and has whether the information shall have the evolving diabetes epidemic. In completed an average of 1,088 practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the response to this growing public health participant surveys each year (80% agency’s estimate of the burden of the concern, the Centers for Disease Control participation rate among registry study proposed collection of information; (c) and Prevention (CDC) and the National participants). As of November 2013,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13057

SEARCH Phase 3 has completed visits conduct follow-up on an average of 142 Findings from the registry study will for 1,839 cohort study participants. cases per year, for a total of 710 cases be used to estimate the incidence of CDC plans to continue information across all sites. The items collected for diabetes in youth in the U.S. Findings collection for two additional years, with each case include a Health from the cohort study will be used to minor changes. Participants in the Questionnaire (Youth version), an estimate the prevalence and incidence registry study will continue to complete additional Health Questionnaire (Parent of risk factors and complications a Medication Inventory and an Initial version), Center for Epidemiologic associated with diabetes in youth, Participant Survey; however, the in- Study-Depression, Quality of Care, including chronic microvascular person study examination will be Pediatric Quality of Life Survey (Peds complications (retinopathy, discontinued. This change will result in QL), SEARCH Michigan Neuropathy nephropathy, and autonomic a decrease in burden per respondent. neuropathy) and selected markers of CDC estimates that each clinical site Screening Instrument, Diabetes Eating macrovascular complications will identify and register an average of Survey, Low Blood Sugar Survey, (hypertension, arterial stiffness) of 255 cases per year, for a total 1,275 Supplemental Survey, Tanner Stage, cases across all sites. Retinal Photo, Family Conflict Survey, diabetes. No data collection changes are Pediatric Diabetes Quality of Life Scale, Participation is voluntary and there planned for the cohort study. CDC Physical Exam, Specimen Collection, are no costs to respondents other than estimates that each clinical site will and Food Frequency Questionnaire. their time.

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

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

SEARCH Registry Study Participants ..... Medication Inventory ...... 1,275 1 5/60 106 Initial Participant Survey ...... 1,275 1 10/60 213 SEARCH Cohort Study Participants ...... Health Questionnaire-Youth ...... 710 1 15/60 178 Health Questionnaire-Parent ..... 710 1 15/60 178 CES-Depression ...... 710 1 4/60 47 Quality of Care ...... 710 1 13/60 154 Peds QL ...... 710 1 5/60 59 SEARCH MNSI Neuropathy ...... 710 1 10/60 118 Diabetes Eating Survey ...... 710 1 5/60 59 Low Blood Sugar Survey ...... 710 1 5/60 59 Supplemental Survey ...... 710 1 10/60 118 Tanner Stage ...... 710 1 5/60 59 Retinal Photo ...... 710 1 15/60 178 Family Conflict Survey ...... 710 1 5/60 59 Pediatric Diabetes QOL Scale ... 710 1 5/60 59 Physical Exam ...... 710 1 3 2,130 Specimen Collection ...... 710 1 20/60 237 Food Frequency Questionnaire 710 1 20/60 237

Total ...... 4,248

Leroy A. Richardson, review by the Office of Management and Background and Brief Description Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Budget (OMB) in compliance with the NIOSH has the responsibility under Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Associate Director for Science, Office of the the Occupational Safety and Health Chapter 35). To request a copy of these Administration’s Cotton Dust Standard, Director, Centers for Disease Control and requests, call (404) 639–7570 or send an Prevention. 29 CFR 1920.1043, for approving email to [email protected]. Send written [FR Doc. 2014–04974 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] courses to train technicians to perform comments to CDC Desk Officer, Office of pulmonary function testing in the cotton BILLING CODE 4163–18–P Management and Budget, Washington, industry. Successful completion of a DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395–5806. NIOSH-approved course is mandatory DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Written comments should be received under the standard. HUMAN SERVICES within 30 days of this notice. To carry out its responsibility, NIOSH maintains a Pulmonary Function Centers for Disease Control and Proposed Project Testing Course Approval Program. The Prevention Pulmonary Function Testing Course program consists of an application submitted by potential sponsors [30Day–14–0138] Approval Program, 29 CFR 1910.1043 (OMB No. 0920–0138, Expiration 8/31/ (universities, hospitals, and private consulting firms) who seek NIOSH Proposed Data Collections Submitted 2014)—Revision—The National Institute approval to conduct courses, and if for Public Comment and for Occupational Safety and Health Recommendations approved, notification to NIOSH of any (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control course or faculty changes during the The Centers for Disease Control and and Prevention (CDC). approval period, which is limited to five Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of years. The application form and added information collection requests under materials, including an agenda,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13058 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

curriculum vitae, and course materials renewal application and supporting will be adequately trained as mandated are reviewed by NIOSH to determine if documentation for review by NIOSH under the standard. NIOSH will the applicant has developed a program staff to ensure the course curriculum disseminate a one-time customer which adheres to the criteria required in meets all current standard requirements. satisfaction survey to course directors the standard. Following approval, any Approved course sponsors that elect and sponsor representatives to evaluate subsequent changes to the course are to offer NIOSH-Approved Spirometry our service to courses, the effectiveness submitted by course sponsors via letter Refresher Courses must submit a of the program changes implemented or email and reviewed by NIOSH staff separate application and supporting since 2005, and the usefulness of to assure that the changes in faculty or documents for review by NIOSH staff. potential Program enhancements. course content continue to meet course Institutions and organizations The annualized figures slightly over- requirements. throughout the country voluntarily estimate the actual burden, due to Course sponsors also voluntarily submit applications and materials to rounding of the number of respondents submit an annual report to inform become course sponsors and carry out for even allocation over the three-year NIOSH of their class activity level and training. Submissions are required for clearance period. The estimated annual any faculty changes. Sponsors who elect NIOSH to evaluate a course and burden to respondents is 201 hours. to have their approval renewed for an determine whether it meets the criteria There are no costs to respondents other additional 5 year period submit a in the standard and whether technicians than their time.

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

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

NIOSH-Approved Spirometry Testing Course 3 1 3.5 Application. Potential Sponsors ...... Annual Report ...... 35 1 30/60 NIOSH-Example of email request for course 12 1 45/60 change. NIOSH-Approved Spirometry Course Spon- 13 1 6 sorship Renewal Application. NIOSH-Approved Spirometry Refresher 10 1 8 Course Application. One-Time Customer Satisfaction Survey ...... 23 1 12/60

Leroy Richardson, information (including each proposed Submission’’ or ‘‘More Search Options’’ Chief, Information Collection Review Office, extension or reinstatement of an existing to find the information collection Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the collection of information) and to allow document(s) that are accepting Associate Director for Science, Office of the 60 days for public comment on the comments. Director, Centers for Disease Control and proposed action. Interested persons are Prevention. 2. By regular mail. You may mail invited to send comments regarding our written comments to the following [FR Doc. 2014–04972 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] burden estimates or any other aspect of address: CMS, Office of Strategic BILLING CODE 4163–18–P this collection of information, including Operations and Regulatory Affairs, any of the following subjects: (1) The Division of Regulations Development, necessity and utility of the proposed DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Attention: Document Identifier/OMB information collection for the proper lll HUMAN SERVICES Control Number , Room C4–26– performance of the agency’s functions; 05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid (2) the accuracy of the estimated Maryland 21244–1850. Services burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, To obtain copies of a supporting utility, and clarity of the information to statement and any related forms for the [Document Identifier: CMS–10518] be collected; and (4) the use of proposed collection(s) summarized in automated collection techniques or Agency Information Collection this notice, you may make your request other forms of information technology to using one of following: Activities: Proposed Collection; minimize the information collection Comment Request burden. 1. Access CMS’ Web site address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & DATES: Comments must be received by PaperworkReductionActof1995. Medicaid Services, HHS. May 6, 2014. 2. Email your request, including your ACTION: Notice. ADDRESSES: When commenting, please address, phone number, OMB number, SUMMARY: The Centers for Medicare & reference the document identifier or and CMS document identifier, to Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing OMB control number (OCN). To be [email protected]. an opportunity for the public to assured consideration, comments and 3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at comment on CMS’ intention to collect recommendations must be submitted in (410) 786–1326. any one of the following ways: information from the public. Under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the 1. Electronically. You may send your Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786– PRA), federal agencies are required to comments electronically to http:// 1326 publish notice in the Federal Register www.regulations.gov. Follow the concerning each proposed collection of instructions for ‘‘Comment or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13059

Contents services needed for the in-home (PRA), federal agencies are required to This notice sets out a summary of the administration of IVIG for the treatment publish notice in the Federal Register use and burden associated with the of PIDD. concerning each proposed collection of The statute limited the demonstration following information collections. More information, including each proposed to 4,000 beneficiaries and $45 million, detailed information can be found in extension or reinstatement of an existing including administrative expenses for collection of information, and to allow each collection’s supporting statement implementation and evaluation as well a second opportunity for public and associated materials (see as benefit costs. The statute also comment on the notice. Interested ADDRESSES). required that an evaluation of the persons are invited to send comments CMS–10518 Application for demonstration be conducted. Under this regarding the burden estimate or any Participation in the Intravenous demonstration, Medicare will issue other aspect of this collection of Immune Globulin (IVIG) Demonstration under Part B a bundled payment for all information, including any of the medically necessary supplies and Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501– following subjects: (1) The necessity and services to administer IVIG in the home 3520), federal agencies must obtain utility of the proposed information to enrolled beneficiaries who are not approval from the Office of Management collection for the proper performance of otherwise homebound and receiving the agency’s functions; (2) the accuracy and Budget (OMB) for each collection of home health care benefits. In order to of the estimated burden; (3) ways to information they conduct or sponsor. implement the demonstration and enhance the quality, utility, and clarity The term ‘‘collection of information’’ is ensure that statutory limits are not of the information to be collected; and defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR exceeded, it is necessary to positively (4) the use of automated collection 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests enroll beneficiaries in the techniques or other forms of information or requirements that members of the demonstration. technology to minimize the information public submit reports, keep records, or This collection of information is for collection burden. provide information to a third party. the application to participate in the Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA DATES: Comments on the collection(s) of demonstration. Participation is information must be received by the requires federal agencies to publish a voluntary and may be terminated by the 60-day notice in the Federal Register OMB desk officer by April 7, 2014. beneficiary at any time. Beneficiaries ADDRESSES: When commenting on the concerning each proposed collection of who do not participate will continue to information, including each proposed proposed information collections, be eligible to receive all of the regular please reference the document identifier extension or reinstatement of an existing Medicare Part B benefits that they collection of information, before or OMB control number. To be assured would be eligible for in the absence of consideration, comments and submitting the collection to OMB for the demonstration. Form Number: approval. To comply with this recommendations must be received by CMS–10518 (OCN: 0938–NEW); the OMB desk officer via one of the requirement, CMS is publishing this Frequency: Annually; Affected Public: notice. following transmissions: OMB, Office of Individuals and households; Number of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Information Collection Respondents: 4,000; Total Annual Attention: CMS Desk Officer, Fax Responses: 4,000 Total Annual Hours: 1. Type of Information Collection Number: (202) 395–5806 OR, Email: 1,000. (For policy questions regarding Request: New collection (Request for a [email protected]. this collection contact Jody Blatt at 410– new OMB control number); Title of To obtain copies of a supporting 786–6921.) Information Collection: Application for statement and any related forms for the Participation in the Intravenous Dated: March 4, 2014. proposed collection(s) summarized in Immune Globulin (IVIG) Demonstration; Martique Jones, this notice, you may make your request Use: Traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Deputy Director, Regulations Development using one of following: Medicare covers some or all Group, Office of Strategic Operations and 1. Access CMS’ Web site address at components of home infusion services Regulatory Affairs. http://www.cms.hhs.gov/Paperwork depending on the circumstances. By [FR Doc. 2014–04998 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] ReductionActof1995. special statutory provision, Medicare BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 2. Email your request, including your Part B covers intravenous immune address, phone number, OMB number, globulin (IVIG) for persons with primary and CMS document identifier, to immune deficiency disease (PIDD) who DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND [email protected]. wish to receive the drug at home. HUMAN SERVICES 3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at However, Medicare does not separately (410) 786–1326. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid pay for any services or supplies to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Services administer it if the person is not Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786– homebound and otherwise receiving [Document Identifier: CMS–10215 and CMS– 1326. services under a Medicare Home Health 10416] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the episode of care. As a result, many Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) beneficiaries have chosen to receive the Agency Information Collection (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), federal agencies drug at their doctor’s office or in an Activities: Submission for OMB must obtain approval from the Office of outpatient hospital setting. On Tuesday, Review; Comment Request Management and Budget (OMB) for each January 3, 2012, the President signed ACTION: Notice. collection of information they conduct into law the ‘‘Medicare IVIG Access and or sponsor. The term ‘‘collection of Strengthening Medicare and Repaying SUMMARY: The Centers for Medicare & information’’ is defined in 44 U.S.C. Taxpayers Act of 2012’’. The act Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and authorizes a 3-year demonstration under an opportunity for the public to includes agency requests or Part B of Title XVIII of the Social comment on CMS’ intention to collect requirements that members of the public Security Act to evaluate the benefits of information from the public. Under the submit reports, keep records, or provide providing payment for items and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 information to a third party. Section

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13060 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. States seeking to establish a (FOA) for the Native Asset Building 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies Marketplace must build one that meets Initiative, HHS–2014–ACF–ANA–NO– to publish a 30-day notice in the the requirements set out in Section 0786 (hereinafter referred to as NABI). Federal Register concerning each 1311(d) of the Affordable Care Act and Projects funded under this initiative proposed collection of information, 45 CFR 155.105. In order to ensure that receive two grant awards from two including each proposed extension or a State seeking approval as a State-based Administration for Children and reinstatement of an existing collection Marketplace, State-based SHOP Families (ACF) Program Offices—ANA of information, before submitting the Marketplace, or State Partnership and the Office of Community Services collection to OMB for approval. To Marketplace meet all applicable (OCS). Grantees under the NABI comply with this requirement, CMS is requirements, the Secretary will require program implement economic capacity publishing this notice that summarizes a state to submit a Blueprint for building projects that are targeted the following proposed collection(s) of approval and to demonstrate operational toward increasing the economic stability information for public comment: readiness through virtual or on-site of low-income individuals and families, 1. Type of Information Collection readiness review. Form Number: CMS– through the establishment of Individual Request: Reinstatement without change 10416 (OCN: 0938–1172); Frequency: Development Accounts (IDAs) and of a previously approved collection; Once; Affected Public: State, Local, or related services that motivate Title of Information Collection: Tribal governments; Number of individuals to save, invest, and Medicaid Payment for Prescription Respondents: 31; Number of Responses: accumulate assets. NABI is part of a Drugs—Physicians and Hospital 31; Total Annual Hours: 5,552. (For national Assets for Independence (AFI) Outpatient Departments Collecting and policy questions regarding this demonstration project, authorized under Submitting Drug Identifying Information collection, contact Sarah Summer 301– the Assets for Independence Act of to State Medicaid Programs; Use: In 492–4443.) 1998, to test, demonstrate, and develop accordance with the Deficit Act of 2005, Dated: March 4, 2014. knowledge about the impact of IDAs states are required to provide for the Martique Jones, and related services. For additional collection and submission of utilization Deputy Director, Regulations Development information about NABI, please see the data for certain physician-administered Group, Office of Strategic Operations and Health and Human Services (HHS) drugs in order to receive federal Regulatory Affairs. Grants Forecast at the following link: financial participation for these drugs. [FR Doc. 2014–05000 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] http://www.acf.hhs.gov/ Physicians, serving as respondents to BILLING CODE 4120–01–P hhsgrantsforecast/ states, submit National Drug Code index.cfm?switch=grant.view&gff_ numbers and utilization information for grants_forecastInfoID=66481. ‘‘J’’ code physician-administered drugs DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND DATES: The deadline for receipt of so that the states will have sufficient HUMAN SERVICES comments is April 7, 2014. information to collect drug rebate ADDRESSES: Comments in response to Administration for Children and dollars. Form Number: CMS–10215 this notice should be sent via email to Families (OCN: 0938–1026); Frequency: Weekly; Lillian Sparks Robinson, Commissioner, Affected Public: Private sector— [CFDA Numbers: 93.612, 93.602] Administration for Native Americans, at Business or other for-profits and Not- [email protected]. for-profit institutions; Number of Notice for Public Comment on the Comments will be available for Respondents: 20,000; Total Annual Adoption of Program Policies and inspection by members of the public at Responses: 3,910,000; Total Annual Procedures for the Native Asset the Administration for Native Hours: 16,227. (For policy questions Building Initiative, a Joint Funding Americans, 901 D Street SW., regarding this collection contact Opportunity Announcement Between Washington, DC 20024. the Administration for Native Bernadette Leeds at 410–786–9463). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2. Type of Information Collection Americans and the Office of Carmelia Strickland, Director, Division Request: Revision of a currently Community Services of Program Operations, ANA, (877) 922– approved collection; Title of AGENCY: Administration for Native 9262. Information Collection: Blueprint for Americans, ACF, HHS. A. Administrative Policies: ANA Approval of Affordable Health ACTION: Notice for Public Comment. would make the following changes to Insurance Marketplaces; Use: All states the Administrative Policies in the NABI (including the 50 states, the territories, SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 814 of the FOA. and the District of Columbia, herein Native American Programs Act of 1974 1. ANA will clarify the conflict of referred to as ‘‘states’’) had the (NAPA), as amended, the interest standards to ensure they align opportunity under Section 1311(b) of Administration for Native Americans with the rule at 45 CFR 1336.50(f). This the Affordable Care Act to establish an (ANA) is required to provide members rule authorizes the Office of the Chief Exchange, also known as a of the public an opportunity to Executive of a federally recognized ‘‘Marketplace’’, no later than October 1, comment on changes in interpretive Indian tribal government to be paid 2013 (Plan Year 2014). This current rules, general statements of policy, and salary and expenses with ANA grant submission reduces the number of rules of agency procedure or practice funds provided such costs are related to potential respondents due to various that affect programs, projects, and a project funded under ANA FOAs and states electing to rely on the Federally- activities authorized under the NAPA. that the costs exclude any portion of facilitated Marketplace (FFM). Also, at In accordance with notice requirements salaries and expenses that are a cost of the time of the original request, the tool of NAPA, ANA herein describes its general government. Given this rule was partially paper-based. During the planned changes to interpretive rules, regarding the allowable use of grant intervening time, we have developed general statements of policy, and rules funds, we would adopt a limited the on-line implementation of the tool of agency procedure or practice as they exception to previously published and will transition all future relate to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 conflict of interest standards that applications to that system. Funding Opportunity Announcement previously did not include the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13061

regulatory exception applicable to the applicants will remain the same as those FOAs. Applications that exceed the Office of the Chief Executive of federally entities noted in the FY 2013 version of page limit will have excess pages recognized Indian tribes. the NABI FOA (HHS–2013–ACF–ANA– removed from consideration during the 2. ANA intends to adopt the following NO–0587, available at: http:// panel review process. policy for the NABI FOA: www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/open/foa/ G. Two-File Application Upload ACF encourages all eligible applicants index.cfm?switch=foa&fon=HHS-2013- Requirement: ANA would exempt to participate in the Assets for ACF-ANA-NO-0587) and will include applicants from the ACF application Independence demonstration project; Native 501(c)(3) non-profit two-file upload requirement for therefore awards made under this FOA organizations, federally recognized electronically submitted applications will be exempt from the following tribal governments and Alaska Native when responding to all FY 2014 ANA Administrative Policies regarding Villages, Native non-profit organizations FOAs, including NABI, in order to limitation of ANA awards: ‘‘Limitation designated by the Secretary of the reduce the technical burden on such on the Number of Awards under a Treasury as Community Development applicants and to ensure that lack of Single CFDA Number,’’ and ‘‘Limitation Financial Institutions (CDFIs), and technical resources, not otherwise on the Number of Awards Based on Two Native non-profit credit unions required of applicants, does not Consecutive Funding Cycles.’’ (Please designated as low-income credit unions unintentionally act to disqualify an see FOA Index for a full statement of by the National Credit Union applicant, otherwise eligible, from these policies). Administration (NCUA). The bulleted applying under ANA FOAs. Since NABI was developed as a lists of example organizations under H. Outcomes Expected for NABI special initiative between ANA and each type of applicant will be removed Applications: ANA intends to OCS to increase Native American and clarifying language will be added emphasize monitoring of outcomes participation in the national Asset for that describes the following eligibility specific to the AFI initiative by Independence demonstration project, rules: Native non-profits must have requiring applicants to provide annual ANA also will remove the related 501(c)(3) status with the Internal targets for the following: The number of disqualification factor titled ‘‘Only One Revenue Service; tribes and Alaska IDAs opened per savings goal (home Active Award per CFDA.’’ This Native Villages may only apply jointly ownership, education, and disqualification factor had been with a non-profit with 501(c)(3) status; entrepreneurship); the number of included in the FY 2013 version of the Tribal Colleges may apply as either a participants completing financial NABI FOA to ensure the ‘‘Limitation on non-profit with 501(c)(3) status or education trainings; the number of Number of Awards per CDFA Number’’ jointly with a non-profit with 501(c)(3) individuals completing an asset Administrative Policy. The exemption status. purchase; the amount of non-federal from the Administrative Policy coupled E. Projects Ineligible for Funding: cash contribution deposited in the with the removal of the disqualification ANA would revise language in this Project Reserve Fund; and the factor is intended to encourage section to provide clarification on two percentage of the 5-year federal AFI increased participation in the NABI of the types of projects ANA will not budget that will be drawn down program. fund under regulations at 45 CFR annually. Target numbers for the entire B. Federal Evaluation: ANA intends 1336.33(b), as follows: 5-year project period were requested in to include the following language: 1. Projects for which a grantee would previous FOAs. ANA and OCS are required by statute provide training and technical I. Protection of Sensitive and/or to evaluate the impact of their funding. assistance to other tribes or Native Confidential Information: ANA intends To fulfill the evaluation requirements, American organizations to the extent to add the following application ANA and OCS will implement a such training or technical assistance is requirement to all FY 2014 FOAs in federally sponsored evaluation strategy duplicative of ANA-funded training and order to ensure the protection of to assess the success and impact of technical assistance available to tribes confidential and/or sensitive approved projects. The federal and other entities that are eligible to information: evaluation strategy will include grantee- apply for ANA funding. This does not If any confidential or sensitive level documentation. In accepting a apply to ‘‘train-the-trainer’’ capacity information will be collected during the grant award, all grantees will agree to building projects. course of the project, whether from staff participate fully in the federal 2. Projects from consortia of tribes (e.g., background investigations) or evaluation if selected and to follow all that do not include documentation from project participants and/or project evaluation protocols established by each participating consortium member beneficiaries, then provide a description ANA and OCS or their designee specifying their role and support. of the methods that will be used to contractor. Projects from consortia must have goals ensure that confidential and/or sensitive C. Name Change of a Disqualification and objectives that will encompass the information is properly handled and Factor: ANA would change the name of participating communities. ANA will safeguarded. Also provide a plan for the the disqualification factor titled ‘‘Board not fund projects by a consortium of disposition of such information at the Documentation’’ to ‘‘Assurance of tribes that duplicates activities for end of the project period. Community Representation on Board of which participating member tribes also J. ANA Application Evaluation Directors’’ in order to further clarify receive funding from ANA. Criteria: what is being requested of applicants F. Page Limits for NABI Applications: 1. Changes to Criteria: ANA would regarding demonstration of community ANA would change the maximum page add three additional criteria to the FOA, representation. The content of this limit for applications submitted in titled: Need for Assistance, Objective requirement will not change, and it still response to the FY 2014 NABI FOA Work Plan (OWP), and Organizational will not apply to tribes or Alaska Native from 200 pages to 150 pages. This page Capacity. The concept of Need for Villages. All disqualification factors will limit excludes business plans (if Assistance was articulated as the be in Section III.3. Other of the applicable) and mandatory grant forms Problem Statement and was evaluated published FOA. (Standard Forms and ANA’s Objective under the Outcomes Expected criteria in D. Eligible Applicants: ANA intends Work Plan form). The 150-page limit is prior years’ FOAs. The OWP and to clarify eligible applicants. Eligible consistent with ANA’s other FY 2014 Organizational Capacity were

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13062 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

previously listed and evaluated as part 3. Allows any one community, or DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND of the Approach section. They will be region, to receive a disproportionate HUMAN SERVICES listed as separate criteria to highlight share of the funds available for award. Food and Drug Administration the critical nature of these elements to 4. Is essentially identical or similar in project success. Bonus Points that whole, or in part, to previously funded [Docket No. FDA–2014–D–0191] appeared in prior years’ FOAs will be projects proposed by the same removed from the evaluation criteria. Advancing Regulatory Science for 2. Titles and Assigned Weight: ANA applicant, or activities or projects proposed by a consortium that High Throughput Sequencing Devices would adjust the maximum point values for Microbial Identification and of the evaluation criteria scores to duplicates activities for which any consortium member also receives Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance further prioritize elements that are Markers important to project monitoring and funding from ANA. success. ANA proposes to use the 5. Provides couples or family AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, following criteria values for the FY 2014 counseling activities that are medically HHS. NABI FOA: based. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. Need for Assistance—15 points; 6. Originated with and/or was Outcomes Expected—10 points; The Food and Drug Administration Project Approach—20 points; designed by consultants who provide a (FDA) is announcing the following Organizational Capacity—25 points; major role for themselves and are not public workshop entitled ‘‘Advancing Objective Work Plan—20 points; members of the applicant organization, Regulatory Science for High Throughput Budget and Budget Justification—10 tribe, or village. Sequencing Devices for Microbial points. 7. Contains contingent activities that Identification and Detection of 3. Scoring Guidance: ANA intends to may impede, or indefinitely delay, the Antimicrobial Resistance Markers.’’ The provide guidance to reviewers to utilize progress of the project. purpose of the public workshop is to the table below when allocating points discuss the clinical and public health 8. Has the potential to cause for applications in order to ensure applications and performance validation unintended harm or that could consistency and equivalence in scoring of these devices, the quality criteria for between different panels and panel negatively impact the safety or privacy establishing the accuracy of reference reviewers. ANA would add the of individuals. databases for regulatory use and ways to following table to all FY 2014 FOAs: 9. May be used for the purpose of streamline clinical trials for microbial providing loan capital. Federal funds identification. This discussion is Excellent ...... 93–100 awarded under this FOA may not be essential to establish the safety and Very Good ...... 86–92 used for the purpose of providing loan effectiveness of high throughput Good ...... 78–85 capital. This is not related to loan sequencing devices when used to test Fair ...... 70–77 human specimens or clinical isolates for Needs Significant Improvement 0–69 capital authorized under Sec. 803A of NAPA [42 U.S.C. 2991b–1(a)(1)] for the the diagnosis of infectious diseases and detection of antimicrobial resistance K. ANA Internal Review of Proposed purpose of the Hawaiian Revolving markers. Projects: ANA proposes to clarify the Loan fund. language in Section V.2. Review and 10. Includes human subject research DATES: Date and Time: The public Selection Process of all FY 2014 FOAs as defined at 45 CFR 45.102(d) and (f). workshop will be held on April 1, 2014, to clarify the scope of discretion to be from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. L. Reporting: ANA would change the exercised in making funding decisions Location: The public workshop will reporting requirement from quarterly to as follows: be held at the FDA White Oak Campus, Based on the ranked order of semi-annual for Objective Progress 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Building applications, ANA staff will perform an Reports (OPR) and Financial Status 31 Conference Center, the Great Room internal review and analysis of the Reports (FSR). Therefore, grantees will (Rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993– highest ranked applications in order to be required to submit an OPR and an 0002. For parking and security determine their consistency with the FSR every 6 months instead of every 3 information, please visit the following purposes of NAPA, all relevant statutory months. Please note grantees will still Web site: http://www.fda.gov/ and regulatory requirements, and the be required to submit a Federal AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/ requirements of this FOA. ANA’s Financial Report—Federal Cash BuildingsandFacilities/ Commissioner has discretion to make all Transaction Report to the Division of WhiteOakCampusInformation/ final funding decisions. In the exercise Payment Management on a quarterly ucm241740.htm. of such discretion, the Commissioner basis. Contact Person: Heike Sichtig, Center would consider whether the project: for Devices and Radiological Health, 1. Would further the purpose of this Lillian Sparks Robinson, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 funding opportunity as described in Commissioner, Administration for Native New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. Section I. Description, or is likely to be Americans. 5269, Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002, successful or cost effective based on [FR Doc. 2014–04959 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] email: [email protected]. what is submitted for evaluation in BILLING CODE 4184–34–P Registration: Registration is free and response to Section IV.2. Project on a first-come, first-served basis. Description. Persons interested in attending this 2. Fails to provide documented public workshop must register online by commitment of non-federal cash 5 p.m. on March 25, 2014. Early contributions as described in Section registration is recommended because III.2. Cost Sharing or Matching and seating is limited. FDA may limit the Section IV.2. Project Description, number of participants from each Commitment of Non-Federal Resources. organization based on space limitations.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13063

Registrants will receive confirmation manufacturer or are otherwise publicly default.htm (select the appropriate once their registration has been available. workshop from the list). accepted. Onsite registration on the day High throughput sequencing devices of the public workshop will be provided have the potential to dramatically III. Topics for Input on a space-available basis beginning at change clinical microbiology. These FDA will seek input on its proposed diagnostic devices present several 7 a.m. performance evaluation approach, advantages, such as identifying If you need special accommodations which will include the following topics: due to a disability, please contact Susan potential disease etiology in situations Monahan, Center for Devices and where many different pathogens share a 1. Clinical applications and public Radiological Health, Food and Drug common clinical manifestation without health needs: Identify specific Administration, 10903 New Hampshire the need for any a priori target specific applications where high throughput Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 4321, Silver Spring, information to select the appropriate sequencing could be used for diagnosis MD 20993–0002, 301–796–5661, email: test. However, the processes of selecting of infectious diseases and markers of [email protected] at least 7 the methods used to establish and antimicrobial resistance from human days in advance of the workshop. validate the performance of these specimens or clinical isolates. devices to make informed clinical and To register for the public workshop, 2. Device validation: Develop and please visit FDA’s Medical Devices public health decisions pose significant scientific and regulatory challenges. adapt standards for the microbial News & Events-Workshops & genome sequencing process (from Conferences calendar at http:// The purpose of the public workshop is to discuss the implementation of high sample collection to result reporting), www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ discuss best practices for sample/library NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/ throughput sequencing devices for the preparation, variant identification, default.htm (select the appropriate diagnosis of infectious disease. genome annotation, output de- meeting from the list). Please provide Specifically, the FDA seeks input from convolution/results interpretation, and complete contact information for each clinical laboratories, infectious disease attendee, including name, title, physicians, industry, government, reporting. affiliation, email, and telephone academia, and other stakeholders on the 3. Reference databases: Develop number. If you are unable to register following topics: Clinical applications quality criteria to establish accurate online, please contact Susan Monahan and public health needs; device reference databases, methods for performance validation; reference (301–796–5661, email: curating, maintaining, and updating databases; and ways to streamline [email protected]). these databases. clinical evaluations/trials for microbial Registration requests should be received identification. This information is 4. Streamline clinical evaluations/ by 5 p.m., March 25, 2014. viewed as essential in establishing the trials for microbial identification: In advance of the meeting, registered safety and effectiveness of high Establish a new comparator paradigm attendees will receive a draft of FDA’s throughput sequencing devices when for high throughput sequencing as the proposed concept for the performance used for the clinical diagnosis of reference method to augment or replace evaluation of High Throughput infectious diseases and markers of existing reference testing methods. Sequencing Devices for Microbial antimicrobial resistance from human Identification and Detection of specimens or clinical isolates. IV. Transcripts Antimicrobial Resistance Markers. Additional information, including a II. Workshop Overview Please be advised that as soon as a workshop agenda, will be available at a This public workshop will consist of transcript is available, it will be later date. brief presentations providing accessible at http:// SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information to frame the goals of the www.regulations.gov. It may be viewed workshop, and an interactive at the Division of Dockets Management I. Background discussion. The presentations will focus (HFA–305), Food and Drug High throughput sequencing devices on current and anticipated uses for high Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. for the diagnosis of infectious diseases, throughput sequencing devices, a 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. A transcript including detection of antimicrobial proposal for the performance evaluation will also be available in either hardcopy resistance markers, are a new generation approach preferred by FDA, and or on CD–ROM, after submission of a of diagnostic products that have the information on the criteria for Freedom of Information request. Written capability to simultaneously identify acceptable reference databases. requests are to be sent to Division of and differentiate a large number of Following the presentations there will Freedom of Information (ELEM–1029), microbial pathogens using a single be a moderated discussion where the Food and Drug Administration, 12420 clinical specimen or clinical isolate. participants will be asked to provide Parklawn Dr., Element Bldg., Rockville, These devices have already emerged as their individual perspectives. The MD 20857. a critical tool in many research areas outcome of the meeting will be captured and soon they will become both a and released as a draft guidance Dated: February 28, 2014. fixture in clinical microbiology document. Leslie Kux, reference laboratories and a routine part The draft guidance document is Assistant Commissioner for Policy. of diagnostic laboratory workflows. Use expected to be available at a later date. [FR Doc. 2014–04940 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] of this technology requires a process of This information will be placed on file BILLING CODE 4160–01–P sample/library preparation, sequencing, in the public docket (docket number and output de-convolution/results found in brackets in the heading of this interpretation. The identification of the document), which is available at organism or resistance marker is often http://www.regulations.gov. This based on genomic sequence information information will also be available at in comparison to reference databases http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ that were created by the device NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13064 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND modifications before coming to the meetings. Please visit our Web site at HUMAN SERVICES meeting. http://www.fda.gov/ Agenda: The committee will discuss AdvisoryCommittees/ Food and Drug Administration biologics license application (BLA) AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ [Docket No. FDA–2014–N–0001] 125468, serelaxin injection, submitted ucm111462.htm for procedures on by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., as a public conduct during advisory Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs treatment to improve the symptoms of committee meetings. Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting acute heart failure through reduction of Notice of this meeting is given under the rate of worsening of heart failure. the Federal Advisory Committee Act AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, FDA intends to make background (5 U.S.C. app. 2). HHS. material available to the public no later Dated: March 4, 2014. ACTION: Notice. than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post the background Jill Hartzler Warner, This notice announces a forthcoming material on its Web site prior to the Acting Associate Commissioner for Special meeting of a public advisory committee meeting, the background material will Medical Programs. of the Food and Drug Administration be made publicly available at the [FR Doc. 2014–04986 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] (FDA). The meeting will be open to the location of the advisory committee BILLING CODE 4160–01–P public. meeting, and the background material Name of Committee: Cardiovascular will be posted on FDA’s Web site after and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee. the meeting. Background material is DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND General Function of the Committee: available at http://www.fda.gov/ HUMAN SERVICES To provide advice and AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/ Health Resources and Services recommendations to the Agency on default.htm. Scroll down to the Administration FDA’s regulatory issues. appropriate advisory committee meeting Date and Time: The meeting will be link. National Advisory Council on Nurse held on March 27, 2014, from 8 a.m. to Procedure: Interested persons may 5 p.m. This meeting is a reschedule of Education and Practice; Notice of present data, information, or views, Meeting a postponed meeting announced in the orally or in writing, on issues pending Federal Register of January 8, 2014 (79 before the committee. Written In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of FR 1384), originally scheduled for submissions may be made to the contact the Federal Advisory Committee Act February 13, 2014. person on or before March 24, 2014. (Pub. L. 92–463), notice is hereby given Location: FDA White Oak Campus, Oral presentations from the public will of the following meeting: 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Building be scheduled between approximately 1 Name: National Advisory Council on 31, the Great Room, White Oak p.m. and 2 p.m. Those individuals Nurse Education and Practice Conference Center (Rm. 1503), Silver interested in making formal oral (NACNEP). Spring, MD 20993–0002. Information presentations should notify the contact Date and Time: March 21, 2014, 9:30 regarding special accommodations due person and submit a brief statement of a.m.–5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. to a disability, visitor parking, and the general nature of the evidence or Place: Webinar Format. transportation may be accessed at http:// arguments they wish to present, the Status: This meeting will be open to www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/ names and addresses of proposed the public. default.htm; under the heading participants, and an indication of the Purpose: The purpose of this meeting ‘‘Resources for You,’’ click on ‘‘Public approximate time requested to make is to identify the key issues facing Meetings at the FDA White Oak their presentation on or before March public health nursing and population Campus.’’ Please note that visitors to the 21, 2014. Time allotted for each health, and to formulate policy White Oak Campus must enter through presentation may be limited. If the recommendations for Congress and the Building 1. number of registrants requesting to Secretary to ensure the nursing Contact Person for More Information: speak is greater than can be reasonably workforce is ready to meet these Kristina Toliver, Center for Drug accommodated during the scheduled challenges. The objectives of the Evaluation and Research, Food and open public hearing session, FDA may meeting are: (1) To articulate the key Drug Administration, 10903 New conduct a lottery to determine the challenges facing public health nursing Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, speakers for the scheduled open public and population health; (2) to develop Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002, 301– hearing session. The contact person will goals and priorities for Council action to 796–9001, FAX: 301–847–8533, email: notify interested persons regarding their address these challenges; and (3) to [email protected], or FDA Advisory request to speak by March 24, 2014. develop recommendations on the Committee Information Line, 1–800– Persons attending FDA’s advisory activities, initiatives, and partnerships 741–8138 (301–443–0572 in the committee meetings are advised that the that are critical to advancing twenty- Washington, DC area). A notice in the Agency is not responsible for providing first century public health nurse Federal Register about last minute access to electrical outlets. education and practice models needed modifications that impact a previously FDA welcomes the attendance of the to promote the health of the public. This announced advisory committee meeting public at its advisory committee meeting will form the basis for cannot always be published quickly meetings and will make every effort to NACNEP’s mandated Twelfth Annual enough to provide timely notice. accommodate persons with physical Report to the Secretary of the U.S. Therefore, you should always check the disabilities or special needs. If you Department of Health and Human Agency’s Web site at http:// require special accommodations due to Services and Congress. The meeting will www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/ a disability, please contact Kristina include presentations and discussion default.htm and scroll down to the Toliver at least 7 days in advance of the focused around the purpose and appropriate advisory committee meeting meeting. objectives of this meeting. link, or call the advisory committee FDA is committed to the orderly Agenda: A tentative agenda will be information line to learn about possible conduct of its advisory committee available on the NACNEP Web site 10

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13065

days in advance of the meeting with a DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND preregistration is requested for both final agenda posted 1 day prior to the HUMAN SERVICES attendance and oral comment and meeting. Agenda items are subject to required to access the webcast. Parts of change as priorities dictate. National Institutes of Health the meeting will be closed as indicated Public Comment: Public participants on the agenda. Information about the National Institute on Aging; Notice of meeting and registration are available at may submit written statements in Closed Meeting http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/165. advance of the scheduled meeting. If DATES: you would like to provide oral public Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Meeting: April 16–18, 2014, begins at comment during the meeting, please Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 11:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) address them to the Designated Federal amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. on April 16, at 8:30 a.m. on April 17 and Official (DFO), CDR Serina Hunter- The meeting will be closed to the 18, and continues each day until Thomas, at [email protected]. public in accordance with the adjournment. Written Public Comment Public comment will be limited to 3 provisions set forth in sections Submissions: Deadline is April 2, 2014. minutes per speaker. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Preregistration for Meeting and/or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Further as amended. The grant applications and Oral Comments: Deadline is April 9, information regarding NACNEP, the discussions could disclose 2014. Registration to view the meeting including the roster of members, confidential trade secrets or commercial via the webcast is required. Reports to Congress, and minutes from property such as patentable material, ADDRESSES: previous meetings is available at the and personal information concerning Meeting Location: Rodbell following Web site: http:// individuals associated with the grant Auditorium, Rall Building, National Institute of Environmental Health www.hrsa.gov/advisorycommittees/ applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted Sciences (NIEHS), 111 T.W. Alexander bhpradvisory/nacnep/index.html. In invasion of personal privacy. Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC addition, please be advised that Name of Committee: National Institute on 27709. committee members are given copies of Meeting Web Page: The preliminary all written statements submitted from Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Intergenerational Processes. agenda, registration, and other meeting the public. Any further public Date: March 31, 2014. materials are at http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ participation will be solely at the Time: 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. go/165. discretion of the Chair, with approval of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Webcast: Webcasting of the meeting the DFO in attendance. Registration applications. will start at 2:00 p.m. on April 17; the through the DFO for the public Place: National Institute on Aging, URL will be provided to those who comment session is required. Any Gateway Building, Room 2C212, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, preregister for viewing. member of the public who wishes to (Telephone Conference Call). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. have printed materials distributed to the Contact Person: Rebecca J. Ferrell, Ph.D., Lori White, Designated Federal Officer Council for this scheduled meeting Scientific Review Officer, National Institute for the BSC, Office of Liaison, Policy should submit material to the DFO no On Aging, Gateway Building Rm. 2C212, and Review, Division of NTP, NIEHS, later than 12:00 p.m. EST March 18, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD P.O. Box 12233, K2–03, Research 2014. 20892, 301–402–7703, [email protected]. Triangle Park, NC 27709. Phone: 919– (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Members of the public and interested 541–9834, Fax: 301–480–3272, Email: Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, [email protected]. Hand Deliver/ parties should request to participate in National Institutes of Health, HHS) Courier address: 530 Davis Drive, Room the meeting by contacting our Staff Dated: March 3, 2014. K2124, Morrisville, NC 27560. Assistant, Jeanne Brown, to obtain Melanie J. Gray, access information. Access will be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Meeting and Registration: Parts of the granted upon request only and will be Committee Policy. meeting are open to the public as granted on a first-come, first-served [FR Doc. 2014–04941 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] indicated on the agenda with time basis. Space is limited. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P scheduled for oral public comments; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: attendance at the meeting is limited Jeanne Brown, Staff Assistant, National only by the space available. Parts of the Advisory Council on Nurse Education DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND meeting are closed to the public as and Practice, Parklawn Building, Room HUMAN SERVICES indicated on the agenda in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 9–61, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, National Institutes of Health Maryland 20857; email reachDN@ 552(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended, for hrsa.gov; telephone (301) 443–5688. National Toxicology Program Board of the review, discussion, and evaluation of individual intramural programs and Dated: February 28, 2014. Scientific Counselors; Announcement of Meeting; Request for Comments projects conducted by the NIEHS, Jackie Painter, including consideration of personnel Deputy Director, Division of Policy and SUMMARY: This notice announces the qualifications and performance, and the Information Coordination. next meeting of the National Toxicology competence of individual investigators, [FR Doc. 2014–04957 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Program (NTP) Board of Scientific the disclosure of which would BILLING CODE 4165–15–P Counselors (BSC). The BSC, a federally constitute a clearly unwarranted chartered, external advisory group invasion of personal privacy. composed of scientists from the public The BSC will provide input to the and private sectors, will review and NTP on programmatic activities and provide advice on programmatic issues. A preliminary agenda, roster of activities. The meeting is open to the BSC members, background materials, public as indicated below, and public comments, and any additional

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13066 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

information, when available, will be of the BSC chair. Persons wishing to DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND posted on the BSC meeting Web site present oral comments should register HUMAN SERVICES (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/165) or may on the BSC meeting Web site by April be requested in hardcopy from the 9, 2014, indicate whether they will Substance Abuse and Mental Health Designated Federal Officer for the BSC. present comments in-person or via the Services Administration Following the meeting, summary teleconference line, and indicate the Current List of HHS-Certified minutes will be prepared and made topic(s) on which they plan to comment. Laboratories and Instrumented Initial available on the BSC meeting Web site. The access number for the Testing Facilities Which Meet Minimum The public may attend the meeting in teleconference line will be provided to Standards To Engage in Urine Drug person or view the webcast of the open registrants by email prior to the meeting. Testing for Federal Agencies sessions, which begin at 2 p.m. on April On-site registration for oral comments 17, 2014. Registration is required to will also be available on the meeting AGENCY: Substance Abuse and Mental view the webcast; the URL for the day, although time allowed for Health Services Administration, HHS. webcast will be provided in the email presentation by these registrants may be ACTION: Notice. confirming registration. Individuals who less than that for pre-registered speakers plan to provide oral comments (see and will be determined by the number SUMMARY: The Department of Health and below) are encouraged to preregister of persons who register at the meeting. Human Services (HHS) notifies federal online at the BSC meeting Web site agencies of the laboratories and Persons registering to make oral (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/165) by Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities April 9, 2014, to facilitate planning for comments are asked to send a copy of (IITF) currently certified to meet the the meeting. Individuals interested in their statement and/or PowerPoint standards of the Mandatory Guidelines this meeting are encouraged to access slides to the Designated Federal Officer for Federal Workplace Drug Testing the Web site to stay abreast of the most by April 9, 2014. Written statements can Programs (Mandatory Guidelines). The current information regarding the supplement and may expand upon the Mandatory Guidelines were first meeting. Visitor and security oral presentation. If registering on-site published in the Federal Register on information for those attending in- and reading from written text, please April 11, 1988 (53 FR 11970), and person is available at niehs.nih.gov/ bring 40 copies of the statement for subsequently revised in the Federal about/visiting/index.cfm. Individuals distribution to the BSC and NTP staff Register on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29908); with disabilities who need and to supplement the record. September 30, 1997 (62 FR 51118); accommodation to participate in this Background Information on the BSC: April 13, 2004 (69 FR 19644); November event should contact Dr. White at The BSC is a technical advisory body 25, 2008 (73 FR 71858); December 10, phone: (919) 541–9834 or email: comprised of scientists from the public 2008 (73 FR 75122); and on April 30, [email protected]. TTY users and private sectors that provides 2010 (75 FR 22809). should contact the Federal TTY Relay primary scientific oversight to the NTP. A notice listing all currently HHS- Service at 800–877–8339. Requests Specifically, the BSC advises the NTP certified laboratories and IITFs is should be made at least five business on matters of scientific program content, published in the Federal Register days in advance of the event. both present and future, and conducts during the first week of each month. If Request for Comments: Written periodic review of the program for the any laboratory or IITF certification is comments submitted in response to this suspended or revoked, the laboratory or notice should be received by April 2, purpose of determining and advising on the scientific merit of its activities and IITF will be omitted from subsequent 2014. Comments will be posted on the lists until such time as it is restored to BSC meeting Web site and persons their overall scientific quality. Its full certification under the Mandatory submitting them will be identified by members are selected from recognized authorities knowledgeable in fields such Guidelines. their name and affiliation and/or If any laboratory or IITF has sponsoring organization, if applicable. as toxicology, pharmacology, pathology, biochemistry, epidemiology, risk withdrawn from the HHS National Persons submitting written comments Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP) should include their name, affiliation (if assessment, carcinogenesis, mutagenesis, molecular biology, during the past month, it will be listed applicable), phone, email, and at the end and will be omitted from the sponsoring organization (if any) with behavioral toxicology, neurotoxicology, immunotoxicology, reproductive monthly listing thereafter. the document. This notice is also available on the Time is allotted during the open toxicology or teratology, and Internet at http:// portion of the meeting for the public to biostatistics. Members serve overlapping www.workplace.samhsa.gov. present oral comments to the BSC on terms of up to four years. The BSC the agenda topics. Public comments can usually meets biannually. The authority FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: be presented in-person at the meeting at for the BSC is provided by 42 U.S.C. Giselle Hersh, Division of Workplace NIEHS or by teleconference line. There 217a, section 222 of the Public Health Programs, SAMHSA/CSAP, Room are 50 lines for this call; availability is Service Act (PHS), as amended. The 7–1051, One Choke Cherry Road, on a first-come, first-served basis. The BSC is governed by the provisions of the Rockville, Maryland 20857; 240–276– available lines will be open from 2:00 Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 2600 (voice), 240–276–2610 (fax). p.m. on April 17 and from 8:30 a.m. on amended (5 U.S.C. app.), which sets SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The April 18 until adjournment, although forth standards for the formation and Mandatory Guidelines were initially the BSC will receive public comments use of advisory committees. developed in accordance with Executive only during the formal public comment Order 12564 and section 503 of Public Dated: February 28, 2014. periods, which are indicated on the Law 100–71. The ‘‘Mandatory preliminary agenda. Each organization John R. Bucher, Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug is allowed one time slot per agenda Associate Director, National Toxicology Testing Programs,’’ as amended in the topic. Each speaker is allotted at least 7 Program. revisions listed above, requires strict minutes, which if time permits, may be [FR Doc. 2014–04942 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] standards that laboratories and IITFs extended to 10 minutes at the discretion BILLING CODE 4140–01–P must meet in order to conduct drug and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13067

specimen validity tests on urine Doctors Laboratory, Inc., 2906 Julia 77504, 888–747–3774, (Formerly: specimens for federal agencies. Drive, Valdosta, GA 31602, 229–671– University of Texas Medical Branch, To become certified, an applicant 2281. Clinical Chemistry Division; UTMB laboratory or IITF must undergo three DrugScan, Inc., 200 Precision Road, Pathology-Toxicology Laboratory). rounds of performance testing plus an Suite 200, Horsham, PA 19044, 800– Pacific Toxicology Laboratories, 9348 on-site inspection. To maintain that 235–4890. DeSoto Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, certification, a laboratory or IITF must ElSohly Laboratories, Inc., 5 Industrial 800–328–6942, (Formerly: Centinela participate in a quarterly performance Park Drive, Oxford, MS 38655, 662– Hospital Airport Toxicology testing program plus undergo periodic, 236–2609. Laboratory). on-site inspections. Fortes Laboratories, Inc., 25749 SW Pathology Associates Medical Canyon Creek Road, Suite 600, Laboratories and IITFs in the Laboratories, 110 West Cliff Dr., Wilsonville, OR 97070, 503–486– applicant stage of certification are not to Spokane, WA 99204, 509–755–8991/ 1023. be considered as meeting the minimum 800–541–7891 x7. Gamma-Dynacare Medical requirements described in the HHS Phamatech, Inc., 10151 Barnes Canyon Laboratories*, A Division of the Mandatory Guidelines. A HHS-certified Road, San Diego, CA 92121, 858–643– Gamma-Dynacare Laboratory laboratory or IITF must have its letter of 5555. Partnership, 245 Pall Mall Street, certification from HHS/SAMHSA Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 1777 London, ONT, Canada N6A 1P4, 519– (formerly: HHS/NIDA), which attests Montreal Circle, Tucker, GA 30084, 679–1630. 800–729–6432, (Formerly: SmithKline that it has met minimum standards. Laboratory Corporation of America In accordance with the Mandatory Beecham Clinical Laboratories; Holdings, 7207 N. Gessner Road, SmithKline Bio-Science Laboratories). Guidelines dated November 25, 2008 Houston, TX 77040, 713–856–8288/ (73 FR 71858), the following HHS- Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 400 800–800–2387. Egypt Road, Norristown, PA 19403, certified laboratories and IITFs meet the Laboratory Corporation of America minimum standards to conduct drug 610–631–4600/877–642–2216, Holdings, 69 First Ave., Raritan, NJ (Formerly: SmithKline Beecham and specimen validity tests on urine 08869, 908–526–2400/800–437–4986, specimens: Clinical Laboratories; SmithKline Bio- (Formerly: Roche Biomedical Science Laboratories). HHS-Certified Instrumented Initial Laboratories, Inc.). Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 8401 Testing Facilities Laboratory Corporation of America Fallbrook Ave., West Hills, CA 91304, Holdings, 1904 Alexander Drive, Gamma-Dynacare Medical Laboratories, 818–737–6370, (Formerly: SmithKline Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, Beecham Clinical Laboratories). 6628 50th Street NW., Edmonton, AB 919–572–6900/800–833–3984, Canada T6B 2N7, 780–784–1190. Redwood Toxicology Laboratory, 3650 (Formerly: LabCorp Occupational Westwind Blvd., Santa Rosa, CA HHS-Certified Laboratories Testing Services, Inc., CompuChem 95403, 707–570–4434. Laboratories, Inc.; CompuChem South Bend Medical Foundation, Inc., ACL Laboratories, 8901 W. Lincoln Laboratories, Inc., A Subsidiary of 530 N. Lafayette Blvd., South Bend, Ave., West Allis, WI 53227, 414–328– Roche Biomedical Laboratory; Roche IN 46601, 574–234–4176 x 1276. 7840/800–877–7016 (Formerly: CompuChem Laboratories, Inc., A Southwest Laboratories, 4625 E. Cotton Bayshore Clinical Laboratory). Member of the Roche Group). Center Boulevard, Suite 177, Phoenix, Laboratory Corporation of America ACM Medical Laboratory, Inc., 160 AZ 85040, 602–438–8507/800–279– Holdings, 1120 Main Street, Elmgrove Park, Rochester, NY 14624, 0027. Southaven, MS 38671, 866–827–8042/ 585–429–2264. STERLING Reference Laboratories, 2617 800–233–6339, (Formerly: LabCorp Aegis Analytical Laboratories, Inc., 345 East L Street, Tacoma, Washington Occupational Testing Services, Inc.; Hill Ave., Nashville, TN 37210, 615– 98421, 800–442–0438. MedExpress/National Laboratory 255–2400, (Formerly: Aegis Sciences Toxicology & Drug Monitoring Center). Corporation, Aegis Analytical Laboratory, University of Missouri Laboratories, Inc., Aegis Analytical LabOne, Inc. d/b/a Quest Diagnostics, 10101 Renner Blvd., Lenexa, KS Hospital & Clinics, 301 Business Loop Laboratories). 70 West, Suite 208, Columbia, MO Alere Toxicology Services, 1111 Newton 66219, 913–888–3927/800–873–8845, (Formerly: Quest Diagnostics 65203, 573–882–1273. St., Gretna, LA 70053, 504–361–8989/ U.S. Army Forensic Toxicology Drug 800–433–3823, (Formerly: Kroll Incorporated; LabOne, Inc.; Center for Laboratory Services, a Division of Testing Laboratory, 2490 Wilson St., Laboratory Specialists, Inc., Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755– Laboratory Specialists, Inc.). LabOne, Inc.). MedTox Laboratories, Inc., 402 W. 5235, 301–677–7085. Alere Toxicology Services, 450 County Road D, St. Paul, MN 55112, * The Standards Council of Canada Southlake Blvd., Richmond, VA 651–636–7466/800–832–3244. (SCC) voted to end its Laboratory 23236, 804–378–9130, (Formerly: MetroLab-Legacy Laboratory Services, Accreditation Program for Substance Kroll Laboratory Specialists, Inc., 1225 NE 2nd Ave., Portland, OR Abuse (LAPSA) effective May 12, 1998. Scientific Testing Laboratories, Inc.; 97232, 503–413–5295/800–950–5295. Laboratories certified through that Kroll Scientific Testing Laboratories, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical program were accredited to conduct Inc.). Center, Forensic Toxicology forensic urine drug testing as required Baptist Medical Center-Toxicology Laboratory, 1 Veterans Drive, by U.S. Department of Transportation Laboratory, 11401 I–30, Little Rock, Minneapolis, MN 55417, 612–725– (DOT) regulations. As of that date, the AR 72209–7056, 501–202–2783, 2088. certification of those accredited (Formerly: Forensic Toxicology National Toxicology Laboratories, Inc., Canadian laboratories will continue Laboratory Baptist Medical Center). 1100 California Ave., Bakersfield, CA under DOT authority. The responsibility Clinical Reference Lab, 8433 Quivira 93304, 661–322–4250/800–350–3515. for conducting quarterly performance Road, Lenexa, KS 66215–2802, 800– One Source Toxicology Laboratory, Inc., testing plus periodic on-site inspections 445–6917. 1213 Genoa-Red Bluff, Pasadena, TX of those LAPSA-accredited laboratories

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13068 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

was transferred to the U.S. HHS, with Center for Substance Abuse Treatment Matthew J. Aumen. A transcript of the the HHS’ NLCP contractor continuing to National Advisory Council. open portion of the meeting will also be have an active role in the performance Date/Time/Type: April 2, 2014, 9:30 a.m.– available on the SAMHSA Web site after testing and laboratory inspection 5:00 p.m. (OPEN) the meeting. Place: SAMHSA Building, Sugarloaf processes. Other Canadian laboratories Conference Room, 1 Choke Cherry, Rockville, Committee Name: Substance Abuse and wishing to be considered for the NLCP MD 20857. Mental Health Services, Administration, may apply directly to the NLCP Contact: Cynthia Graham, M.S., Designated Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, contractor just as U.S. laboratories do. Federal Official, SAMHSA/CSAT National National Advisory Council. Upon finding a Canadian laboratory to Advisory Council, 1 Choke Cherry Road, Date/Time/Type: April 2, 2014, from 10:00 be qualified, HHS will recommend that Room 5–1035, Rockville, MD 20857, a.m. to 4:00 p.m. EDT: (OPEN) DOT certify the laboratory (Federal Telephone: (240) 276–1692, FAX: (240) 276– Place: SAMHSA, 1 Choke Cherry Road, Rock Creek Conference Room (lobby level), Register, July 16, 1996) as meeting the 1690, Email: cynthia.graham@ samhsa.hhs.gov. Rockville, MD 20857. minimum standards of the Mandatory Contact: Matthew J. Aumen, Designated Guidelines published in the Federal Cathy J. Friedman, Federal Officer, SAMHSA CSAP NAC, 1 Register on April 30, 2010 (75 FR Public Health Analyst, SAMHSA. Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, MD 20857, 22809). After receiving DOT [FR Doc. 2014–05004 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Telephone: 240–276–2419, Fax: 240–276– 2430, Email: matthew.aumen@ certification, the laboratory will be BILLING CODE 4162–20–P included in the monthly list of HHS- samhsa.hhs.gov. certified laboratories and participate in Cathy J. Friedman, the NLCP certification maintenance DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Public Health Analyst, SAMHSA. program. HUMAN SERVICES [FR Doc. 2014–05003 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Summer King, Substance Abuse and Mental Health BILLING CODE 4162–20–P Statistician. Services Administration [FR Doc. 2014–04958 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND BILLING CODE 4160–20–P Center for Substance Abuse HUMAN SERVICES Prevention; Notice of Meeting Pursuant to Public Law 92–463, Substance Abuse and Mental Health DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Services Administration HUMAN SERVICES notice is hereby given for the meeting of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health National Advisory Council; Notice of Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) Substance Abuse and Mental Health Meeting Services Administration Center for Substance Abuse Prevention National Advisory Council (CSAP NAC) Pursuant to Public Law 92–463, Notice of Meeting on April 2, 2014. notice is hereby given of a meeting of The Council was established to advise the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Pursuant to Public Law 92–463, the Secretary, Department of Health and Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) notice is hereby given that the Human Services (HHS); the National Advisory Council (NAC) on Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administrator, SAMHSA; and Center April 4, 2014. Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) Director, CSAP concerning matters The meeting will include discussions Center for Substance Abuse Treatment relating to the activities carried out by of SAMHSA’s Leadership Role in an (CSAT) National Advisory Council will and through the Center and the policies Integrated Health Environment, meet April 2, 2014, 9:30 a.m.–5:00 p.m. respecting such activities. SAMHSA and Military Families, and The meeting is open to the public and The meeting will be open to the SAMHSA’s Communication Strategy. will include a discussion of the Center’s public and include discussion of The meeting is open to the public and current administrative, legislative, and prevention in the context of primary will be held at the SAMHSA building, program developments. Public care, SAMHSA’s Strategic Initiative on 1 Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, MD comments are welcome. To attend on- the Prevention of Substance Abuse and 20857 in the Sugarloaf Conference site, or request special accommodations Mental Illness, communications, and Room. Attendance by the public will be for persons with disabilities, please CSAP program and budget limited to space available. Interested register at SAMHSA Committees’ Web developments. persons may present data, information, site, http://nac.samhsa.gov/ To attend the public portion of the or views, orally or in writing, on issues Registration/meetingsRegistration.aspx meeting onsite, submit written or brief pending before the committee. Written or contact the Council’s Designated oral comments, request special submissions should be forwarded to the Federal Officer, Ms. Cynthia Graham, accommodations for persons with contact person on or before one week (see contact information below). disabilities, or participate via Webcast, prior to the meeting. Oral presentations Individuals interested in making oral please register at the SAMHSA from the public will be scheduled at the comments or obtaining the meeting Committees’ Web site, http:// conclusion of the meeting. Individuals number and passcode are encouraged to nac.samhsa.gov/Registration/ interested in making oral presentations notify Ms.Graham, on or before March meetingsRegistration.aspx, or are encouraged to notify the contact on 24. Substantive program information, a communicate with the CSAP Council’s or before one week prior to the meeting. summary of the meeting and a roster of Designated Federal Officer (see contact Five minutes will be allotted for each Council members may be obtained 30 information below). presentation. days following the meeting by accessing Substantive program information, a The meeting may be accessed via the SAMHSA Committee Web site at summary of the meeting, and a roster of teleconference. The meeting will be http://nac.samhsa.gov/CSATcouncil/ committee members may be obtained available via teleconference at 888–390– index.aspx or contacting Ms. Graham. either by accessing the SAMHSA 0854, Participant passcode: SAMHSA. Committee Name: Substance Abuse and Committee’s Web site after the meeting, To attend on site, obtain the call-in Mental Health Services Administration, http://nac.samhsa.gov/, or by contacting number and access code, submit written

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13069

or brief oral comments, or request prior to the meeting. Oral presentations the two SAMHSA Advisory Committees special accommodations for persons from the public will be scheduled at the (Advisory Committee for Women’s with disabilities, please register on-line conclusion of the meeting. Individuals Services, and the Tribal Technical at http://nac.samhsa.gov/Registration/ interested in making oral presentations Advisory Committee). meetingsRegistration.aspx, or are encouraged to notify the contact on The Councils were established to communicate with SAMHSA’s or before one week prior to the meeting. advise the Secretary, Department of Designated Federal Officer, Ms. Geretta Five minutes will be allotted for each Health and Human Services (HHS), the Wood (see contact information below). presentation. Administrator, SAMHSA, and Center Substantive meeting information and The meeting may be accessed via Directors, concerning matters relating to a roster of Committee members may be teleconference. The meeting will be the activities carried out by and through obtained either by accessing the available via teleconference at 800–593– the Centers and the policies respecting SAMHSA Committees’ Web site at 7178, Participant passcode: SAMHSA. such activities. https://nac.samhsa.gov/NACcouncil/ To attend on site, obtain the call-in Under Section 501 of the Public meetings.aspx, or by contacting Ms. number and access code, submit written Health Service Act, the Advisory Wood. The transcript for the meeting or brief oral comments, or request Committee for Women’s Services will be available on the SAMHSA special accommodations for persons (ACWS) is statutorily mandated to Committees’ Web site within three with disabilities, please register on-line advise the SAMHSA Administrator and weeks after the meeting. at http://nac.samhsa.gov/Registration/ the Associate Administrator for Meetings Registration.aspx, or Women’s Services on appropriate Committee Name: SAMHSA’s National Advisory Council. communicate with SAMHSA’s Acting activities to be undertaken by SAMHSA Date/Time/Type: Friday, April 4, 2014 Designated Federal Officer, Ms. Nadine and its Centers with respect to women’s from 9 a.m. to 1:30 EDT: OPEN. Benton (see contact information substance abuse and mental health Place: SAMHSA, 1 Choke Cherry Road, below).Substantive meeting information services. SAMHSA Sugarloaf Conference Room, and a roster of Committee members may Pursuant to Presidential Executive Rockville, Maryland 20857. be obtained either by accessing the Order No. 13175, November 6, 2000, Contact: Geretta Wood, Committee SAMHSA Committees’ Web site and the Presidential Memorandum of Management Officer and Designated Federal https://nac.samhsa.gov/Women September 23, 2004, SAMHSA Official of the SAMHSA National Advisory established the Tribal Technical Council, 1 Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, Services/index.aspx, or by contacting Maryland 20857, Telephone: (240) 276–2326, Ms. Benton. The transcript for the Advisory Committee (TTAC) for Fax: (240) 276–2252, and Email: meeting will be available on the working with Federally-recognized [email protected]. SAMHSA Committees’ Web site within Tribes to enhance the government-to- three weeks after the meeting. government relationship, honor Federal Cathy J. Friedman, trust responsibilities and obligations to Public Health Analyst, SAMHSA. Committee Name: SAMHSA’s Advisory Tribes and American Indian and Alaska Committee for Women’s Services. [FR Doc. 2014–05006 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Date/Time/Type: Wednesday, April 2, Natives. The SAMHSA TTAC serves as BILLING CODE 4162–20–P 2014, from 9 a.m. to 5:15 EDT: OPEN. an advisory body to SAMHSA. Place: SAMHSA, 1 Choke Cherry Road, The April 3 combined meeting will SAMHSA VTC Room, Rockville, Maryland include a report from the SAMHSA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 20857. Contact: Nadine Benton, Acting Administrator, an update on SAMHSA’s HUMAN SERVICES Designated Federal Officer, SAMHSA’s Budget, and discussions related to the Advisory Committee for Women’s Services, 1 impact of behavioral health and Substance Abuse and Mental Health Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, Maryland healthcare integration on SAMHSA, a Services Administration 20857, Telephone: (240) 276–0127, Fax: (240) 276–2252 and Email: nadine.benton@ report from the Youth Members of the Advisory Committee for Women’s samhsa.hhs.gov. Councils, an update of SAMHSA’s Services; Notice of Meeting current and future strategic initiatives Cathy J. Friedman, and SAMHSA’s internal operating Pursuant to Public Law 92–463, Public Health Analyst, SAMHSA. strategies. notice is hereby given of a meeting of [FR Doc. 2014–05001 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] The meeting is open to the public and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health BILLING CODE 4162–20–P will be held at the SAMHSA building, Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) 1 Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, MD Advisory Committee for Women’s 20857 in the 1st floor Conference Services (ACWS) on April 2, 2014. The DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Rooms. Attendance by the public will meeting is open to the public. It will HUMAN SERVICES be limited to space available. Interested include an update from the SAMHSA persons may present data, information, Women’s Coordinating Committee and Substance Abuse and Mental Health or views, orally or in writing, on issues discussions of Behavioral Health and Services Administration (SAMHSA) pending before the committee. Written Primary Care Integration and other Notice of Meeting submissions should be forwarded to the ACWS related topics. contact person on or before one week The meeting is open to the public and Pursuant to Public Law 92–463, prior to the meeting. Oral presentations will be held at the SAMHSA building, notice is hereby given of the combined from the public will be scheduled at the 1 Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, MD meeting on April 3, 2014, of the conclusion of the meeting. Individuals 20857, in the VTC Room. Attendance by Substance Abuse and Mental Health interested in making oral presentations the public will be limited to space Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) are encouraged to notify the contact on available. Interested persons may four National Advisory Councils (the or before one week prior to the meeting. present data, information, or views, SAMHSA National Advisory Council Five minutes will be allotted for each orally or in writing, on issues pending (NAC), the Center for Mental Health presentation. before the committee. Written Services NAC, the Center for Substance The meeting may be accessed via submissions should be forwarded to the Abuse Prevention NAC, the Center for teleconference at 1–866–652–5200, contact person on or before one week Substance Abuse Treatment NAC), and Participant passcode: SAMHSA. To

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13070 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

attend on site, obtain the call-in number 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(b) and 5 U.S.C. App. Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. and access code, submit written or brief 2, Section 10(d). The meeting will 11411), as amended, HUD is publishing oral comments, or request special include discussion of the Center’s this Notice to identify Federal buildings accommodations for persons with policy issues, and current and other real property that HUD has disabilities, please register on-line at administrative, legislative, and program reviewed for suitability for use to assist http://nac.samhsa.gov/Registration/ developments. the homeless. The properties were meetingsRegistration.aspx, or Substantive program information, a reviewed using information provided to communicate with SAMHSA’s summary of the meeting and a roster of HUD by Federal landholding agencies Committee Management Officer, Ms. Council members may be obtained as regarding unutilized and underutilized Geretta Wood (see contact information soon as possible after the meeting, by buildings and real property controlled below). accessing the SAMHSA Committee Web by such agencies or by GSA regarding Substantive meeting information and site at https://nac.samhsa.gov/ its inventory of excess or surplus a roster of Committee members may be CMHScouncil/index.aspx, or by Federal property. This Notice is also obtained either by accessing the contacting the CMHS National Advisory published in order to comply with the SAMHSA Committees’ Web site at Council Designated Federal Official, Ms. December 12, 1988 Court Order in https://nac.samhsa.gov/ Deborah DeMasse-Snell (see contact National Coalition for the Homeless v. WomenServices/index.aspx, or by information below). Veterans Administration, No. 88–2503– contacting Ms. Wood. The transcript for OG (D.D.C.). Committee Name: SAMHSA’s Center for Properties reviewed are listed in this the meeting will be available on the Mental Health Services National Advisory SAMHSA Committees’ Web site within Council. Notice according to the following three weeks after the meeting. Date/Time/Type: April 2, 2014, 9:00 a.m.– categories: Suitable/available, suitable/ unavailable, and suitable/to be excess, Committee Names: Substance Abuse and 4:30 p.m. OPEN. Mental Health Services Administration Place: SAMHSA Building, 1 Choke Cherry and unsuitable. The properties listed in National Advisory Council, Center for Mental Road, Great Falls Room, Rockville, Maryland the three suitable categories have been Health Services National Advisory Council, 20857. reviewed by the landholding agencies, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention Contact: Deborah DeMasse-Snell M.A. and each agency has transmitted to National Advisory Council, Center for (Than), Designated Federal Official, HUD: (1) Its intention to make the Substance Abuse Treatment National SAMHSA CMHS National Advisory Council, property available for use to assist the Advisory Council, SAMHSA’s Advisory 1 Choke Cherry Road, Room 6–1084, homeless, (2) its intention to declare the Rockville, Maryland 20857, Telephone: (240) Committee for Women’s Services, SAMHSA property excess to the agency’s needs, or Tribal Technical Advisory Committee. 276–1861, Fax: (240) 276–1830, Email: Date/Time/Type: Thursday, April 3, 2014 [email protected]. (3) a statement of the reasons that the from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 EDT: OPEN. property cannot be declared excess or Place: SAMHSA, 1 Choke Cherry Road, Cathy J. Friedman, made available for use as facilities to SAMHSA 1st floor Conference Rooms, Public Health Analyst, SAMHSA. assist the homeless. Rockville, Maryland 20857. [FR Doc. 2014–05002 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Properties listed as suitable/available Contact: Geretta Wood, Committee BILLING CODE 4162–20–P will be available exclusively for Management Officer and Designated Federal homeless use for a period of 60 days Official of the SAMHSA National Advisory from the date of this Notice. Where Council and SAMHSA’s Advisory Committee property is described as for ‘‘off-site use for Women’s Services, 1 Choke Cherry Road, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND Rockville, Maryland 20857, Telephone: (240) URBAN DEVELOPMENT only’’ recipients of the property will be 276–2326, Fax: (240) 276–2252, and Email: required to relocate the building to their [email protected]. [Docket No. FR–5750–N–10] own site at their own expense. Homeless assistance providers Cathy J. Friedman, Federal Property Suitable as Facilities interested in any such property should Public Health Analyst, SAMHSA. To Assist the Homeless send a written expression of interest to [FR Doc. 2014–05005 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] HHS, addressed to Theresa Ritta, Office AGENCY: Office of the Assistant BILLING CODE 4162–20–P of Enterprise Support Programs, Secretary for Community Planning and Program Support Center, HHS, Room Development, HUD. 12–07, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ACTION: Notice. MD 20857; (301) 443–2265. (This is not HUMAN SERVICES a toll-free number.) HHS will mail to the SUMMARY: This Notice identifies interested provider an application unutilized, underutilized, excess, and Substance Abuse and Mental Health packet, which will include instructions surplus Federal property reviewed by Services Administration for completing the application. In order HUD for suitability for use to assist the to maximize the opportunity to utilize a Center for Mental Health Services; homeless. Notice of Meeting suitable property, providers should FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: submit their written expressions of Pursuant to Public Law 92–463, Juanita Perry, Department of Housing interest as soon as possible. For notice is hereby given that the and Urban Development, 451 Seventh complete details concerning the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Street SW., Room 7266, Washington, DC processing of applications, the reader is Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) 20410; telephone (202) 402–3970; TTY encouraged to refer to the interim rule Center for Mental Health Services number for the hearing- and speech- governing this program, 24 CFR part (CMHS) National Advisory Council will impaired (202) 708–2565 (these 581. meet April 2, 2014, 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 telephone numbers are not toll-free), or For properties listed as suitable/to be p.m. call the toll-free Title V information line excess, that property may, if The meeting will be open to the at 800–927–7588. subsequently accepted as excess by public from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. as SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In GSA, be made available for use by the determined by the SAMHSA accordance with 24 CFR part 581 and homeless in accordance with applicable Administrator, in accordance with Title section 501 of the Stewart B. McKinney law, subject to screening for other

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13071

Federal use. At the appropriate time, Dated: February 27, 2014. Hunter Army Airfield GA 31409 HUD will publish the property in a Mark Johnston, Landholding Agency: Army Property Number: 21201410033 Notice showing it as either suitable/ Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special Needs. available or suitable/unavailable. Status: Excess TITLE V, FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY Comments: off-site removal only; 5,809 sq. For properties listed as suitable/ PROGRAM FEDERAL REGISTER REPORT ft.; poor conditions; secured area; gov’t unavailable, the landholding agency has FOR 03/07/2014 escort required; contact Army for more decided that the property cannot be info. Suitable/Available Properties declared excess or made available for Hawaii Building use to assist the homeless, and the 00038 property will not be available. Alabama Pohakuloa Training Area Properties listed as unsuitable will 40123 Hilo HI 96720 not be made available for any other Fort Rucker Landholding Agency: Army purpose for 20 days from the date of this Fort Rucker AL 36362 Property Number: 21201410007 Notice. Homeless assistance providers Landholding Agency: Army Status: Unutilized interested in a review by HUD of the Property Number: 21201410011 Comments: off-site removal only; 102 sq. ft.; determination of unsuitability should Status: Unutilized storage; 49+ yrs.-old; poor conditions; contact Army for more information. call the toll free information line at 1– Comments: off-site removal only; 480 sq. ft.; 20+ yrs.-old; extensive termite & water 800–927–7588 for detailed instructions Building 6004 damage; secured area; contact Army for Marine Corps Base or write a letter to Ann Marie Oliva at accessibility/removal requirements. Kaneohe HI 96863 the address listed at the beginning of 4 Buildings Landholding Agency: Navy this Notice. Included in the request for Redstone Arsenal Property Number: 77201410005 review should be the property address Redstone Arsenal AL 35898 Status: Excess (including zip code), the date of Landholding Agency: Army Comments: off-site removal only; publication in the Federal Register, the Property Number: 21201410026 disassembly required; 3,880 sq. ft.; storage/ landholding agency, and the property Status: Unutilized shop; 10+ yrs.-old; metal siding & roofing number. Directions: 3535 (150 sq. ft.); 3538 (48 sq. ft.); is heavily corroded; contact Navy for more information. For more information regarding 4637 (2,095 sq. ft.); 7330 (75 sq. ft.) Comments: off-site removal only; no future Illinois particular properties identified in this agency need; repairs needed; secured area; Village Water Facility Notice (i.e., acreage, floor plan, existing contact Army for more information. sanitary facilities, exact street address), Fermi National Accelerator Lab providers should contact the Arkansas Batavia IL 60510 Landholding Agency: Energy appropriate landholding agencies at the Tract 12–113—Hebert Bernard House Property Number: 41201410006 following addresses: Agriculture: Ms. Status: Excess Debra Kerr, Department of Agriculture, 102 Groinger Dr. Hot Springs AR 71901 Comments: off-site removal only; 1,257 sq. Reporters Building, 300 7th Street SW., Landholding Agency: Interior ft.; 53+ yrs.-old; storage; repairs needed; Room 300, Washington, DC 20024, (202) Property Number: 61201410004 secured area; contact Energy for 720–8873; Army: Ms. Veronica Rines, Status: Excess accessibility/removal requirements. Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Comments: off-site removal only; 1,269 sq. Trailer 159 Installation Management, Department of ft.; residential; severe deterioration; Fermi National Accelerator Lab Army, Room 5A128, 600 Army structurally unsound; contact Interior for Batavia IL 60510 Pentagon, Washington, DC 20310, (571) more info. Landholding Agency: Energy 256–8145; Energy: Mr. David Steinau, California Property Number: 41201410007 Status: Excess Department of Energy, Office of 2 Buildings Comments: off-site removal only; 980 sq. ft.; Property Management, 1000 Camp Roberts MTC 23+ yrs.-olds; repairs needed; secured area; Independence Ave. SW., Washington, Camp Roberts CA 93451 contact Energy for accessibility/removal DC 20585 (202) 287–1503; GSA: Mr. Landholding Agency: Army requirements. Property Number: 21201410024 Flavio Peres, General Services North Carolina Administration, Office of Real Property Status: Excess Directions: 14102 (864 sq. ft.); 14801 (200 sq. Greenville Site A Transmitting Utilization and Disposal, 1800 F Street ft.) Station NW., Room 7040 Washington, DC Comments: off-site removal only; 72+ yrs.- 1000 Cherry Run Rd. 20405, (202) 501–0084; Health And old; secured area; contact Army for Greenville NC 27834 Human Services: Ms. Theresa M. Ritta, accessibility/removal requirements. Landholding Agency: GSA Chief Real Property Branch, the 7 Buildings Property Number: 54201410008 Department of Health and Human Fort Irwin Status: Excess Services, Room 5B–17, Parklawn Fort Irwin CA 92310 GSA Number: 4–Z–NC–0753 Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Landholding Agency: Army Directions: Landholding Agency: MD 20857, (301) 443–2265; Interior: Mr. Property Number: 21201410027 Broadcasting Board of Governors; Disposal: Status: Unutilized GSA; previously reported under Michael Wright, Acquisition & Property Directions: 359 (1,458 sq. ft.); 806 (5,328 sq. 54201210002 Management, Department of the ft.); 807 (3,956 sq. ft.); 865 (2,928 sq. ft.); Comments: main bldg. 54,318 sq. ft.; 40 Interior, MS–4262, 1849 C Street, 1034 (2,160 sq. ft.); 1323 (3,664 sq. ft.); transmitter antennas & 160 towers on the Washington, DC, 20240, (202) 513–0795; 9032 (6,038 sq. ft.) site; 12+ months vacant; fair conditions; Navy: Mr. Steve Matteo, Department of Comments: off-site removal only; dissemble asbestos/lead-based paint; environ. the Navy, Asset Management Division, required; no future agency need; repairs conditions; contact GSA for more info. Naval Facilities Engineering Command, needed; contamination; secured area; Texas contact Army for more information. Washington Navy Yard, 1330 Patterson 5 Buildings Ave. SW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC Georgia Red River Army Depot 20374; (202) 685–9426 (These are not Building 1157 Texarkana TX 75507 toll-free numbers). Hunter Army Airfield Landholding Agency: Army

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13072 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

Property Number: 21201410025 South Carolina 1124 Status: Excess Marine Corps Reserve Training Hunter Army Airfield Directions: 467 (800 sq. ft.); 00676 (283 sq. Center Hunter Army Airfield GA 31409 ft.); 02091 (864 sq. ft.); 02257 (864 sq. ft.); 2517 Vector Ave. Landholding Agency: Army 02325 (864 sq. ft.) Goose Creek SC 29406 Property Number: 21201410010 Comments: off-site removal only; removal Landholding Agency: GSA Status: Excess may be difficult due to conditions/ Property Number: 54201410009 Comments: off-site removal only; 1,188 sq. structure type; poor conditions; asbestos; Status: Excess ft.; due to structure type relocation may be secured area; contact Army for more GSA Number: 4–N–SC–0630–AA difficult; poor conditions; secured area; information. Directions: Landholding Agency: Navy; contact Army for more info. 2 Buildings Disposal Agency: GSA Texas Fort Hood Comments: 5.59 acres; contact GSA for more 8 Buildings Ft. Hood TX 76544 information. Landholding Agency: Army Fort Hood Property Number: 21201410034 South Dakota Ft. Hood TX 76544 Status: Excess Burke Radio Tower Site Landholding Agency: Army Directions: 90084 (13,125 sq. ft.); 90000 (217 290 St. Property Number: 21201410020 sq. ft.) Burke SD 57523 Status: Excess Comments: off-site removal only; removal Landholding Agency: GSA Directions: 94030 (2,567 sq. ft.); 90083 (150 difficult due to structure type; Property Number: 54201410004 sq. ft.); 26011 (4,789 sq. ft.); 26010 (4,735 contamination; secured area; contact Army Status: Excess sq. ft.); 26009 (4,735 sq. ft.); 26008 (4,735 sq. ft.); 26007 (4,735 sq. ft.); 08640 (3,735 for more info. GSA Number: 7–D–SD–0540 sq. ft.) Building 4917 Directions: Disposal: GSA; Landholding: COE Comments: off-site removal only; removal Fort Hood Comments: 2.48 acres; vacant; contact GSA difficult due to structure type; Ft. Hood TX 76544 for more information. contamination; secured area; contact Army Landholding Agency: Army Property Number: 21201410035 Suitable/Unavailable Properties for more information. Status: Excess Building 9 Buildings Comments: off-site removal only; 404 sq. ft.; Fort Hood California removal may be difficult due to structure Fort Hood TX 96544 type; secured area; contact Army for more 00806 Landholding Agency: Army info. Fort Hunter Liggett Property Number: 21201410021 Washington Fort Hunter Liggett CA 93928 Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Army Directions: 04481 (48 sq. ft.); 4292 (1,830 sq. LK WEN RS BH TRLR Property Number: 21201410017 ft.); 4291 (6,400 sq. ft.); 04290 (674 sq. ft.); (1149.005511) 07672 00 Status: Unutilized 4283 (8,940 sq. ft.); 4281 (2,000 sq. ft.); Leavenworth WA 98826 Comments: off-site removal only; no future 04273 (687 sq. ft.); 04206 (651 sq. ft.); Landholding Agency: Agriculture agency need; 1,600 sq. ft.; 60+ months 04203 (2,196 sq. ft.) Property Number: 15201410006 vacant; poor conditions; exposed to Comments: off-site removal only; removal Status: Unutilized elements/wildlife; secured area; contact may be difficult due to structure type; Comments: 720 sq. ft.; residential; 38+ yrs.- Army for more info. secured area; contact Army for more old; water damaged due to broken water information. line; contact Agriculture for more Building 573 information. Fort Irwin 8 Buildings Ft. Irwin CA 92310 Fort Hood Liberty Airbase Trailer Landholding Agency: Army Fort Hood TX 76544 (2131.005511) 07672 00 Property Number: 21201410037 Landholding Agency: Army Liberty WA 98922 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Status: Unutilized Property Number: 21201410023 Property Number: 15201410007 Comments: off-site removal only; 760 sq. ft.; Status: Excess Status: Unutilized disassembly maybe required; no future Directions: 07035 (1,702 sq. ft.); 7008 (288 sq. Comments: 320 sq. ft.; storage; 38+ yrs.-old; agency need; repairs needed; ft.); 6987 (192 sq. ft.); 04643 (4,017 sq. ft.); damaged due to break-ins; contact contamination; secured area; contact Army 04642 (4,017 sq. ft.); 04619 (4,103 sq. ft.); Agriculture for more information. for more info. 04496 (284 sq. ft.); 04495 (347 sq. ft.) Georgia Comments: off-site removal only; removal Wisconsin may be difficult due to structure type; 06250 1096 secured area; contact Army for more Fort McCoy Fort Stewart information. Ft. Stewart GA 31314 Fort McCoy WI 54656 8 Buildings Landholding Agency: Army Landholding Agency: Army Fort Hood Property Number: 21201410001 Property Number: 21201410013 Ft. Hood TX 76544 Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Army Comments: off-site removal only; due to Comments: off-site removal only; no future Property Number: 21201410028 structure type relocation may be difficult; agency need; 341 sq. ft.; 38+ yrs.-old; fair Status: Excess poor conditions; 7,643 sq. ft.; secured area; conditions; possible lead based paint; Directions: 04163, 04165, 51015, 51016, contact Army for more information. secured area; contact Army for more info. 51017, 51018, 51019, 51020 3 Buildings Land Comments: off-site removal only; sq. ft. Hunter Army Airfield varies; secured area; contact Army for Montana Hunter Army Airfield GA 31409 specific property and/or accessibility/ Turner Lots 7–12 Landholding Agency: Army removal requirements. Park Street Property Number: 21201410002 Turner MT 59542 Status: Excess Washington Landholding Agency: GSA Directions: 1126 (1,196 sq.); 1127 (1,196 sq. 03215 Property Number: 54201410003 ft.); 1129 (5,376 sq. ft.) Joint Base Lewis McChord Status: Excess Comments: off-site removal only; dissemble JBLM WA 98433 GSA Number: 7–G–MT–0635 required; poor conditions; secured area; Landholding Agency: Army Comments: .96 aces; vacant; undeveloped; gov’t escort required; contact Army for Property Number: 21201410008 contact GSA for more information. more information. Status: Underutilized

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13073

Comments: off-site removal only; no future Landholding Agency: HHS Status: Underutilized agency need; due to age/structure Property Number: 57201410003 Directions: 461, 480, 500 relocation may be difficult; 33,460 sq. ft.; Status: Unutilized Comments: public access denied and no 61+ yrs.-old; barracks; significant Directions: 115, 221, 227, 118, 223, 233, 224, alternative method to gain access w/out renovations; secured area; contact Army. 225, 206, 226 compromising national security. 7 Buildings Comments: w/in CDC secured area; public Reasons: Secured Area access denied and no alternative to gain Joint Base Lewis McChord Land JBLM WA 98433 access w/out compromising national Landholding Agency: Army security. Minnesota Property Number: 21201410016 Reasons: Secured Area Township 69; Tract 50–107 Status: Underutilized 8 Buildings Linsten Cabin Directions: 03216 (33,460 sq. ft.); 03218 NAS Voyageurs National Park (33,460 sq. ft.); 3219 (33,460 sq. ft.); 03222 Mechanicsburg PA Kabetogama Lake MN (33,460 sq. ft.); 03224 (33,460 sq. ft.); 03417 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Interior (40,385 sq. ft.); 03418 (40,385 sq. ft.) Property Number: 77201410002 Property Number: 61201410006 Comments: off-site removal only; no future Status: Excess Status: Excess agency need; due to age/structure type Directions: 215, 304, 406, 506, 507, 508, 509, Comments: property located on a small removal may be difficult; barracks; 510 island & only accessible by boat. significant repairs needed; contact Army Comments: public access denied and no Reasons: Not accessible by road, Isolated area alternative to gain access w/out for more info. [FR Doc. 2014–04777 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] compromising national security. Unsuitable Properties Reasons: Secured Area BILLING CODE 4210–67–P Building Building 202 Naval Support Activity Massachusetts Mechanicsburg PA DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Tract 21–4979; Maguire House Landholding Agency: Navy 225 Ridgeway Dr. Property Number: 77201410004 Office of the Secretary Wellfleet MA 02267 Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Interior Comments: public access denied and no [XXXD5198NI DS61100000 Property Number: 61201410005 alternative method to gain access w/out DNINR0000.000000 DX61104] Status: Excess compromising w/out compromising Comments: documented Deficiencies: national security. Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Public Advisory structurally unsound; partially collapsed; Reasons: Secured Area Committee collapsed ceilings. Tennessee Reasons: Extensive deterioration AGENCY: 9 Bldgs. Office of the Secretary, Interior. Ohio Holston Army Ammo Plant ACTION: Call for nominations. 2 Buildings Kingsport TN 37660 Ridge/Tusculum Ave. Landholding Agency: Army SUMMARY: The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Cincinnati OH 45213 Property Number: 21201030021 Trustee Council is soliciting Landholding Agency: HHS Status: Unutilized nominations for the Public Advisory Property Number: 57201410001 Directions: 249, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, Committee, which advises the Trustee Status: Underutilized 302B, 315, 331 Council on decisions related to the Directions: 2, 6 Comments: public access denied and no planning, evaluation, funds allocation, alternative method to gain access w/out Comments: w/in CDC secured campus; and conduct of injury assessment and public access denied and no alternative to compromising national security. gain access w/out compromising national Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or restoration activities related to the T/V security. explosive material, Secured Area Exxon Valdez oil spill of March 1989. Reasons: Secured Area Virginia Public Advisory Committee members will be selected by the Secretary of the Pennsylvania Building No. 540 Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek Interior to serve a 24-month term, which 00026 will begin on October 1, 2014. Tobyhanna Army Depot VA Beach VA 23459 Tobyhanna PA 18466 Landholding Agency: Navy DATES: All nominations must be Landholding Agency: Army Property Number: 77201410010 received on or before the close of Property Number: 21201410036 Status: Unutilized business on May 15, 2014. Status: Underutilized Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access w/out ADDRESSES: A complete nomination Comments: public access denied and no package should be submitted by hard alternative method to gain access w/out compromising national security. compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area copy to Elise Hsieh, Executive Director, Reasons: Secured Area Washington Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, 4210 University Drive, Anchorage, 4 Buildings Building 523 Cochrans Mills Rd. 1400 Farragut Ave. Alaska 99508–4650, or via email at Pittsburgh PA 15236 Bremerton WA 98314 [email protected]. Landholding Agency: HHS Landholding Agency: Navy FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Property Number: 57201410002 Property Number: 77201410008 Questions should be directed to Cherri Status: Underutilized Status: Unutilized Womac, Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Directions: 3, 101, 140, 145 Comments: public access denied and no Council, 4210 University Drive, Comments: w/in CDC secured campus; alternative method to gain access w/out Anchorage, Alaska 99508–4650, 907– public access denied and no alternative to compromising national security. gain access w/out compromising national Reasons: Secured Area 265–9339 or 800–478–7745; or Pamela security. 3 Buildings Bergmann, Designated Federal Officer, Reasons: Secured Area 1400 Farragut Ave. Department of the Interior, Office of 10 Buildings Bremerton WA 98314 Environmental Policy and Compliance, Cochrans Mills Rd. Landholding Agency: Navy 1689 C Street, Suite 119, Anchorage, Pittsburgh PA 15236 Property Number: 77201410009 Alaska 99501–5126, 907–271–5011.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13074 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Exxon DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 3. Through the regulations.gov web Valdez Oil Spill Public Advisory portal: Navigate to http:// Committee was created by Paragraph Bureau of Ocean Energy Management www.regulations.gov and search for V.A.4 of the Memorandum of ‘‘Geological and Geophysical Activities Geological and Geophysical Agreement and Consent Decree entered in Mid and South Atlantic’’ (Note: It is Exploration (G&G) on the Mid- and into by the United States of America important to include the quotation South Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf marks in your search terms.) Click on and the State of Alaska on August 27, (OCS) 1991, and approved by the United States the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ button to the right of the document link. Enter your District Court for the District of Alaska AGENCY: Bureau of Ocean Energy information and comment, then click in settlement of United States of Management (BOEM), Interior. ‘‘Submit’’. America v. State of Alaska, Civil Action ACTION: Notice of Availability (NOA) of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: No. A91–081 CV. The Public Advisory the Final Programmatic Environmental For Committee was created to advise the Impact Statement (EIS) for proposed more information on the Final Trustee Council on matters relating to G&G Activities on the Mid- and South Programmatic EIS, you may contact Mr. decisions on injury assessment, Atlantic OCS. Gary D. Goeke, Chief, Environmental restoration activities, or other use of Assessment Section, Office of natural resource damage recoveries SUMMARY: Consistent with the Environment (GM 623E), Bureau of obtained by the government. regulations implementing the National Ocean Energy Management, Gulf of Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as Mexico OCS Region, 1201 Elmwood The Trustee Council consists of amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), BOEM Park Boulevard, New Orleans, Louisiana representatives of the Department of the has prepared a Final Programmatic EIS 70123–2394, or by email at ggeis@ Interior, Department of Agriculture, to describe and evaluate the potential boem.gov. You may also contact Mr. National Oceanic and Atmospheric environmental impacts associated with Goeke by telephone at (504) 736–3233. Administration, Alaska Department of reasonably foreseeable G&G survey SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Fish and Game, Alaska Department of activities in Federal waters overlying Programmatic EIS was prepared to Environmental Conservation, and the Mid- and South Atlantic OCS, as analyze potential environmental Alaska Department of Law. well as potentially interconnected or impacts from multiple G&G activities in Appointment to the Public Advisory interrelated activities in adjacent State the OCS Mid- and South Atlantic Council will be made by the Secretary waters, as described in the Planning Areas, and interconnected or of the Interior. Supplemental Information section interrelated activities in adjacent State The Public Advisory Committee below. These activities include, but are waters. Development of this consists of 10 members to reflect not limited to, seismic surveys (deep Programmatic EIS was also directed under the Conference Report balanced representation from each of penetration and high-resolution accompanying the FY 2010 Department the following principal interests: geophysical), electromagnetic surveys, of the Interior, Environment and Related Aquaculturist/mariculturist, commercial geological and geochemical sampling, and remote sensing surveys. The Final Agencies Appropriations Act (Pub. L. tourism business person, Programmatic EIS covers reasonably 111–88). conservationist/environmentalist, foreseeable G&G activities associated The Area of Interest (AOI), also recreation user, subsistence user, with the three program areas managed known as the affected environment or commercial fisher, public-at-large, by BOEM on the OCS (i.e., oil and gas area of potential effects, for the native landowner, sport hunter/fisher, exploration and development, Programmatic EIS includes U.S. Atlantic and scientist/technologist. renewable energy, and marine waters and submerged lands from the Nominations for membership may be minerals). The Final Programmatic EIS mouth of Delaware Bay to just south of submitted by any source. also evaluates mitigating measures to Cape Canaveral, Florida, and from the shoreline to 350 nautical miles from Nominations should include a resume reduce potential impacts of G&G activities on marine resources, such as shore. While G&G activities in State providing an adequate description of the waters are not within the jurisdiction of nominee’s qualifications, including sound impacts to marine species and bottom-disturbance impacts on benthic BOEM, the AOI also encompasses information that would enable the communities and cultural resources. adjacent State waters (excluding Department of the Interior to make an estuaries) because related G&G activities DATES: Comments should be submitted informed decision regarding meeting the could extend into State waters or no later than April 7, 2014. membership requirements of the Public because G&G activities in waters Advisory Committee and permit the ADDRESSES: Comments may be overlying the OCS could impact Department of the Interior to contact a submitted in one of the following three resources in or migrating through potential member. ways: adjacent State waters, e.g. through the Individuals who are currently 1. In written form enclosed in an introduction of acoustic energy into federally registered lobbyists are envelope labeled ‘‘Comments on the those waters. The activity scenario and Final Programmatic EIS for the Mid- and ineligible to serve on all Federal associated impact assessment contained South Atlantic’’ and mailed (or hand Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and in the Final Programmatic EIS extend to carried) to Mr. Gary D. Goeke, Chief, non-FACA boards, committees, or 2020. Environmental Assessment Section, The Draft Programmatic EIS was councils. Office of Environment (GM 623E), published on March 30, 2012 and the Willie R. Taylor, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, public comment period closed on July 2, Director, Office of Environmental Policy and Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, 1201 2012. BOEM received over 55,000 Compliance. Elmwood Park Boulevard, New Orleans, comment submissions from federal, [FR Doc. 2014–04985 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Louisiana 70123–2394; state and local governmental 2. Electronically to BOEM’s email organizations, non-governmental BILLING CODE 4310–RG–P address: [email protected]; or organizations, industry and private

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13075

citizens electronically and via hard Several libraries along the Atlantic p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. copy. These comments were considered Coast have been sent copies of the Final International Trade Commission, 500 E and evaluated in preparing the Final Programmatic EIS. To find out which Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, Programmatic EIS. Within the Final libraries have copies of the Final telephone (202) 205–2000. Programmatic EIS, BOEM presents the Programmatic EIS for review, you may General information concerning the baseline conditions, analyzes reasonably contact BOEM’s Public Information Commission may also be obtained by foreseeable impacts to marine resources Office or visit BOEM’s Internet Web site accessing its Internet server at United and, where applicable, identifies and at http://www.boem.gov/nepaprocess/. States International Trade Commission analyzes potential mitigation and Public Disclosure of Names and (USITC) at USITC.2 The public record monitoring measures to avoid, reduce, Addresses: Before including your for this investigation may be viewed on or minimize potential impacts. It also address, telephone number, email the Commission’s Electronic Document establishes a framework for future address, or other personal identifying Information System (EDIS) at EDIS.3 environmental analyses of site-specific information in your comment, be Hearing-impaired persons are advised activities before BOEM authorizes any advised that your entire comment, that information on this matter can be individual permits for those activities. including your personal identifying obtained by contacting the The Final Programmatic EIS identifies information, may be made publicly Commission’s TDD terminal on (202) BOEM’s Preferred Alternative which available at any time. While you can ask 205–1810. provides programmatic-level mitigation, us in your comment to withhold from SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The monitoring and reporting requirements public review your personal identifying Commission has received a complaint meant to reduce the potential for information, we cannot guarantee that and a submission pursuant to section adverse impacts to Mid- and South we will be able to do so. 210.8(b) of the Commission’s Rules of Atlantic resources from reasonably Authority: This NOA is published Practice and Procedure filed behalf of foreseeable G&G activities across all pursuant to the regulations (40 CFR part Baxter International Inc., Baxter three BOEM program areas. It also 1503) implementing the provisions of NEPA, Healthcare Corporation, and Baxter includes an adaptive management as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Healthcare SA, on February 28, 2014. strategy that, through site-specific NEPA Dated: January 10, 2014. The complaint alleges violations of analysis, will incorporate new Tommy P. Beaudreau, section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 information, establish additional Director, Bureau of Ocean Energy U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the measures and/or adjust existing Management. United States, the sale for importation, measures based on monitoring results. and the sale within the United States Please note that the Final [FR Doc. 2014–05046 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P after importation of certain hemostatic Programmatic EIS does not address the products and components thereof. The potential environmental effects of oil complaint name as respondents Johnson and gas leasing, development, or and Johnson Inc. Brunswick, NJ, production in the Mid- and South INTERNATIONAL TRADE Ethicon, Inc., Somerville, NJ, Ferrosan Atlantic. BOEM has not proposed oil COMMISSION Medical Devices A/S, Denmark, and gas leasing, development or Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Packaging Coordinators, Inc., production in the Mid- and South Solicitation of Comments Relating to Philadelphia, PA. The complainant Atlantic at this time, and additional the Public Interest requests that the Commission issue a environmental analyses would be permanent limited exclusion order, necessary prior to proceeding with any AGENCY: U.S. International Trade permanent cease and desist orders, and such activities. Commission. impose a bond during any Presidential Final Programmatic EIS Availability: ACTION: Notice. In keeping with the Department of the Review period. Proposed respondents, other Interior’s mission to protect natural SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that interested parties, and members of the resources and to limit costs while the U.S. International Trade public are invited to file comments, not ensuring availability of the document to Commission has received a complaint to exceed five (5) pages in length, the public, BOEM will primarily entitled Certain Hemostatic Products inclusive of attachments, on any public distribute digital copies of the Final and Components Thereof; DN 3003; the interest issues raised by the complaint Programmatic EIS on compact discs. Commission is soliciting comments on or section 210.8(b) filing. Comments However, BOEM has printed and will be any public interest issues raised by the should address whether issuance of the distributing a limited number of paper complaint or complainant’s filing under relief specifically requested by the copies. If you require a paper copy, section 210.8(b) of the Commission’s complainant in this investigation would BOEM will provide one upon request if Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR affect the public health and welfare in copies are still available. 210.8(b)). the United States, competitive 1. You may request a hard copy or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa conditions in the United States compact disc of the Final Programmatic R. Barton, Acting Secretary to the economy, the production of like or EIS from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Commission, U.S. International Trade directly competitive articles in the Management, Gulf of Mexico OCS Commission, 500 E Street SW., United States, or United States Region, Public Information Office (GM Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 335A), 1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard, consumers. 205–2000. The public version of the In particular, the Commission is Room 250, New Orleans, Louisiana complaint can be accessed on the interested in comments that: 70123–2394 (1–800–200–GULF (4853)). Commission’s Electronic Document (i) Explain how the articles 2. You may download or view the 1 Information System (EDIS) at EDIS, and potentially subject to the requested Final Programmatic EIS on BOEM’s will be available for inspection during project Web site at http://.boem.gov/ official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 2 United States International Trade Commission and-Gas-Energy-Program//.aspx or on (USITC): http://edis.usitc.gov. BOEM’s EIS Web site at http:// 1 Electronic Document Information System 3 Electronic Document Information System www.boem.gov/nepaprocess/. (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov. (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13076 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

remedial orders are used in the United This action is taken under the No. DEA–390P’’ on all electronic and States; authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act written correspondence. The DEA (ii) identify any public health, safety, of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), encourages that all comments be or welfare concerns in the United States and of sections 201.10 and 210.8(c) of submitted electronically through relating to the requested remedial the Commission’s Rules of Practice and www.regulations.gov using the orders; Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)). electronic comment form provided on (iii) identify like or directly By order of the Commission. that site. An electronic copy of this competitive articles that complainant, Issued: February 28, 2014. document is also available at its licensees, or third parties make in the William R. Bishop, www.regulations.gov for easy reference. United States which could replace the Paper comments that duplicate the Supervisory Hearings and Information subject articles if they were to be Officer. electronic submission are not necessary excluded; as all comments submitted to [FR Doc. 2014–04945 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] (iv) indicate whether complainant, www.regulations.gov will be posted for complainant’s licensees, and/or third BILLING CODE 7020–02–P public review and are part of the official party suppliers have the capacity to docket record. Written comments replace the volume of articles submitted via regular or express mail potentially subject to the requested DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE should be sent to the Drug Enforcement exclusion order and/or a cease and Drug Enforcement Administration Administration, Attention: DEA Federal desist order within a commercially Register Representative/ODW, 8701 reasonable time; and [DEA #390P] Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia (v) explain how the requested 22152. remedial orders would impact United Controlled Substances: 2014 Proposed Aggregate Production Quota for Four FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: States consumers. Ruth A. Carter, Office of Diversion Written submissions must be filed no Temporarily Controlled Synthetic Cannabinoids Control, Drug Enforcement later than by close of business, eight Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 calendar days after the date of AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia publication of this notice in the Federal Administration (DEA), Department of 22152, Telephone: (202) 598–6812. Register. There will be further Justice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: opportunities for comment on the ACTION: Notice of a proposed 2014 public interest after the issuance of any aggregate production quota for four Posting of Public Comments final initial determination in this synthetic cannabinoids. The Freedom of Information Act investigation. applies to all comments received. All SUMMARY: Four synthetic cannabinoids: Persons filing written submissions comments received are considered part quinolin-8-yl 1-pentyl-1H-indole-3- must file the original document of the public record and made available carboxylate (PB-22; QUPIC); quinolin-8- electronically on or before the deadlines for public inspection online at yl 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indole-3- stated above and submit 8 true paper www.regulations.gov and in the DEA’s carboxylate (5-fluoro-PB-22; 5F-PB-22); copies to the Office of the Secretary by public docket. Such information N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)- noon the next day pursuant to section includes personal identifying 1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3- 210.4(f) of the Commission’s Rules of information (such as your name, carboxamide (AB-FUBINACA); and N- Practice and Procedure (19 CFR address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by (1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)- 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the commenter. the docket number (‘‘Docket No. 3003’’) 1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide If you want to submit personal in a prominent place on the cover page (ADB-PINACA) were temporarily placed identifying information (such as your and/or the first page. (See Handbook for in schedule I of the Controlled name, address, etc.) as part of your Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Substances Act (CSA) by a final order comment, but do not want it to be Filing Procedures 4). Persons with published by the DEA on February 10, posted online or made available in the questions regarding filing should 2014 (79 FR 7577). This means that any public docket, you must include the contact the Secretary (202–205–2000). manufacturer that wishes to phrase ‘‘PERSONAL IDENTIFYING Any person desiring to submit a manufacture PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB- INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph document to the Commission in FUBINACA, or ADB-PINACA after of your comment. You must also place confidence must request confidential February 10, 2014, must be registered all the personal identifying information treatment. All such requests should be with the DEA and have obtained a you do not want posted online or made directed to the Secretary to the manufacturing quota for PB-22, 5F-PB- available in the public docket in the first Commission and must include a full 22, AB-FUBINACA, or ADB-PINACA paragraph of your comment and identify statement of the reasons why the pursuant to 21 CFR part 1303. what information you want redacted. Commission should grant such The DEA cannot issue individual If you want to submit confidential treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents manufacturing quotas for PB–22, 5F– business information as part of your for which confidential treatment by the PB–22, AB–FUBINACA, or ADB– comment, but do not want it to be Commission is properly sought will be PINACA unless and until it establishes posted online or made available in the treated accordingly. All nonconfidential an aggregate production quota. public docket, you must include the written submissions will be available for Therefore, this notice proposes a 2014 phrase ‘‘CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS public inspection at the Office of the aggregate production quota for PB–22, INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph Secretary and on EDIS.5 5F–PB–22, AB–FUBINACA, and ADB– of your comment. You must also PINACA. prominently identify confidential 4 Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures: DATES: Comments or objections should _ _ business information to be redacted http://www.usitc.gov/secretary/fed reg notices/ be received on or before April 7, 2014. rules/handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf within the comment. If a comment has 5 Electronic Document Information System ADDRESSES: To ensure proper handling so much confidential business (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov. of comments, please reference ‘‘Docket information that it cannot be effectively

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13077

redacted, all or part of that comment considered the following factors in Dated: February 28, 2014. may not be posted online or made accordance with 21 U.S.C. 826(a) and 21 Thomas M. Harrigan, available in the public docket. CFR 1303.11: (1) Total estimated net Deputy Administrator. Personal identifying information and disposal of each substance by all [FR Doc. 2014–05024 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] confidential business information manufacturers; (2) estimated trends in BILLING CODE 4410–09–P identified and located as set forth above the national rate of net disposal; (3) total will be redacted, and the comment, in estimated inventories of the basic class redacted form, will be posted online and and of all substances manufactured from DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE placed in the DEA’s public docket file. the class; (4) projected demand for each If you wish to inspect the DEA’s class as indicated by procurement Office of Justice Programs public docket file in person by quotas requested pursuant to 21 CFR [OJP (BJA) Docket No. 1648] appointment, please see the FOR 1303.12; and (5) other factors affecting FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT medical, scientific, research, and Meeting of the Department of Justice’s paragraph. industrial needs of the United States (DOJ’s) National Motor Vehicle Title Background and lawful export requirements, as the Information System (NMVTIS) Federal Deputy Administrator finds relevant. Section 306 of the CSA (21 U.S.C. Advisory Committee These quotas do not include imports of 826) requires that the Attorney General controlled substances for use in AGENCY: Office of Justice Programs establish aggregate production quotas industrial processes. (OJP), Justice. for each basic class of controlled The Deputy Administrator, therefore, ACTION: Notice of meeting. substance listed in schedules I and II proposes that the year 2014 aggregate each year. This responsibility has been SUMMARY production quotas for the following : This is an announcement of a delegated to the Administrator of the temporarily controlled schedule I webinar meeting of DOJ’s National DEA by 28 CFR 0.100. The controlled substances, expressed in Motor Vehicle Title Information System Administrator, in turn, has redelegated grams of anhydrous acid or base, be (NMVTIS) Federal Advisory Committee this function to the Deputy established as follows: to discuss various issues relating to the Administrator, pursuant to 28 CFR operation and implementation of 0.104. NMVTIS. The DEA established the 2014 DATES: The meeting will take place on aggregate production quotas for Proposed Wednesday March 26, 2014, from 1:00 substances in schedules I and II on Basic class—Schedule I 2014 quota p.m. to 3:00 p.m. ET. September 9, 2013 (78 FR 55099). Subsequently, on January 10, 2014, the N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1- ADDRESSES: This will be a webinar DEA published in the Federal Register oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl- meeting. Those wishing to participate a notice of intent to temporarily place 1H-indazole-3- are asked to email their request to the four synthetic cannabinoids: quinolin-8- carboxamide (ADB– Designated Federal Employee (DFE) yl 1-pentyl-1H-indole-3-carboxylate (PB- PINACA) ...... 15 g listed below. N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 22; QUPIC); quinolin-8-yl 1-(5- oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(4- fluoropentyl)-1H-indole-3-carboxylate fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole- Todd Brighton, Designated Federal (5-fluoro-PB-22; 5F-PB-22); N-(1-amino- 3-carboxamide (AB– Employee (DFE), Bureau of Justice 3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(4- FUBINACA) ...... 15 g Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3- quinolin-8-yl 1-(5- 810 7th Street NW., Washington, DC carboxamide (AB-FUBINACA); and N- fluoropentyl)-1H-indole-3- 20531; Phone: (202) 616–3879 [note: (1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)- carboxylate (5-fluoro-PB– this is not a toll-free number]; Email: 1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide 22; 5F–PB–22) ...... 15 g [email protected] quinolin-8-yl 1-pentyl-1H- (ADB-PINACA) in schedule I of the CSA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This indole-3-carboxylate (PB– (79 FR 1776). On February 10, 2014, the 22; QUPIC) ...... 15 g meeting is open to the public. Members DEA published in the Federal Register of the public who wish to participate in a final order to temporarily place these Comments the webinar must register with Mr. four synthetic cannabinoids in schedule Brighton at the above address at least I of the CSA (79 FR 7577), making all Pursuant to 21 CFR 1303.11, any seven (7) days in advance of the regulations pertaining to schedule I interested person may submit written meeting. Registrations will be accepted controlled substances applicable to the comments on or objections to these on a space available basis. Access to the manufacture of these four synthetic proposed determinations. Based on meeting will not be allowed without cannabinoids, including the comments received in response to this registration. Interested persons whose establishment of an aggregate notice, the Deputy Administrator may registrations have been accepted may be production quota pursuant to 21 CFR hold a public hearing on one or more permitted to participate in the 1303.11. issues raised. In the event the Deputy discussions at the discretion of the PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, and Administrator decides in his sole meeting chairman and with approval of ADB-PINACA were non-controlled discretion to hold such a hearing, the the DFE. substances when the aggregate Deputy Administrator will publish a Anyone requiring special production quotas for schedule I and II notice of any such hearing in the accommodations should notify Mr. substances were established, therefore, Federal Register. After consideration of Brighton at least seven (7) days in no aggregate production quotas for PB- any comments and after a hearing, if one advance of the meeting. 22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, and ADB- is held, the Deputy Administrator will PINACA were established at that time. publish in the Federal Register a final Purpose In determining the 2014 aggregate order establishing the 2014 aggregate The NMVTIS Federal Advisory production quotas of these four production quota for PB–22, 5F–PB–22, Committee will provide input and cannabinoids, the Deputy Administrator AB–FUBINACA, and ADB–PINACA. recommendations to the Office of Justice

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13078 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

Programs (OJP) regarding the operations Room N–3647, Washington, DC 20210; period on Interlake’s application for a and administration of NMVTIS. The telephone: (202) 693–1999; email: permanent variance (39 FR 19543). primary duties of the NMVTIS Federal [email protected]. (3) On February 3, 1976, OSHA Advisory Committee will be to advise General and technical information: published a Federal Register notice the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) Contact David Johnson, Director, Office announcing that Interlake was Director on NMVTIS-related issues, of Technical Programs and Coordination abandoning its application for a including but not limited to: Activities, Directorate of Technical permanent variance and, instead, was implementation of a system that is self- Support and Emergency Management, applying for an experimental variance sustainable with user fees; options for Occupational Safety and Health pursuant to Section 6(b)(6)(c) of the Act alternative revenue-generating Administration, U.S. Department of (41 FR 4994). Interlake took this action opportunities; determining ways to Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., because OSHA revised the requirements enhance the technological capabilities Room N–3655, Washington, DC 20210; in 29 CFR 1910.217(d)(1) on May 20, of the system to increase its flexibility; telephone: (202) 693–2110; email: 1974 (39 FR 41841), which obviated the and options for reducing the economic [email protected]. OSHA’s Web applicant’s need for a variance from that burden on current and future reporting page includes information about the provision. Concurrently, OSHA entities and users of the system. Variance Program (see http:// renumbered 29 CFR www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/variances/ 1910.217(c)(3)(iii)(c) as 29 CFR Todd Brighton, index.html ). 1910.217(c)(3)(iii)(b). The new NMVTIS Enforcement Coordinator, Bureau of application, therefore, sought an Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: experimental variance from 29 CFR [FR Doc. 2014–04988 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] I. Background 1910.217(c)(3)(iii)(b). According to the BILLING CODE 4410–18–P February 3, 1976, Federal Register A. Previous Experimental Variance notice, Interlake was seeking to conduct On August 31, 1976, OSHA granted an experiment designed to demonstrate DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Interlake Stamping Corp., 4732 East that it can use the presence-sensing- 355th Street, Willoughby, OH 44094, an point-of-operation device on a Occupational Safety and Health experimental variance from the mechanical power press as a tripping Administration provisions of OSHA standards that mechanism, in addition to its function regulate mechanical power presses at 29 as a safety device, while maintaining [Docket No. OSHA–2013–0011] CFR 1910.217 (41 FR 36702). Below is employee safety at or above the level Interlake Stamping Corp. (Also Doing a description of the history of this provided by the standard. Interlake also Business as Interlake Industries, Inc.); experimental variance: claimed that the experiment would Revocation of an Experimental (1) On May 20, 1974, OSHA validate Swedish and German data Variance and Interim Order published a notice in the Federal showing that employers use this Register announcing that Interlake tripping mechanism virtually free of AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health submitted an application pursuant to accidents. Administration (OSHA), Labor. Section 6(d) of the Occupational Safety (4) On August 31, 1976, OSHA ACTION: Notice. and Health Act of 1970 (the Act; 29 published a notice in the Federal U.S.C. 655) and 29 CFR 1905.11 for a Register granting Interlake an SUMMARY: In this notice, the permanent variance from several experimental variance for a one-year Occupational Safety and Health provisions of OSHA’s mechanical period, August 31, 1976, to August 30, Administration (‘‘OSHA’’ or the power-presses standard (39 FR 17806); 1977 (41 FR 36702). ‘‘Agency’’) revokes an experimental these provisions were 29 CFR (5) On September 9, 1977, OSHA variance and interim order granted by 1910.217(c)(3)(iii)(c), which prohibited published a Federal Register notice OSHA in 1976 and 1978, respectively, the use of presence-sensing-device- extending the experimental variance for a six-month period, September 1, 1977, to Interlake Stamping Corp., initiation (PSDI) systems, and 29 CFR to February 28, 1978, to allow Interlake (‘‘Interlake’’ or the ‘‘applicant’’) from 1910.217(d)(1), which regulated conduct to collect additional information on a several provisions of the OSHA of mechanical power-press operations. number of factors, including the effects standard that regulates mechanical According to the May 20, 1974, Federal of the experimental conditions on power presses at 29 CFR 1910.217. In Register notice, Interlake proposed the worker safety and productivity (42 FR April 2011, Interlake submitted an following alternate means of compliance 45389). application request for a permanent in its variance application: variance from these provisions, but later (6) On March 17, 1978, OSHA The applicant states that he has purchased withdrew the application, stating that it published a notice in the Federal a 22-ton Bliss OBI mechanical power press Register extending the experimental would be too costly to comply with the equipped with an air friction clutch and an conditions of the variance. Therefore, variance for a two-year period, March 1, Erwin Sick electronic light curtain. The press 1977, to February 28, 1979 (43 FR OSHA is revoking Interlake’s is equipped with special controls and a experimental variance and the interim highly reliable brake monitoring system. The 11275). This extension allowed order. applicant further proposes to use the Interlake to continue collecting electronic light curtain as both a protective information on the effects of the DATES: The revocation becomes effective device and as a means of cycling the press. experimental conditions on worker on March 7, 2014. The applicant states that electronic light safety and productivity, but also FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: curtain devices are used as a tripping means allowed the Agency to collect Information regarding this notice is in Europe and a large body of standards information for a possible new standard available from the following sources: governing their design and use in this regulating PSDI systems, including Press inquiries: Contact Frank manner has been accumulated .... information on the need for a Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office of (2) On June 3, 1974, OSHA published certification program and the level of Communications, U.S. Department of a notice in the Federal Register interest in the regulated community for Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., extending for 30 days the comment using PSDI systems. In this notice,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13079

OSHA also granted Interlake an interim In its variance application, and in its granted to Interlake on August 31, 1976, order to preserve the continuity of the responses to OSHA’s follow-up and extended through April 30, 1982. experimental conditions pending a final questions (Ex. OSHA–2013–0011–004), With this notice, OSHA also is revoking decision on the variance. Interlake provided a detailed the interim order granted to Interlake on (7) On March 6, 1979, OSHA description of its proposed alternate March 17, 1978, under which Interlake published a notice in the Federal means of worker protection during continued to comply with the Register extending the experimental operation of the PSDI system, including conditions of the experimental variance variance for an additional two-year a description of the power presses and from May 1, 1982, to September 17, period, March 6, 1979, to March 5, 1981, light curtains used; the equipment- 2013. to continue collecting safety and guarding means and worker training Accordingly, Interlake must comply productivity information, and to provided; and inspection, testing, and fully with the requirements of 29 CFR preserve the continuity of the maintenance procedures. Additionally, 1910.217(h) if it decides to use PSDI experimental conditions (44 FR 12288). in its responses to OSHA’s follow-up systems. (8) On May 29, 1981, OSHA questions, Interlake stated that it never published a Federal Register notice had a worker injured while using PSDI III. Authority and Signature extending the experimental variance for systems during the 36 years it operated David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, an additional one-year period from May the systems under the conditions Assistant Secretary of Labor for 29, 1981, to May 28, 1982 (46 FR specified by the experimental variance. Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. 29010). The main purpose of this On August 2, 2012, OSHA conducted Department of Labor, 200 Constitution extension was to allow the Purdue a site-evaluation visit at Interlake’s Ave. NW., Washington, DC, authorized Research Foundation, under contract to Willoughby, Ohio, plant. The purpose of the preparation of this notice. OSHA is the National Institute for Occupational the visit was to review and confirm the issuing this notice under the authority Safety and Health, to: (1) Observe and continued safe operation of the two specified by 29 U.S.C. 655, Secretary of evaluate the self-tripping experiment at mechanical power presses equipped Labor’s Order No. 1–2012 (76 FR 3912; Interlake; (2) research the design and with PSDI systems. Based on the results Jan. 25, 2012), and 29 CFR part 1905. application practices that could develop of the site-evaluation visit, OSHA, on if OSHA expanded the experiment to Signed at Washington, DC, on March 4, March 13, 2013, proposed in a letter to 2014. other sites or modified 29 CFR Interlake several additional conditions David Michaels, 1910.217(c)(3)(iii)(b); and (3) develop that the Agency believed Interlake design and performance-criteria Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational should include in its variance Safety and Health. approval procedures, and continuing application (Ex. OSHA–2013–0011– research strategies. 005). On April 30, 2013, Interlake [FR Doc. 2014–04982 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] (9) In 1988, OSHA added paragraph responded to this proposal (Ex. OSHA– BILLING CODE 4510–26–P (h) to 29 CFR 1910.217 (53 FR 8353). 2013–0011–006). OSHA reviewed Paragraph (h) allows employers to Interlake’s responses and modified install and use PSDI systems, but several of the proposed conditions. In a NUCLEAR REGULATORY requires that OSHA-approved third letter dated September 4, 2013, OSHA COMMISSION parties validate the PSDI systems at the notified Interlake of the Agency’s time of installation and annually revisions to the proposed conditions [Docket No. 50–346; NRC–2010–0298] thereafter. To date, no third party has (Ex. OSHA–2013–0011–007). After requested OSHA’s approval to validate reviewing these revisions, Interlake License Renewal Application for Davis- PSDI systems. In the interim, Interlake notified OSHA on September 17, 2013, Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 continued operating mechanical power that it is withdrawing its application for AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory presses using PSDI systems under the a permanent variance, stating: interim order granted in 1978. However, Commission. on March 24, 2011, OSHA informed [T]he management team at Interlake ACTION: Draft supplemental generic Interlake that it must submit an Stamping has decided not to pursue the permanent variance for use of the Presence environmental impact statement; application for a permanent variance if Sensing Device Initiation (PSDI). We feel it issuance, public meeting, and request it wanted to continue this practice (Ex. would be too costly for us to comply with all for comment. OSHA–2013–0011–002). of the requirements mandated in the OSHA response going forward, and would be more SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory B. Interlake’s Application for a economical for us to discontinue its use Commission (NRC) is issuing for public Permanent Variance completely. We understand that the comment a draft plant-specific On April 8, 2011, OSHA received experimental variance that Interlake was Supplement 52 to the ‘‘Generic Interlake’s application seeking a granted will no longer be in effect and we Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) permanent variance from Appendices A have removed the connections completely for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,’’ disabling the PSDI system as of this date. and C of 29 CFR 1910.217 (see Ex. (Emphasis in original; Ex. OSHA–2013– NUREG–1437, regarding the renewal of OSHA–2013–0011–002). Appendix A 0011–008.) operating license NPF–3 for an sets forth requirements for certification/ additional 20 years of operation for validation of PSDI systems, and II. Revocation of Interlake’s Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit Appendix C specifies requirements for Experimental Variance 1 (Davis-Besse). Davis-Besse is located OSHA recognition of third-party Based on its review of the record, and in Ottawa County, Ohio. Possible validation organizations for PSDI the applicant’s request to withdraw its alternatives to the proposed action systems. Interlake proposed to use PSDI application for a permanent variance, (license renewal) include no action and systems as tripping mechanisms under OSHA finds that Interlake no longer reasonable alternative energy sources. conditions similar to the conditions needs the experimental variance. The NRC staff plans to hold two public specified by the experimental variance Therefore, under the authority specified meetings during the public comment granted to Interlake by OSHA in 1976 by 29 CFR 1905.13(a)(2), OSHA is period to present an overview of the (see previous discussion). revoking the experimental variance draft plant-specific supplement to the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13080 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

GEIS and to accept public comments on Document Room reference staff at 1– that the adverse environmental impacts the document. 800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by of license renewal for Davis-Besse are DATES: Submit comments by April 21, email to [email protected]. The not great enough to deny the option of 2014. Comments received after this date ADAMS accession number for each license renewal for energy planning will be considered, if it is practical to do document referenced in this document decisionmakers. (if that document is available in so, but the NRC staff is able to ensure III. Public Meetings consideration only for comments ADAMS) is provided the first time that received on or before this date. a document is referenced. The draft The NRC staff will hold public plant-specific Supplement 52 to the meetings prior to the close of the public ADDRESSES: You may submit comments GEIS, is available in ADAMS under comment period to present an overview by any of the following methods (unless Accession No. ML14050A290. of the draft plant-specific supplement to this document describes a different • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and the GEIS and to accept public comment method for submitting comments on a purchase copies of public documents at on the document. Two meetings will be specific subject): • the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One held at the Camp Perry Conference Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Center, 1000 Lawrence Road, Bldg. 600, http://www.regulations.gov and search Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. In Port Clinton, Ohio 43453 on Tuesday, for Docket ID NRC–2010–0298. Address addition, paper copies of the draft plant March 25, 2014. The first session will questions about NRC dockets to Carol specific Supplement 52 are available to convene at 2:00 p.m. and will continue Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; the public at the Ida Rupp Public until 4:00 p.m., as necessary. The email: [email protected]. For Library, 310 Madison Street, Port second session will convene at 7:00 technical questions, contact the Clinton, OH, 43452; and the Toledo- p.m. and will continue until 9:00 p.m., individual listed in the FOR FURTHER Lucas County Public Library, 325 North as necessary. The meetings will be INFORMATION CONTACT section of this Michigan Street, Toledo, OH, 43452. transcribed and will include: (1) A document. • B. Submitting Comments presentation of the contents of the draft Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, plant-specific supplement to the GEIS, Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Please include Docket ID NRC–2010– and (2) the opportunity for interested Directives Branch, Office of 0298 in the subject line of your government agencies, organizations, and Administration, Mail Stop: 3WFN–06– comment submission, in order to ensure individuals to provide comments on the 44M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory that the NRC is able to make your draft report. Additionally, the NRC staff Commission, Washington, DC 20555– comment submission available to the will host informal discussions one hour 0001. public in this docket. prior to the start of each session at the For additional direction on accessing The NRC cautions you not to include same location. No comments on the information and submitting comments, identifying or contact information that draft supplement to the GEIS will be see ‘‘Accessing Information and you do not want to be publicly accepted during the informal Submitting Comments’’ in the disclosed in your comment submission. discussions. To be considered, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of The NRC will post all comment comments must be provided either at this document. submissions at http:// the transcribed public meeting or in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: www.regulations.gov as well as enter the writing. Persons may pre-register to Elaine Keegan, Office of Nuclear Reactor comment submissions into ADAMS. attend or present oral comments at the Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory The NRC does not routinely edit meeting by contacting Elaine Keegan, Commission, Washington, DC 20555– comment submissions to remove the NRC Environmental Project 0001; telephone: 301–415–8517 or by identifying or contact information. Manager, at 1–800–368–5642, extension email at [email protected]. If you are requesting or aggregating 8517, or by email at Elaine.Keegan@ SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: comments from other persons for nrc.gov no later than Wednesday, March submission to the NRC, then you should 19, 2014. Members of the public may I. Accessing Information and inform those persons not to include also register to provide oral comments Submitting Comments identifying or contact information that within 15 minutes of the start of each A. Accessing Information they do not want to be publicly session. Individual oral comments may disclosed in their comment submission. be limited by the time available, Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2010– Your request should state that the NRC 0298 when contacting the NRC about depending on the number of persons does not routinely edit comment who register. If special equipment or the availability of information regarding submissions to remove such information this document. You may access accommodations are needed to attend or before making the comment present information at the public publicly-available information related to submissions available to the public or this document by any of the following meeting, the need should be brought to entering the comment submissions into Ms. Keegan’s attention no later than methods: ADAMS. • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to Monday, March 10, 2014, to provide the http://www.regulations.gov and search II. Discussion NRC staff adequate notice to determine for Docket ID NRC–2010–0298. The NRC is issuing for public whether the request can be • NRC’s Agencywide Documents comment a draft plant-specific accommodated. Access and Management System Supplement 52 to the GEIS, regarding Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day (ADAMS): You may access publicly the renewal of operating license NPF–3 of February, 2014. available documents online in the NRC for an additional 20 years of operation For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- for Davis-Besse. Supplement 52 to the Brian D. Wittick, rm/adams.html. To begin the search, GEIS includes the preliminary analysis Chief, Projects Branch 2, Division of License select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and that evaluates the environmental Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS impacts of the proposed action and Regulation. Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, alternatives to the proposed action. The [FR Doc. 2014–05021 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] please contact the NRC’s Public NRC’s preliminary recommendation is BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13081

NUCLEAR REGULATORY for Docket ID NRC–2008–0441. Address Tier 1 material by (1) changing the COMMISSION questions about NRC dockets to Carol safety classification of the PXS and CVS Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; compartment drain hubs, (2) changing [Docket Nos. 52–027 and 52–028; NRC– email: [email protected]. For the connection type from the PXS 2008–0441] technical questions, contact the Compartments drains A and B to a Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, individual listed in the FOR FURTHER header to match the design description, Units 2 and 3; South Carolina Electric INFORMATION CONTACT section of this (3) changing the valve types for three and Gas; Liquid Radwaste System document. valves in the Tier 1 figure to conform to • Consistency Changes NRC’s Agencywide Documents the design description and (4) changing Access and Management System depiction of Tier 1 WLS components to AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory (ADAMS): You may access publicly conform to Tier 1 Figure Conventions. Commission. available documents online in the Part of the justification for granting ACTION: Exemption and combined ADAMS Public Documents Collection at the exemption was provided by the license amendment; issuance. http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ review of the amendment. Because the adams.html. To begin the search, select exemption is necessary in order to issue SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then the requested license amendment, the Commission (NRC) is granting an select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS NRC granted the exemption and issued exemption to allow a departure from the Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, the amendment concurrently, rather certification information of Tier 1 of the please contact the NRC’s Public than in sequence. This included issuing generic design control document (DCD) Document Room (PDR) reference staff at a combined safety evaluation containing and issuing License Amendment No. 10 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by the NRC staff’s review of both the to Combined Licenses (COL), NPF–93 email to [email protected]. The exemption request and the license and NPF–94. The COLs were issued to ADAMS accession number for each amendment. The exemption met all South Carolina Electric and Gas document referenced in this document applicable regulatory criteria set forth in (SCE&G) and South Carolina Public (if that document is available in 10 CFR 50.12, 10 CFR 52.7, and Section Service Authority (Santee Cooper) (the ADAMS) is provided the first time that VIII.A.4. of Appendix D to 10 CFR Part licensee), for construction and operation a document is referenced. 52. The license amendment was found of the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and to be acceptable as well. The combined (VCSNS), Units 2 and 3 located in purchase copies of public documents at safety evaluation is available in ADAMS Fairfield County, South Carolina. The the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One under Accession No. ML13354B798. amendment changes the VCSNS Tier 1 White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Identical exemption documents (COL Appendix C) Figure 2.3.10–1, Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. (except for referenced unit numbers and Liquid Radwaste System (WLS), and license numbers) were issued to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: licensee for VCSNS Units 2 and 3 (COLs Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Denise McGovern, Office of New (UFSAR) Tier 2 tables, text and figures NPF–93 and NPF–94). These documents Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory can be found in ADAMS under to align VCSNS Tier 1 with Tier 2 Commission, Washington, DC 20555– information provided in the UFSAR and Accession Nos. ML13354B740 and 0001; telephone: 301–415–0681; email: ML13354B768. The exemption is to achieve consistency within VCSNS [email protected]. Tier 1 material by (1) changing the reproduced (with the exception of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: safety classification of the Passive Core abbreviated titles and additional Cooling System (PXS) and Chemical and I. Introduction citations) in Section II of this document. The amendment documents for COLs Volume Control System (CVS) • The NRC is granting an exemption compartment drain hubs, (2) changing NPF–93 and NPF–94 are available in from Paragraph B of Section III, ‘‘Scope ADAMS under Accession Nos. the connection type from the PXS and Contents,’’ of Appendix D, ‘‘Design Compartments drains A and B to a ML13354B723 and ML13354B731. A Certification Rule for the AP1000 summary of the amendment documents header to match the design description, Design,’’ to part 52 of Title 10 of the (3) changing the valve types for three is provided in Section III of this Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) document. valves in the Tier 1 figure to conform to and issuing License Amendment No. 10 the design description and (4) changing to COLs, NPF–93 and NPF–94, to the II. Exemption depiction of Tier 1 WLS components to licensee. The request for the amendment Reproduced below is the exemption conform to Tier 1 Figure Conventions. and exemption were submitted by letter document issued to VCSNS Units 2 and The granting of the exemption allows dated August 30, 2013 (ADAMS 3. It makes reference to the combined the changes to Tier 1 information asked Accession No. ML13246A228). The safety evaluation that provides the for in the amendment. Because the licensee supplemented this request on reasoning for the findings made by the acceptability of the exemption was October 15, 2013 (ADAMS Accession NRC (and listed under Item 1) in order determined in part by the acceptability No. ML13290A517). The exemption is to grant the exemption: of the amendment, the exemption and required by Paragraph A.4 of Section 1. In a letter dated August 30, 2013, amendment are being issued VIII, ‘‘Processes for Changes and and revised by the letter dated October concurrently. Departures,’’ Appendix D to 10 CFR Part 15, 2013, South Carolina Electric & Gas ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID 52 to allow the licensee to depart from Company (licensee) requested from the NRC–2008–0441 when contacting the Tier 1 information. With the requested Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC about the availability of amendment, the licensee sought (Commission) an exemption from the information regarding this document. changes to the VCSNS Tier 1 (COL provisions of Title 10 of the Code of You may access publicly-available Appendix C) Figure 2.3.10–1, WLS, and Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 52, information related to this document, UFSAR Tier 2 tables, text and figures to Appendix D, Section III.B, ‘‘Design using any of the following methods: align VCSNS Tier 1 with Tier 2 Certification Rule for the AP1000 • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to information provided in the UFSAR and Design, Scope, and Contents,’’ as part of http://www.regulations.gov and search to achieve consistency within VCSNS license amendment request, ‘‘Liquid

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13082 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

Radwaste System Consistency Changes’’ departing from the Combined License POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION (LAR 13–32). Appendix C information and the plant- For the reasons set forth in Section 3.1 [Docket Nos. MC2014–20 and CP2014–33; specific DCD Tier 2 material by revising Order No. 2001] of the NRC staff Safety Evaluation, the safety function and classification of which can be found at ADAMS WLS drain hubs in the CVS and PXS New Postal Product Accession Number ML13354B798, the compartments. In addition, the AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. Commission finds that: proposed changes would modify the ACTION: A. The exemption is authorized by PXS compartment drain piping Notice. law; connection; WLS valve types, and B. the exemption presents no undue SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a risk to public health and safety; depiction of components in the WLS recent Postal Service filing requesting C. the exemption is consistent with figures. the addition of Priority Mail Contract 79 the common defense and security; The Commission has determined for to the competitive product list. This D. special circumstances are present these amendments that the application notice informs the public of the filing, in that the application of the rule in this complies with the standards and invites public comment, and takes other circumstance is not necessary to serve requirements of the Atomic Energy Act administrative steps. the underlying purpose of the rule; of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the DATES: Comments are due: March 7, E. the special circumstances outweigh Commission’s rules and regulations. 2014. any decrease in safety that may result The Commission has made appropriate ADDRESSES: Submit comments from the reduction in standardization findings as required by the Act and the electronically via the Commission’s caused by the exemption; and Commission’s rules and regulations in Filing Online system at http:// F. the exemption will not result in a 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit significant decrease in the level of safety the license amendment. comments electronically should contact otherwise provided by the design. the person identified in the FOR FURTHER 2. Accordingly, the licensee is granted A notice of consideration of issuance INFORMATION CONTACT section by an exemption to the provisions of 10 of amendment to facility operating telephone for advice on filing CFR Part 52, Appendix D, Section III.B, license or combined license, as alternatives. to allow deviations from the certified applicable, proposed no significant FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Design Control Document Tier 1 Figure hazards consideration determination, 2.3.10–1, as described in the licensee’s Brian Corcoran, Acting General Counsel, and opportunity for a hearing in at 202–789–6820. request dated August 30, 2013, and connection with these actions, was SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: revised by the letter dated October 15, published in the Federal Register on 2013. This exemption is related to, and September 17, 2013 (78 FR 57180). No Table of Contents necessary for the granting of License comments were received during the 60- Amendment No. 10, which is being I. Introduction day comment period. II. Notice of Filings issued concurrently with this III. Ordering Paragraphs exemption. The Commission has determined that 3. As explained in Section 5.0 of the these amendments satisfy the criteria for I. Introduction NRC staff Safety Evaluation, this categorical exclusion in accordance In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 exemption meets the eligibility criteria with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental Service filed a formal request and CFR 51.22(c)(9). Therefore, pursuant to impact statement or environmental associated supporting information to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental assessment need be prepared for these add Priority Mail Contract 79 to the impact statement or environmental amendments. competitive product list.1 assessment needs to be prepared in The Postal Service connection with the issuance of the IV. Conclusion contemporaneously filed a redacted exemption. Using the reasons set forth in the contract related to the proposed new 4. This exemption is effective as of combined safety evaluation, the staff product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and January 8, 2013. granted the exemption and issued the 39 CFR 3015.5. Id. Attachment B. To support its Request, the Postal III. License Amendment Request amendment that the licensee requested Service filed six attachments: A copy of By letter dated August 30, 2013, the on August 30, 2013, and revised by the contract, a redacted copy of licensee requested that the NRC amend letter dated October 15, 2013. The Governors’ Decision No. 11–6, proposed the COLs for VCSNS Units 2 and 3, exemption and amendment were issued changes to the Mail Classification COLs NPF–93 and NPF–94. The on January 8, 2014 as part of a combined Schedule, a Statement of Supporting licensee revised this application on package to the licensee (ADAMS Justification, a certification of October 15, 2013. The proposed Accession No. ML13354B699). compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and amendment would depart from Tier 2 Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day an application for non-public treatment Material previously incorporated into of February 2014. of certain materials. It also filed the UFSAR. Additionally, these Tier 2 For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. supporting financial workpapers. changes involve changes to Tier 1 II. Notice of Filings Information in the UFSAR, and the Lawrence J. Burkhart, proposed amendment would also revise Chief, Licensing Branch 4, Division of New The Commission establishes Docket the associated material that has been Reactor Licensing, Office of New Reactors. Nos. MC2014–20 and CP2014–33 to included in Appendix C of each of the [FR Doc. 2014–05022 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] 1 VCSNS, Units 2 and 3 COLs. The BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 79 to Competitive requested amendment would amend Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Combined License Nos. NPF–93 and Unredacted Governors’ Decision, Contract, and NPF–94 for the VCSNS Units 2 and 3 by Supporting Data, February 26, 2014 (Request).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13083

consider the Request pertaining to the telephone for advice on filing The Commission appoints Lyudmila proposed Priority Mail Contract 79 alternatives. Y. Bzhilyanskaya to serve as Public product and the related contract, Representative in this docket. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: respectively. Brian Corcoran, Acting General Counsel, III. Ordering Paragraphs Interested persons may submit at 202–789–6820. comments on whether the Postal It is ordered: Service’s filings in the captioned SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1. The Commission reopens Docket No. CP2014–9 for consideration of dockets are consistent with the policies Table of Contents of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR matters raised by the Postal Service’s 3015.5, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart I. Introduction Notice. B. Comments are due no later than II. Notice of Filings 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, March 7, 2014. The public portions of III. Ordering Paragraphs Lyudmila Y. Bzhilyanskaya is appointed these filings can be accessed via the I. Introduction to serve as an officer of the Commission Commission’s Web site (http:// to represent the interests of the general www.prc.gov). On February 25, 2014, the Postal public in these proceedings (Public The Commission appoints Kenneth R. Service filed notice that it has agreed to Representative). Moeller to serve as Public an amendment to the existing Priority 3. Comments are due no later than Representative in these dockets. Mail Contract 70 subject to this docket March 7, 2014. (Amendment).1 The Postal Service 4. The Secretary shall arrange for III. Ordering Paragraphs includes two attachments in support of publication of this order in the Federal It is ordered: its Notice: Register. • 1. The Commission establishes Docket Attachment A—a redacted copy of By the Commission. the Amendment to the existing Priority Nos. MC2014–20 and CP2014–33 to Shoshana M. Grove, Mail Contract 70. consider the matters raised in each Secretary. docket. • Attachment B—certified statement [FR Doc. 2014–04960 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a). BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P R. Moeller is appointed to serve as an The Postal Service also filed the officer of the Commission to represent supporting financial documentation and the interests of the general public in the unredacted Amendment under seal. POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION these proceedings (Public Notice at 1. The Postal Service seeks to Representative). incorporate by reference the Application [Docket No. CP2013–79; Order No. 2003] 3. Comments by interested persons in for Non-Public Treatment originally Amendment to Postal Product these proceedings are due no later than filed in this docket for the protection of March 7, 2014. customer-identifying information that it AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 4. The Secretary shall arrange for has filed under seal. Id. ACTION: Notice. publication of this order in the Federal The Amendment broadens the Register. application of the contract to include SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a By the Commission. prices for Priority Mail packages having recent Postal Service filing an Shoshana M. Grove, weights and sizes different than those amendment to Priority Mail Express & 2 Priority Mail Contract 14. This notice Secretary. described in the original contract. The Amendment is scheduled to take effect informs the public of the filing, invites [FR Doc. 2014–04961 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] one business day following the day on public comment, and takes other BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P which the Commission issues all administrative steps. necessary regulatory approval. Notice, DATES: Comments are due: March 7, POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION Attachment A at 1. 2014. II. Notice of Filings ADDRESSES: Submit comments [Docket No. CP2014–9; Order No. 1999] electronically via the Commission’s Interested persons may submit Filing Online system at http:// Amendment to Postal Product comments on whether the changes www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit presented in the Postal Service’s Notice AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. comments electronically should contact are consistent with the policies of 39 the person identified in the FOR FURTHER ACTION: Notice. U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR INFORMATION CONTACT section by 3015.5, and 39 CFR Part 3020, subpart SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a telephone for advice on filing B. Comments are due no later than alternatives. recent Postal Service filing requesting March 7, 2014. The public portions of an amendment to Priority Mail Contract these filings can be accessed via the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 70. This notice informs the public of the Commission’s Web site (http:// Brian Corcoran, Acting General Counsel, filing, invites public comment, and www.prc.gov). at 202–789–6820. takes other administrative steps. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: Comments are due: March 7, 1 Notice of United States Postal Service of Change Table of Contents 2014. in Prices Pursuant to Amendment to Priority Mail Contract 70, February 25, 2014 (Notice). I. Introduction ADDRESSES: Submit comments 2 Compare id., Attachment A at 1–2 (filed under II. Notice of Filings electronically via the Commission’s seal) with Docket Nos. MC2014–8 and CP2014–9, III. Ordering Paragraphs Filing Online system at http:// Request of the United States Postal Service to Add www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit Priority Mail Contract 70 to Competitive Product I. Introduction List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted comments electronically should contact Governors’ Decision, Contract, and Supporting On February 26, 2014, the Postal the person identified in the FOR FURTHER Data, November 19, 2013, Attachment B at 1–2 Service filed notice that it has agreed to INFORMATION CONTACT section by (filed under seal). an amendment to the existing Priority

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13084 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 14 Representative) to represent the SUMMARY: The SBA is issuing this notice subject to this docket (Amendment).1 interests of the general public in this to announce the location, date, time, The Postal Service includes two docket. and agenda for its public meeting of the attachments in support of its Notice: 3. Comments are due no later than Interagency Task Force on Veterans • Attachment A—a redacted copy of March 7, 2014. Small Business Development. The the Amendment to the existing Priority 4. The Secretary shall arrange for meeting will be open to the public. Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract publication of this order in the Federal DATES: Thursday, March 20, 2014, from 14. Register. 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. • Attachment B—a certified statement By the Commission. ADDRESSES: SBA 409 3rd Street NW., of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a). Washington, DC 20419. The Postal Service also filed Shoshana M. Grove, Secretary. Room: Eisenhower Conference Room supporting financial documentation and B, located on the Concourse Level. [FR Doc. 2014–04981 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] the unredacted Amendment under seal. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant Notice at 1. The Postal Service seeks to BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal incorporate by reference the Application Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C., for Non-Public Treatment originally Appendix 2), SBA announces the filed in this docket for the protection of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE meeting of the Interagency Task Force materials filed under seal. Id. COMMISSION on Veterans Small Business The Amendment changes the prices [File No. 500–1] Development. The Task Force is for some of the customer’s Priority Mail established pursuant to Executive Order 2 contract packages. It is scheduled to 13540 and focused on coordinating the take effect one business day following Aventura Equities, Inc.; Order of Suspension of Trading efforts of Federal agencies to improve the day on which the Commission capital, business development issues all necessary regulatory approval. March 5, 2014 opportunities and pre-established Notice, Attachment A at 1. It appears to the Securities and Federal contracting goals for small II. Notice of Filings Exchange Commission that there is a business concerns owned and lack of current and accurate information controlled by veterans (VOB’s) and Interested persons may submit concerning the securities of Aventura service-disabled veterans (SDVOSB’S). comments on whether the changes Equities, Inc. (‘‘Aventura’’) because of Moreover, the Task Force shall presented in the Postal Service’s Notice questions concerning the adequacy and coordinate administrative and are consistent with the policies of 39 accuracy of publicly available regulatory activities and develop U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR information about Aventura, including, proposals relating to ‘‘three focus 3015.5, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart among other things, its financial areas’’: (1) Training, Counseling & B. Comments are due no later than condition, the control of the company, Capital; (2) Federal Contracting & March 7, 2014. The public portions of its business operations, and trading in Verification; (3) Improved Federal these filings can be accessed via the its securities. Aventura is a Florida Support on November 1, 2011, the Commission’s Web site (http:// corporation based in Georgetown, South Interagency Task Force on Veterans www.prc.gov). Small Business Development submitted The Commission previously Carolina, and is traded under the symbol ‘‘AVNE.’’ its first report to the President, which appointed Pamela A. Thompson to included 18 Recommendations. In represent the interests of the general The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of addition, the Task Force will allow time public (Public Representative) in this to obtain public comment from 3 investors require a suspension of trading docket. She will continue to serve in individuals and representatives of that capacity. in the securities of the above-listed company. organizations regarding the areas of III. Ordering Paragraphs Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to focus. It is ordered: Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 1. The Commission reopens Docket Act of 1934, that trading in the meeting is open to the public, however, No. CP2013–79 for consideration of securities of the above-listed company is advance notice of attendance is matters raised by the Postal Service’s suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. requested. Anyone wishing to attend Notice. EST, on March 5, 2014, through 11:59 and/or make a presentation to the Task 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Pamela p.m. EDT, on March 18, 2014. Force must contact Barbara Carson, by A. Thompson will continue to serve as By the Commission. February 28, 2014 by email in order to an officer of the Commission (Public Jill M. Peterson, be placed on the agenda. Comments for Assistant Secretary. the Record should be applicable to the 1 Notice of United States Postal Service of Change ‘‘three focus areas’’ of the Task Force in Prices Pursuant to Amendment to Priority Mail [FR Doc. 2014–05084 Filed 3–5–14; 4:15 pm] and emailed prior to the meeting for Express & Priority Mail Contract 14, February 26, BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 2014 (Notice). inclusion in the public record, verbal 2 Compare id. Attachment A at 2 (filed under seal) presentations; however, will be limited with Docket Nos. MC2013–58 and CP2013–79, to five minutes in the interest of time Request of the United States Postal Service to Add SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION and to accommodate as many presenters Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 14 to as possible. Written comments should Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Interagency Task Force on Veterans be emailed to Barbara Carson, (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors’ Decision, Small Business Development; Notice Contract, and Supporting Data, August 30, 2013, Designated Federal Officer Office of Attachment B at 3 (filed under seal). of Meeting Veterans Business Development, U.S. 3 Docket Nos. MC2013–58 and CP2013–79, Order AGENCY: Small Business Administration. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd No. 1825, Notice and Order Concerning Addition of Street SW., Washington, DC 20416, at Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 14 to ACTION: Notice of open Federal the email address for the Task Force, the Competitive Product List, September 3, 2013, at Interagency Task Force Meeting. 3. [email protected] . Additionally, if

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13085

you need accommodations because of a • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. Exemption Decision disability or require additional Instructions: Each submission must This notice addresses 10 individuals information, please contact Barbara include the Agency name and the who have requested renewal of their Carson, Designated Federal Official for docket number for this notice. Note that exemptions in accordance with FMCSA the Task Force at (202) 205–6773; or by DOT posts all comments received procedures. FMCSA has evaluated these email at: [email protected]. For without change to http:// 10 applications for renewal on their more information, please visit our Web www.regulations.gov, including any merits and decided to extend each site at www.sba.gov/vets. personal information included in a exemption for a renewable two-year Dated: February 21, 2014. comment. Please see the Privacy Act period. They are: Diana Doukas, heading below. Eugenio V. Bermudez (MA) SBA Committee Management Officer. Docket: For access to the docket to John A. Carroll, Jr. (AL) [FR Doc. 2014–04580 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] read background documents or Mark W. Crocker (TN) BILLING CODE 8025–01–P comments, go to http:// Johnny Dillard (SC) www.regulations.gov at any time or Keith J. Haaf (VA) Room W12–140 on the ground level of Edward M. Jurek (NY) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Allen J. Kunze (ND) Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 Mark A. Smalls (GA) Federal Motor Carrier Safety a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Glenn R. Theis (MN) Peter A. Troyan (MI) Administration Friday, except Federal holidays. The The exemptions are extended subject [Docket No. FMCSA–2011–0366] Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is available 24 hours each day, to the following conditions: (1) That Qualification of Drivers; Exemption 365 days each year. If you want each individual has a physical Applications; Vision acknowledgment that we received your examination every year (a) by an comments, please include a self- ophthalmologist or optometrist who AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety addressed, stamped envelope or attests that the vision in the better eye Administration (FMCSA), DOT. postcard or print the acknowledgement continues to meet the requirements in ACTION: Notice of renewal of page that appears after submitting 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and (b) by a exemptions; request for comments. comments on-line. medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise physically SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its Privacy Act: Anyone may search the qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that decision to renew the exemptions from electronic form of all comments each individual provides a copy of the the vision requirement in the Federal received into any of our dockets by the ophthalmologist’s or optometrist’s Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for 10 name of the individual submitting the report to the medical examiner at the individuals. FMCSA has statutory comment (or of the person signing the time of the annual medical examination; authority to exempt individuals from comment, if submitted on behalf of an and (3) that each individual provide a the vision requirement if the association, business, labor union, etc.). copy of the annual medical certification exemptions granted will not You may review DOT’s Privacy Act to the employer for retention in the compromise safety. The Agency has Statement for the Federal Docket driver’s qualification file and retains a concluded that granting these Management System (FDMS) published copy of the certification on his/her exemption renewals will provide a level in the Federal Register on January 17, person while driving for presentation to of safety that is equivalent to or greater 2008 (73 FR 3316). a duly authorized Federal, State, or local than the level of safety maintained FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: enforcement official. Each exemption without the exemptions for these Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical will be valid for two years unless commercial motor vehicle (CMV) Programs Division, 202–366–4001, rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The drivers. [email protected], FMCSA, exemption will be rescinded if: (1) The DATES: This decision is effective March Department of Transportation, 1200 person fails to comply with the terms 23, 2014. Comments must be received New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64– and conditions of the exemption; (2) the on or before April 7, 2014. 224, Washington, DC 20590–0001. exemption has resulted in a lower level ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. of safety than was maintained before it bearing the Federal Docket Management Monday through Friday, except Federal was granted; or (3) continuation of the System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. holidays. exemption would not be consistent with [Docket No. FMCSA–2011–0366], using the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: any of the following methods: 31136(e) and 31315. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to Background Basis for Renewing Exemptions http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an comments. FMCSA may renew an exemption from exemption may be granted for no longer • Mail: Docket Management Facility; the vision requirements in 49 CFR than two years from its approval date U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 391.41(b)(10), which applies to drivers and may be renewed upon application New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a for additional two year periods. In Ground Floor, Room W12–140, two-year period if it finds ‘‘such accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and Washington, DC 20590–0001. exemption would likely achieve a level 31315, each of the 10 applicants has • Hand Delivery or Courier: West of safety that is equivalent to or greater satisfied the entry conditions for Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, than the level that would be achieved obtaining an exemption from the vision 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., absent such exemption.’’ The requirements (77 FR 5874; 77 FR Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 procedures for requesting an exemption 17117). Each of these 10 applicants has p.m., Monday through Friday, except (including renewals) are set out in 49 requested renewal of the exemption and Federal Holidays. CFR part 381. has submitted evidence showing that

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13086 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

the vision in the better eye continues to take immediate steps to revoke the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION meet the requirement specified at 49 exemption of a driver. CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision Federal Motor Carrier Safety impairment is stable. In addition, a Submitting Comments Administration review of each record of safety while You may submit your comments and [FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA–2013–0192] driving with the respective vision material online or by fax, mail, or hand deficiencies over the past two years delivery, but please use only one of Qualification of Drivers; Exemption indicates each applicant continues to these means. FMCSA recommends that Applications; Diabetes Mellitus meet the vision exemption requirements. you include your name and a mailing AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety These factors provide an adequate address, an email address, or a phone Administration (FMCSA), DOT. number in the body of your document basis for predicting each driver’s ability ACTION: Notice of final disposition. to continue to drive safely in interstate so that FMCSA can contact you if there commerce. Therefore, FMCSA are questions regarding your SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its concludes that extending the exemption submission. decision to exempt 46 individuals from for each renewal applicant for a period To submit your comment online, go to its rule prohibiting persons with of two years is likely to achieve a level http://www.regulations.gov and in the insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) of safety equal to that existing without search box insert the docket numbers from operating commercial motor the exemption. FMCSA–2011–0366 and click the search vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce. Request for Comments button. When the new screen appears, The exemptions will enable these click on the blue ‘‘Comment Now!’’ individuals to operate CMVs in FMCSA will review comments interstate commerce. received at any time concerning a button on the right hand side of the DATES: The exemptions are effective particular driver’s safety record and page. On the new page, enter March 7, 2014. The exemptions expire determine if the continuation of the information required including the on March 7, 2016. exemption is consistent with the specific section of this document to requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and which each comment applies, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 31315. However, FMCSA requests that provide a reason for each suggestion or Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical interested parties with specific data recommendation. If you submit your Programs Division, (202) 366–4001, concerning the safety records of these comments by mail or hand delivery, [email protected], FMCSA, Room drivers submit comments by April 7, submit them in an unbound format, no W64–224, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 2014. larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590– FMCSA believes that the copying and electronic filing. If you 0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to requirements for a renewal of an submit comments by mail and would 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except exemption under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and like to know that they reached the Federal holidays. 31315 can be satisfied by initially facility, please enclose a stamped, self- granting the renewal and then SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: addressed postcard or envelope. requesting and evaluating, if needed, subsequent comments submitted by We will consider all comments and Electronic Access interested parties. As indicated above, material received during the comment You may see all the comments online the Agency previously published period and may change this proposed through the Federal Document notices of final disposition announcing rule based on your comments. FMCSA Management System (FDMS) at: http:// its decision to exempt these 10 may issue a final rule at any time after www.regulations.gov. individuals from the vision requirement the close of the comment period. Docket: For access to the docket to in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final read background documents or decision to grant an exemption to each Viewing Comments and Documents comments, go to http:// of these individuals was made on the To view comments, as well as any www.regulations.gov and/or Room merits of each case and made only after documents mentioned in this preamble, W12–140 on the ground level of the careful consideration of the comments To submit your comment online, go to West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue received to its notices of applications. SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. http://www.regulations.gov and in the The notices of applications stated in and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, search box insert the docket number detail the qualifications, experience, except Federal holidays. FMCSA–2011–0366 and click ‘‘Search.’’ and medical condition of each applicant Privacy Act: Anyone may search the for an exemption from the vision Next, click ‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ and electronic form of all comments requirements. That information is you will find all documents and received into any of DOT’s dockets by available by consulting the above cited comments related to the proposed the name of the individual submitting Federal Register publications. rulemaking. the comment (or of the person signing Interested parties or organizations Issued on: February 25, 2014. the comment, if submitted on behalf of possessing information that would Larry W. Minor, an association, business, labor union, or otherwise show that any, or all, of these other entity). You may review DOT’s Associate Administrator for Policy. drivers are not currently achieving the Privacy Act Statement for the Federal statutory level of safety should [FR Doc. 2014–04978 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] Docket Management System (FDMS) immediately notify FMCSA. The BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P published in the Federal Register on Agency will evaluate any adverse January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316). evidence submitted and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of Background the exemption would not be consistent On December 26, 2013, FMCSA with the goals and objectives of 49 published a notice of receipt of Federal U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will diabetes exemption applications from

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13087

46 individuals and requested comments complications. Each meets the vision qualification file if he/she is self- from the public (78 FR 78479). The requirement at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). employed. The driver must also have a public comment period closed on The qualifications and medical copy of the certification when driving, January 27, 2014, and one comment was condition of each applicant were stated for presentation to a duly authorized received. and discussed in detail in the December Federal, State, or local enforcement FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility 26, 2013, Federal Register notice and official. of the 46 applicants and determined that they will not be repeated in this notice. Conclusion granting the exemptions to these Discussion of Comments individuals would achieve a level of Based upon its evaluation of the 46 safety equivalent to or greater than the FMCSA received one comment in this exemption applications, FMCSA level that would be achieved by proceeding. The comment is discussed exempts William B. Andrus (AL), Chad complying with the current regulation and considered below. E. Anger (WI), Thomas C. Aston (MD), 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3). Antonio A. Sena expressed his thanks and appreciation to the FMCSA staff for Jared F. Beard (ND), Edward Blake (GA), Diabetes Mellitus and Driving their help and guidance throughout the Jerrel F. Bower (MO), Jerry A. Campbell Experience of the Applicants application process. (OH), Brian M. Chase (VA), Charles R. The Agency established the current Basis for Exemption Determination Clayton (NJ), Phillip Covel (NE), Ariel requirement for diabetes in 1970 Cuevas (NJ), Glen C. Davis (TN), Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Nicholas P. Dube (RI), Arthur W. because several risk studies indicated FMCSA may grant an exemption from that drivers with diabetes had a higher Ehrenzeller (PA), Manuael Elizondo the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR (TX), Michael K. Farris (IN), Merino rate of crash involvement than the 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is likely to Fernandes (IL), Craig J. Gadley, Sr. (NY), general population. The diabetes rule achieve an equivalent or greater level of Daniel Grove, Jr. (PA), Mary F. Guilfoy provides that ‘‘A person is physically safety than would be achieved without (IN), James M. Hatcher (MS), Edward S. qualified to drive a commercial motor the exemption. The exemption allows vehicle if that person has no established the applicants to operate CMVs in Ionescu (IL), Jeffrey James (AK), medical history or clinical diagnosis of interstate commerce. Hayward S. Mason (NY), Guy B. Mayes diabetes mellitus currently requiring To evaluate the effect of these (WA), Ashun R. Merritt (GA), Herbert A. insulin for control’’ (49 CFR exemptions on safety, FMCSA Morton (CA), Colby A. Nutter (VA), 391.41(b)(3)). considered medical reports about the Jayrome D. Rimolde (MN), Gale Roland FMCSA established its diabetes applicants’ ITDM and vision, and (PA), Larry J. Sanders (MD), Kelly T. exemption program, based on the reviewed the treating endocrinologists’ Scholl (MN), Antonio A. Sena (CA), Agency’s July 2000 study entitled ‘‘A medical opinion related to the ability of Gregory G. Sisco (IA), Travers L. Report to Congress on the Feasibility of the driver to safely operate a CMV while Stephens (GA), Brittany K. Tomasko a Program to Qualify Individuals with using insulin. (CA), Johnny G. Wallace (AR), Daren Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus to Consequently, FMCSA finds that in Warren (NY), Aaron E. Webb (WA), Operate in Interstate Commerce as each case exempting these applicants Billy J. Webb, Jr. (MS), Alan T. Whalen Directed by the Transportation Act for from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR (NY), Thomas L. Whitley (IN), Randall the 21st Century.’’ The report concluded 391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level S. Williams (PA), Tomme J. Wirth (IA), that a safe and practicable protocol to of safety equal to that existing without Charles J. Wirth (WI), Thomas A. allow some drivers with ITDM to the exemption. Wysocki (NJ) from the ITDM operate CMVs is feasible. The September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441), Conditions and Requirements requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), Federal Register notice in conjunction The terms and conditions of the subject to the conditions listed under with the November 8, 2005 (70 FR exemption will be provided to the ‘‘Conditions and Requirements’’ above. 67777), Federal Register notice provides applicants in the exemption document In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) the current protocol for allowing such and they include the following: (1) That and 31315 each exemption will be valid drivers to operate CMVs in interstate each individual submit a quarterly for two years unless revoked earlier by commerce. monitoring checklist completed by the FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked These 46 applicants have had ITDM treating endocrinologist as well as an if the following occurs: (1) The person over a range of 1 to 23 years. These annual checklist with a comprehensive fails to comply with the terms and applicants report no severe medical evaluation; (2) that each conditions of the exemption; (2) the hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss individual reports within 2 business exemption has resulted in a lower level of consciousness or seizure, requiring days of occurrence, all episodes of of safety than was maintained before it the assistance of another person, or severe hypoglycemia, significant was granted; or (3) continuation of the resulting in impaired cognitive function complications, or inability to manage exemption would not be consistent with that occurred without warning diabetes; also, any involvement in an the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. symptoms, in the past 12 months and no accident or any other adverse event in 31136(e) and 31315. If the exemption is recurrent (2 or more) severe a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or still effective at the end of the 2-year hypoglycemic episodes in the past 5 not it is related to an episode of period, the person may apply to FMCSA years. In each case, an endocrinologist hypoglycemia; (3) that each individual for a renewal under procedures in effect verified that the driver has provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s demonstrated a willingness to properly or optometrist’s report to the medical at that time. monitor and manage his/her diabetes examiner at the time of the annual Issued on: February 25, 2014. mellitus, received education related to medical examination; and (4) that each Larry W. Minor, diabetes management, and is on a stable individual provide a copy of the annual Associate Administrator for Policy. insulin regimen. These drivers report no medical certification to the employer for [FR Doc. 2014–04977 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] other disqualifying conditions, retention in the driver’s qualification including diabetes-related file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13088 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION supported transit services and benefits age, or disability. To ensure that FTA’s are distributed by applicants, recipients, EEO procedures are followed, FTA Federal Transit Administration and subrecipients of FTA assistance in requires grant recipients to submit [FTA Docket No. FTA–2014–0007] a manner consistent with Title VI. The written EEO plans to FTA for approval. employment practices of a grant FTA’s assessment of this requirement Agency Information Collection Activity applicant, recipient, or subrecipient are shows that formulating, submitting, and Under OMB Review also covered under Title VI if the implementing EEO programs should primary purpose of the FTA-supported minimally increase costs for FTA AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, program is to provide employment or if applicants and recipients. To determine DOT. those employment practices would a grantee’s compliance with applicable ACTION: Notice of request for comments. result in discrimination against laws and requirements, grantee beneficiaries of FTA-assisted services submissions are evaluated and analyzed SUMMARY: The Federal Transit and benefits. based on the following criteria. First, an Administration invites public comment FTA policies and requirements are EEO program must include an EEO about our intention to request the Office designed to clarify and strengthen Title policy statement issued by the chief of Management and Budget’s (OMB) VI (service equity) procedures for FTA executive officer covering all approval to renew the following grant recipients by requiring submission employment practices, including information collections: of written plans and approval of such recruitment, selection, promotions, (1) Title VI as it Applies to FTA Grant plans by the agency. All project terminations, transfers, layoffs, Programs sponsors receiving financial assistance compensation, training, benefits, and (2) Nondiscrimination as it Applies to pursuant to an FTA-funded project shall other terms and conditions of FTA Grant Programs not discriminate in the provision of employment. Second, the policy must (3) Charter Service Operations services because of race, color, or be placed conspicuously so that The information collected is national origin. Experience has employees, applicants, and the general necessary to determine eligibility of demonstrated that a program public are aware of the agency’s EEO applicants and ensure the proper and requirement at the application stage is commitment. The data derived from timely expenditure of federal funds necessary to assure that benefits and written EEO and affirmative action within the scope of each program. The services are equitably distributed by plans will be used by the Office of Civil Federal Register notice with a 60-day grant recipients. The requirements Rights in monitoring grantees’ comment period soliciting comments prescribed by the Office of Civil Rights compliance with applicable EEO laws was published on February 6, 2014 are designed to accomplish this and regulations. This monitoring and (Citation 79 FR 25). One comment was objective and diminish possible vestiges enforcement activity will ensure that received on February 18, 2014. This of discrimination among FTA grant minorities and women have equitable comment is currently under FTA’s recipients. FTA’s assessment of the access to employment opportunities and review. requirements indicated that the that recipients of federal funds do not formulation and implementation of the DATES: Comments must be submitted discriminate against any employee or before April 7, 2014. A comment to Title VI Program should occur with a applicant because of race, color, creed, OMB is most effective if OMB receives decrease in costs to such applicants and sex, national origin, age, or disability. it within 30 days of publication. recipients. Estimated Total Annual Burden: Estimated Total Annual Burden: 2,425 hours. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tia 5,332 hours. Title: Charter Service Operations Swain, Office of Administration, Office Title: Nondiscrimination as it Applies (OMB Number: 2132–0543). of Management Planning, (202) 366– to FTA Grant Programs (OMB Number: Abstract: FTA recipients may only 0354. 2132–0542). provide charter bus service with FTA- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Abstract: 49 Code of Federal funded facilities and equipment if the Title: Title VI as it Applies to FTA Regulations, part 21.5 states: ‘‘Where a charter service is incidental to the Grant (OMB Number: 2132–0540). primary objective of the Federal provision of transit service (49 U.S.C. Abstract: Title VI of the Civil Rights financial assistance to a program to 5323(d). This restriction protects charter Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d) states: which this part applies is to provide service providers from unauthorized ‘‘No person in the United States shall, employment, a recipient or other party competition by FTA recipients. on the grounds of race, color, or national subject to this part shall not, directly or The requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5323(d) origin, be excluded from participation through contractual or other are implemented in FTA’s charter in, be denied the benefits of, or be arrangements, subject a person to regulation (Charter Service Rule) at 49 subjected to discrimination under any discrimination on the ground of race, CFR part 604. Amended in 2008, the program or activity receiving Federal color, or national origin in its Charter Service Rule now contains five financial assistance.’’ employment practices under such (5) provisions that impose information To achieve this purpose, each Federal program (including recruitment or collection requirements on FTA department and agency which provides recruitment advertising, hiring, firing, recipients of financial assistance from financial assistance for any program or upgrading, promotion, demotion, FTA under Federal Transit Law. activity is authorized and directed by transfer, layoff, termination, rates of pay First, 49 CFR Section 604.4 requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) to or other forms of compensation or all applicants for Federal financial effectuate provisions of Title VI for each benefits, selection for training or assistance under Federal Transit Law, program or activity by issuing generally apprenticeship, use of facilities, and unless otherwise exempted under 49 applicable regulations or requirements. treatment of employees).’’ CFR Section 604.2, to enter into a The Department of Transportation All entities receiving Federal financial ‘‘Charter Service Agreement,’’ contained (DOT) has issued its regulation assistance from FTA are prohibited from in the Certifications and Assurances for implementing this DOJ mandate. discriminating against any employee or FTA Assistance Programs. The In this regard, the responsibility of the applicant for employment because of Certifications and Assurances become a FTA is to ensure that Federally- race, color, creed, sex, national origin, part of the Grant Agreement or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13089

Cooperative Agreement for Federal have practical utility; the accuracy of This action will not significantly financial assistance upon receipt of the Department’s estimate of the burden affect either the quality of the human Federal funds. The rule requires each of the proposed information collection; environment or the conservation of applicant to submit one Charter Service ways to enhance the quality, utility, and energy resources. Agreement for each year that the clarity of the information to be Decided: March 4, 2014. applicant intends to apply for the collected; and ways to minimize the By the Board, Chairman Elliott and Vice Federal financial assistance specified burden of the collection of information Chairman Begeman. above. on respondents, including the use of Jeffrey Herzig, automated collection techniques or Second, 49 CFR Section 604.14(3) Clearance Clerk. requires a recipient of Federal funds other forms of information technology. [FR Doc. 2014–05049 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] under Federal Transit Law, unless Matthew M. Crouch, otherwise exempt, to provide email BILLING CODE 4915–01–P Associate Administrator for Administration. notification to all registered charter providers in the recipient’s geographic [FR Doc. 2014–04758 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] service area each time the recipient BILLING CODE 4910–57–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY receives a request for charter service Internal Revenue Service that the recipient is interested in DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION providing. Privacy Act of 1974, as Amended Third, 49 CFR Section 604.12(c) Surface Transportation Board requires a recipient, unless otherwise AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service, exempt under 49 CFR part 604.2, to [Docket No. EP 290 (Sub-No. 4)] Treasury. submit on a quarterly basis records of all ACTION: Notice of Proposed Alterations Railroad Cost Recovery Procedures— to Privacy Act Systems of Records. instances that the recipient provided Productivity Adjustment charter service. SUMMARY: In accordance with the AGENCY: Fourth, 49 CFR Section 604.13 Surface Transportation Board, requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, requires a private charter provider to DOT. as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552a, the register on FTA’s Charter Registration ACTION: Proposed railroad cost recovery Department of the Treasury, Internal Web site at http:// procedures productivity adjustment. Revenue Service, gives notice of ftawebprod.fta.dot.gov/ SUMMARY: In a decision served on March proposed alterations to systems of CharterRegistration/in order to qualify records entitled: as a registered charter service provider 4, 2014, we proposed to adopt 1.010 (1.0% per year) as the measure of 46.002, Criminal Investigation and receive email notifications by Management Information System recipients that are interested in average change in railroad productivity for the 2008–2012 (5-year) averaging (CIMIS) and case files; providing a requested charter service. 46.003, Confidential Informants; The rule requires that a registered period. This represents an increase of 46.005, Electronic Surveillance Files; charter service provider must update its 0.1% from the average for the 2007– 46.009, Centralized Evaluation and information on the Charter Registration 2011 period. The Board’s March 4, 2014 Processing of Information Items Web site at least once every two years. decision in this proceeding stated that (CEPIIs), Evaluation and Processing of Currently, there are a total of 192 comments may be filed addressing any Information (EOI); registered private charter service perceived data and computational errors 46.015, Relocated Witnesses; and providers. Registration has consistently in our calculation. It also stated that, if 46.050, Automated Information decreased over the years. there were no further action taken by Analysis System. Lastly, 49 CFR Section 604.7 permits the Board, the proposed productivity DATES: Comments must be received no recipients to provide charter service to adjustment would become effective on later than April 7, 2014. These altered Qualified Human Service Organizations March 19, 2014. systems of records will be effective (QHSO) under limited circumstances. DATES: The productivity adjustment is April 16, 2014 unless the IRS receives QHSOs that do not receive Federal effective March 19, 2014. Comments are comments that would result in a funding under programs listed in due by March 17, 2014. contrary determination. Appendix A to part 604 and seek to ADDRESSES: Send comments (an original ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to receive free or reduced rate services and 10 copies) referring to Docket No. Anne Jensen, Tax Law Specialist, Office from recipients must register on FTA’s EP 290 (Sub-No. 4) to: Surface of Privacy, Governmental Liaison, and Charter Registration Web site (49 CFR Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Disclosure, 1111 Constitution Avenue Section 604.15(a)). Washington, DC 20423–0001. NW., Room 1621, Washington, DC Estimated Total Annual Burden: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 20224. Comments will be available for 369.7 hours. Michael Smith, (202) 245–0322. Federal inspection and copying in the Freedom ADDRESSES: All written comments must Information Relay Service (FIRS) for the of Information Reading Room (Room refer to the docket number that appears hearing impaired: (800) 877–8339. 1621), at the above address. The at the top of this document and be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: telephone number for the Reading Room submitted to the Office of Information Additional information is contained in is (202) 317–4997 (not a toll-free and Regulatory Affairs, Office of the Board’s decision, which is available number). Management and Budget, 725—17th on our Web site, http://www.stb.dot.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Street NW. Washington, DC 20503, Copies of the decision may be Anne Jensen, Tax Law Specialist, Office Attention: FTA Desk Officer. purchased by contacting the Office of of Privacy, Governmental Liaison, and Comments are Invited On: Whether Public Assistance, Governmental Disclosure, 1111 Constitution Avenue the proposed collection of information Affairs, and Compliance at (202) 245– NW., Room 1621, Washington, DC is necessary for the proper performance 0238. Assistance for the hearing 20224. Ms. Jensen may be reached via of the functions of the Department, impaired is available through FIRS at telephone at (202) 317–4997 (not a toll- including whether the information will (800) 877–8339. free number).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13090 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The IRS As required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), a including information sources, proposes to revise Criminal report of altered systems of records has pertaining to individuals identified as Investigation’s six existing systems of been provided to the Committee on person(s) of interest by Special Agents records. In conjunction with these Oversight and Government Reform of assigned to the Dignitary Protection revisions, the IRS will delete one of the the House of Representatives, the Detail; personnel and workload existing systems of records, leaving five Committee on Homeland Security and management information. Records remaining systems of records. The Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and include biographical, travel, purpose of these revisions and deletions the Office of Management and Budget. communication, financial, and is to better reflect the reorganization and The five proposed revised systems of surveillance information. realignment of Criminal Investigation, a records, described above, are published business unit under the Deputy in their entirety below. AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: Commissioner (Services and Dated: February 20, 2014. 5 U.S.C. 301; 26 U.S.C. 7801 and Enforcement) following enactment of Helen Goff Foster, 7803; 31 U.S.C. 5311 et seq.; Department of the Treasury Delegation Orders and the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Privacy, 1998, to simplify the notices, to more Transparency, and Records. Directives authorizing CI to conduct closely reflect the nature of the work investigations into specified non-tax currently performed by the various Treasury/IRS 46.002 crimes. components of Criminal Investigation, SYSTEM NAME: PURPOSE(S): both in headquarters and in the field, Management Information System and and to enumerate certain additional To maintain, analyze, and process Case Files, Criminal Investigation— sensitive investigative information that routine uses that may be made of the Treasury/IRS. individually identifiable information identifies or may identify criminal maintained in these systems of records. SYSTEM LOCATION: noncompliance with Federal tax laws This revision should enable individuals Headquarters, Field, Campus, and and other Federal laws delegated to CI to more readily identify the systems of Computing Center offices. (See the for investigation or enforcement, and records in which Criminal Investigation Appendix published in the Federal that identifies or may identify the may maintain records about them. The Register on August 10, 2012, for individuals connected to such activity. revised routine uses more fully describe addresses.) To establish linkages between identity the circumstances under which the theft and refund or other tax fraud agency may use these records. A final CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE schemes, and the individuals involved SYSTEM: exemption rule, which does not alter the in such schemes, that may be used to exemptions claimed for the individually Subjects and potential subjects of further investigate such activity and to identifiable information maintained in Criminal Investigation (CI) perfect filters that identify fraudulent these consolidated systems of records, is investigations and other individuals of returns upon filing and to facilitate tax being published separately under the interest to CI, such as witnesses and account adjustments for taxpayers rules section of the Federal Register. associates of subjects or potential victimized by these schemes. subjects of CI investigations; individuals The IRS currently maintains six about whom CI has received ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE systems of records related to the SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND information alleging their commission functions of Criminal Investigation. THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: of, or involvement with, a violation of Notices describing these systems of Federal laws within IRS jurisdiction, Disclosure of returns and return records were most recently published at including individuals who may be information may be made only as 77 FR 47984–47987 (August 10, 2012). victims of identity theft or other provided by 26 U.S.C. 6103. Material The IRS proposes to delete the system fraudulent refund or tax schemes; covered by rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of records described below: individuals identified as potentially of Criminal Procedure may be disclosed Treasury/IRS 46.009, Centralized posing a threat to the Commissioner, only as permitted by that rule. Evaluation and Processing of other Agency officials, or visiting Disclosure of information covered by 31 Information Items (CEPIIs), Evaluation dignitaries, or as having inappropriately U.S.C. 5311, et seq. or 12 U.S.C. 1951, and Processing of Information (EOI) contacted the Commissioner or other et seq. (Bank Secrecy Act) may be made The IRS proposes to revise the five Agency officials; IRS employees only as provided by Title 31, U.S.C., and systems of records listed below: assigned to work matters handled by CI. Treasury guidelines. Other records may be used as described below if the IRS Treasury/IRS 46.002, Criminal and CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: deems that the purpose of the disclosure Investigation Management Records pertaining to possible is compatible with the purpose for Information System (CIMIS) and case violations of laws under the which the IRS collected the records and files enforcement jurisdiction of the IRS, no privilege is asserted. Treasury/IRS 46.003, Confidential received by the IRS from other sources (1) Disclose information to the Informants or developed during investigative Department of Justice (DOJ) when Treasury/IRS 46.005, Electronic activities, that identify or may identify seeking legal advice, or for use in any Surveillance Files criminal or civil noncompliance with proceeding, or in preparation for any Treasury/IRS 46.015, Relocated Federal tax laws and other Federal laws proceeding, when: (a) The IRS or any Witnesses delegated to CI for investigation or component thereof; (b) any IRS Treasury/IRS 46.050, Automated enforcement; information arising from employee in his or her official capacity; Information Analysis System. investigative activities conducted by CI (c) any IRS employee in his or her A final rule exempting the proposed in conjunction with other Federal, state, individual capacity if the IRS or the DOJ altered systems of records from certain local, or foreign law enforcement, has agreed to provide representation for provisions of the Privacy Act will be regulatory, or intelligence agencies; the employee; or (d) the United States published separately in the Federal personal, identification, criminal is a party to, has an interest in, or is Register. history, and other information, likely to be affected by the proceeding,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13091

and the IRS determines that the records when required in criminal discovery or RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: are relevant and useful. by the Due Process Clause of the Records pertaining to persons of (2) Disclose information in a Constitution. interest identified by Special Agents proceeding (including discovery) before (11) Disclose information, to the assigned to the Dignitary Protection a court, administrative tribunal, or other extent deemed necessary and Detail are maintained until such time adjudicative body when: (a) The IRS or appropriate for use in announcements to that the individual or group no longer any component thereof; (b) any IRS the general public that the IRS or the poses a threat. Other records are employee in his or her official capacity; Department of the Treasury seeks to retained and disposed of in accordance (c) any IRS employee in his or her locate, detain, or arrest specified with the record control schedules personal capacity if the IRS or the DOJ individuals in connection with criminal applicable to the records of Criminal has agreed to provide representation for activity under CI’s investigative Investigation, IRM 1.15.30. the employee; or (d) the United States jurisdiction. is a party to, has an interest in, or is SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: (12) Disclose information to likely to be affected by, the proceeding, Chief, Criminal Investigation. (See the appropriate agencies, entities, and and the IRS or the DOJ determines that Appendix published in the Federal persons when (a) the IRS suspects or has the information is relevant and Register on August 10, 2012, for confirmed that the security or necessary. Information may be disclosed address.) confidentiality of information in the to the adjudicative body to resolve system of records has been NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: issues of relevancy, necessity, or compromised; (b) the IRS has Individuals seeking notification of privilege pertaining to the information. and access to any record contained in (3) Disclose information to Federal, determined that as a result of the this system of records, or seeking to State, local, tribal, and foreign law suspected or confirmed compromise contest its content, may inquire in enforcement and regulatory agencies there is a risk of harm to economic or writing in accordance with instructions regarding violations or possible property interests, identity theft or appearing at 31 CFR part 1, subpart C, violations of Bank Secrecy Act, money fraud, or harm to the security or Appendix B. Written inquiries should laundering, tax, and other financial laws integrity of this system or other systems be addressed as stated in the Appendix when relevant and necessary to obtain or programs (whether maintained by the published in the Federal Register on information for an investigation or IRS or another agency or entity) that rely August 10, 2012. This system of records enforcement activity. upon the compromised information; and (4) Disclose information to a Federal, (c) the disclosure made to such contains records that are exempt from State, local, or tribal agency, or other agencies, entities, and persons is the notification, access, and contest public authority responsible for reasonably necessary to assist in requirements pursuant to 5 U.S.C. implementing, enforcing, investigating, connection with IRS efforts to respond 552a(j)(2). to the suspected or confirmed or prosecuting the violation of a statute, RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: compromise and to prevent, minimize, rule, regulation, order, or license, when See ‘‘Notification Procedure’’ above. a record on its face, or in conjunction or remedy such harm. with other records, indicates a potential CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, See ‘‘Notification Procedure’’ above. violation of law or regulation and the RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND information disclosed is relevant to any DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 26 U.S.C. 7852(e) prohibits Privacy Act regulatory, enforcement, investigative, amendment of tax records. STORAGE: or prosecutorial responsibility of the RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: receiving authority. Paper records and electronic media. (5) Disclose information to a This system of records contains investigatory material compiled for law contractor hired by the IRS, including RETRIEVABILITY: an expert witness or a consultant, to the enforcement purposes whose sources By name, address, taxpayer extent necessary for the performance of need not be reported. identification number, or telephone, a contract. passport, financial account, driver or EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: (6) Disclose information to third professional license, or criminal record Records in this system are exempt parties during the course of an numbers, or other identifying detail from sections (c)(3)–(4), (d)(1)–(4), investigation to the extent necessary to contained in the investigative records, (e)(1)–(3), (e)(4)(G)–(I), (e)(5), (e)(8), (f), obtain information pertinent to the including financial information, and (g) of the Privacy Act, pursuant to investigation. 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2). (See 31 CFR 1.36.) (7) Disclose information to officials of geographical location/travel labor organizations recognized under 5 information, surveillance records, Treasury/IRS 46.003 U.S.C. Chapter 71 when relevant and communication and contact SYSTEM NAME: necessary to their duties of exclusive information, or biographical data of the representation. subject or an associate of the subject, a Confidential Informant Records, (8) Disclose information to foreign witness, or a victim of alleged identity Criminal Investigation—Treasury/IRS. theft or other fraudulent refund or tax governments in accordance with SYSTEM LOCATION: international agreements. scheme; identity of the individual(s) who provided information; name or Headquarters and Field offices. (See (9) Disclose information to the news the Appendix published in the Federal media as described in IRS Policy employee number of assigned employee(s). Register on August 10, 2012, for Statement 11–94 (formerly P–1–183), addresses.) News Coverage to Advance Deterrent SAFEGUARDS: Value of Enforcement Activities CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE Encouraged, IRM 1.2.19.1.9. Access controls are not less than those SYSTEM: (10) Disclose information to a published in IRM 10.2, Physical Current and former confidential defendant in a criminal prosecution, the Security Program, and IRM 10.8, informants; subjects of confidential DOJ, or a court of competent jurisdiction Information Technology (IT) Security. informants’ reports.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13092 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: to the adjudicative body to resolve IRS or another agency or entity) that rely Information about current and former issues of relevancy, necessity, or upon the compromised information; and confidential informants, including their privilege pertaining to the information. (c) the disclosure made to such personal and financial information and (3) Disclose information to Federal, agencies, entities, and persons is investigative activities with which each State, local, tribal, and foreign law reasonably necessary to assist in confidential informant is connected. enforcement and regulatory agencies connection with IRS efforts to respond regarding violations or possible to the suspected or confirmed AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: violations of Bank Secrecy Act, money compromise and to prevent, minimize, 5 U.S.C. 301; 26 U.S.C. 7801 and laundering, tax, and other financial laws or remedy such harm. 7803; 31 U.S.C. 5311 et seq.; Department when relevant and necessary to obtain of the Treasury delegation orders and information for an investigation or POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND directives authorizing CI to conduct enforcement activity. DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: investigations into specified non-tax (4) Disclose information to a Federal, Paper records and electronic media crimes. State, local, or tribal agency, or other public authority responsible for RETRIEVABILITY: PURPOSE(S): implementing, enforcing, investigating, By confidential informant’s name, To maintain a file of the identities and or prosecuting the violation of a statute, address, or taxpayer identification background material of current and rule, regulation, order, or license, when number; investigation number; or other former confidential informants. a record on its face, or in conjunction identifying detail (such as telephone, with other records, indicates a potential ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE driver’s license, passport, or financial SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND violation of law or regulation and the account numbers); name of the subject THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: information disclosed is relevant to any or other persons identified in the regulatory, enforcement, investigative, Disclosure of returns and return confidential informant’s report or or prosecutorial responsibility of the information may be made only as memoranda; name or employee number receiving authority. provided in 26 U.S.C. 6103. Material of assigned employee(s). (5) Disclose information to a covered by rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules contractor hired by the IRS, including SAFEGUARDS: of Criminal Procedure may be disclosed an expert witness or a consultant, to the Access controls are not less than those only as permitted by that rule. extent necessary for the performance of published in IRM 10.2, Physical Disclosure of information covered by 31 a contract. Security Program, and IRM 10.8, U.S.C. 5311, et seq. or 12 U.S.C. 1951, (6) Disclose information to third Information Technology (IT) Security. et seq. (Bank Secrecy Act) may be made parties during the course of an RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: only as provided by Title 31, U.S.C., and investigation to the extent necessary to Records are retained and disposed of Treasury guidelines. Other records may obtain information pertinent to the in accordance with the record control be used as described below if the IRS investigation. deems that the purpose of the disclosure (7) Disclose information to officials of schedules applicable to the records of is compatible with the purpose for labor organizations recognized under 5 Criminal Investigation, IRM 1.15.30. which the IRS collected the records and U.S.C. Chapter 71 when relevant and SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: no privilege is asserted. necessary to their duties of exclusive Chief, Criminal Investigation. (See the (1) Disclose information to the representation. Appendix published in the Federal Department of Justice (DOJ) when (8) Disclose information to foreign Register on August 10, 2012, for seeking legal advice, or for use in any governments in accordance with address.) proceeding, or in preparation for any international agreements. proceeding, when: (a) The IRS or any (9) Disclose information to the news NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: component thereof; (b) any IRS media as described in the IRS Policy Individuals seeking notification of employee in his or her official capacity; Statement 11–94 (formerly P–1–183), and access to any records contained in (c) any IRS employee in his or her News Coverage to Advance Deterrent this system of records, or seeking to individual capacity if the IRS or the DOJ Value of Enforcement Activities contest its content, may inquire in has agreed to provide representation for Encouraged, IRM 1.2.19.1.9. writing in accordance with instructions the employee; or (d) the United States (10) Disclose information to a appearing at 31 CFR part 1, subpart C, is a party to, has an interest in, or is defendant in a criminal prosecution, the Appendix B. Written inquiries should likely to be affected by the proceeding, DOJ, or a court of competent jurisdiction be addressed as stated in the Appendix and the IRS determines that the records when required in criminal discovery or published in the Federal Register on are relevant and useful. by the Due Process Clause of the August 10, 2012. This system of records (2) Disclose information in a Constitution. contains records that are exempt from proceeding (including discovery) before (11) Disclose information to the notification, access, and contest a court, administrative tribunal, or other appropriate agencies, entities, and requirements pursuant to 5 U.S.C. adjudicative body when: (a) The IRS or persons when (a) the IRS suspects or has 552a(j)(2). any component thereof; (b) any IRS confirmed that the security or employee in his or her official capacity; confidentiality of information in the RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: (c) any IRS employee in his or her system of records has been See ‘‘Notification Procedure’’ above. personal capacity if the IRS or the DOJ compromised; (b) the IRS has CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: has agreed to provide representation for determined that as a result of the See ‘‘Notification Procedure’’ above. the employee; or (d) the United States suspected or confirmed compromise 26 U.S.C. 7852(e) prohibits Privacy Act is a party to, has an interest in, or is there is a risk of harm to economic or amendment of tax records. likely to be affected by, the proceeding, property interests, identity theft or and the IRS or the DOJ determines that fraud, or harm to the security or RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: the information is relevant and integrity of this system or other systems This system of records contains necessary. Information may be disclosed or programs (whether maintained by the investigatory material compiled for law

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13093

enforcement purposes whose sources be used as described below if the IRS obtain information pertinent to the need not be reported. deems that the purpose of the disclosure investigation. is compatible with the purpose for (7) Disclose information to officials of EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: which the IRS collected the records and labor organizations recognized under 5 Records in this system are exempt no privilege is asserted. U.S.C. Chapter 71 when relevant and from sections (c)(3)–(4), (d)(1)–(4), (1) Disclose information to the necessary to their duties of exclusive (e)(1)–(3), (e)(4)(G)–(I), (e)(5), (e)(8), (f), Department of Justice (DOJ) when representation. and (g) of the Privacy Act, pursuant to seeking legal advice, or for use in any (8) Disclose information to foreign 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2). (See 31 CFR 1.36.) proceeding, or in preparation for any governments in accordance with TREASURY/IRS 46.005 proceeding, when: (a) The IRS or any international agreements. component thereof; (b) any IRS (9) Disclose information to the news SYSTEM NAME: employee in his or her official capacity; media as described in the IRS Policy Electronic Surveillance and (c) any IRS employee in his or her Statement 11–94 (formerly P–1–183), Monitoring Records, Criminal individual capacity if the IRS or the DOJ News Coverage to Advance Deterrent Investigation—Treasury/IRS. has agreed to provide representation for Value of Enforcement Activities the employee; or (d) the United States Encouraged, IRM 1.2.19.1.9. SYSTEM LOCATION: is a party to, has an interest in, or is (10) Disclose information to a Headquarters office. (See the likely to be affected by the proceeding, defendant in a criminal prosecution, the Appendix published in the Federal and the IRS determines that the records DOJ, or a court of competent jurisdiction Register on August 10, 2012, for are relevant and useful. when required in criminal discovery or address.) (2) Disclose information in a by the Due Process Clause of the CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE proceeding (including discovery) before Constitution. SYSTEM: a court, administrative tribunal, or other (11) Disclose information to appropriate agencies, entities, and Subjects of electronic surveillance, adjudicative body when: (a) The IRS or persons when (a) the IRS suspects or has including associates identified by the any component thereof; (b) any IRS confirmed that the security or surveillance or otherwise. employee in his or her official capacity; (c) any IRS employee in his or her confidentiality of information in the CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: personal capacity if the IRS or the DOJ system of records has been Information received or developed has agreed to provide representation for compromised; (b) the IRS has during CI’s investigative activities the employee; or (d) the United States determined that as a result of the relating to authorized electronic is a party to, has an interest in, or is suspected or confirmed compromise surveillance activities; investigative likely to be affected by, the proceeding, there is a risk of harm to economic or reports and files regarding electronic and the IRS or the DOJ determines that property interests, identity theft or surveillance conducted by CI the information is relevant and fraud, or harm to the security or independently or in conjunction with necessary. Information may be disclosed integrity of this system or other systems other Federal, state, local, or foreign law to the adjudicative body to resolve or programs (whether maintained by the enforcement, or intelligence agencies. issues of relevancy, necessity, or IRS or another agency or entity) that rely privilege pertaining to the information. upon the compromised information; and AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: (3) Disclose information to Federal, (c) the disclosure made to such 5 U.S.C. 301; 26 U.S.C. 7801 and State, local, tribal, and foreign law agencies, entities, and persons is 7803; 31 U.S.C. 5311 et seq.; Department enforcement and regulatory agencies reasonably necessary to assist in of Treasury Delegation Orders and regarding violations or possible connection with IRS efforts to respond Directives authorizing CI to conduct violations of Bank Secrecy Act, money to the suspected or confirmed investigations into specified non-tax laundering, tax, and other financial laws compromise and to prevent, minimize, crimes. when relevant and necessary to obtain or remedy such harm. information for an investigation or PURPOSE: POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, enforcement activity. To maintain, analyze, and process RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND (4) Disclose information to a Federal, sensitive investigative data obtained DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: State, local, or tribal agency, or other through authorized electronic Paper records and electronic media. public authority responsible for surveillance that identifies or may implementing, enforcing, investigating, RETRIEVABILITY: identify criminal noncompliance with or prosecuting the violation of a statute, Federal tax law or other laws delegated By name, address, taxpayer rule, regulation, order, or license, when to CI for enforcement. identification number, or other a record on its face, or in conjunction identifying detail (telephone, driver’s ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE with other records, indicates a potential license, passport, criminal record, or SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND violation of law or regulation and the financial account numbers) of the THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: information disclosed is relevant to any subject or an associate of the subject; Disclosure of returns and return regulatory, enforcement, investigative, investigation number; address, information may be made only as or prosecutorial responsibility of the telephone number, or other locational provided in 26 U.S.C. 6103. Material receiving authority. criteria of the person or location under covered by rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules (5) Disclose information to a surveillance; name or employee number of Criminal Procedure may be disclosed contractor hired by the IRS, including of assigned employee(s). only as permitted by that rule. an expert witness or a consultant, to the Disclosure of information covered by 31 extent necessary for the performance of SAFEGUARDS: U.S.C. 5311, et seq. or 12 U.S.C. 1951, a contract. Access controls are not less than those et seq. (Bank Secrecy Act) may be made (6) Disclose information to third published in IRM 10.2, Physical only as provided by Title 31, U.S.C., and parties during the course of an Security Program, and IRM 10.8, Treasury guidelines. Other records may investigation to the extent necessary to Information Technology (IT) Security.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13094 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: security program, including reasons for the employee; or (d) the United States Records are retained and disposed of recommendation and status of the is a party to, has an interest in, or is in accordance with the record control recommendation (pending, accepted, likely to be affected by, the proceeding, schedules applicable to the records of denied). Records include information and the IRS or the DOJ determines that Criminal Investigation, IRM 1.15.30. about individuals denied acceptance the information is relevant and (including reasons for denial) and necessary. Information may be disclosed SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: individuals accepted and the relocation to the adjudicative body to resolve Chief, Criminal Investigation. (See the and other services provided or offered to issues of relevancy, necessity, or Appendix published in the Federal these individuals. privilege pertaining to the information. Register on August 10, 2012, for (3) Disclose information to Federal, address.) AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: State, local, tribal, and foreign law 5 U.S.C. 301; 26 U.S.C. 7801 and enforcement and regulatory agencies NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: 7803; 31 U.S.C. 5311 et seq.; Department regarding violations or possible Individuals seeking notification and of the Treasury Delegation Orders and violations of Bank Secrecy Act, money access to any record contained in this Directives authorizing CI to conduct laundering, tax, and other financial laws system of records, or seeking to contest investigations into specified non-tax when relevant and necessary to obtain its content, may inquire in writing in crimes. information for an investigation or accordance with instructions appearing enforcement activity. at 31 CFR part 1, subpart C, Appendix PURPOSE: (4) Disclose information to a Federal, B. Written inquiries should be To maintain information on State, local, or tribal agency, or other addressed as stated in the Appendix individuals who are recommended by public authority responsible for published in the Federal Register on IRS for placement in the Federal witness implementing, enforcing, investigating, August 10, 2012. This system of records security program. Records are used to or prosecuting the violation of a statute, contains records that are exempt from ensure that appropriate services are rule, regulation, order, or license, when the notification, access, and contest provided to each individual. a record on its face, or in conjunction requirements pursuant to 5 U.S.C. with other records, indicates a potential 552a(j)(2). ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND violation of law or regulation and the information disclosed is relevant to any RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: regulatory, enforcement, investigative, See ‘‘Notification Procedure’’ above. Disclosure of returns and return information may be made only as or prosecutorial responsibility of the CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: provided in 26 U.S.C. 6103. Material receiving authority. (5) Disclose information to a See ‘‘Notification Procedure’’ above. covered by rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules contractor hired by the IRS, including 26 U.S.C. 7852(e) prohibits Privacy Act of Criminal Procedure may be disclosed an expert witness or a consultant, to the amendment of tax records. only as permitted by that rule. extent necessary for the performance of Disclosure of information covered by 31 RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: a contract. U.S.C. 5311, et seq. or 12 U.S.C. 1951, (6) Disclose information to third This system of records contains et seq. (Bank Secrecy Act) may be made investigatory material compiled for law parties during the course of an only as provided by Title 31, U.S.C., and investigation to the extent necessary to enforcement purposes whose sources Treasury guidelines. Other records may need not be reported. obtain information pertinent to the be used as described below if the IRS investigation. EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: deems that the purpose of the disclosure (7) Disclose information to officials of Records in this system are exempt is compatible with the purpose for labor organizations recognized under 5 from sections (c)(3)–(4), (d)(1)–(4), which the IRS collected the records and U.S.C. Chapter 71 when relevant and (e)(1)–(3), (e)(4)(G)–(I), (e)(5), (e)(8), (f), no privilege is asserted. necessary to their duties of exclusive and (g) of the Privacy Act, pursuant to (1) Disclose information to the representation. 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2). (See 31 CFR 1.36.) Department of Justice (DOJ) when (8) Disclose information to foreign seeking legal advice, or for use in any governments in accordance with TREASURY/IRS 46.015 proceeding, or in preparation for any international agreements. proceeding, when: (a) The IRS or any (9) Disclose information to the news SYSTEM NAME: component thereof; (b) any IRS media as described in the IRS Policy Relocated Witness Records, Criminal employee in his or her official capacity; Statement 11–94 (formerly P–1–183), Investigation—Treasury/IRS. (c) any IRS employee in his or her News Coverage To Advance Deterrent SYSTEM LOCATION: individual capacity if the IRS or the DOJ Value of Enforcement Activities has agreed to provide representation for Headquarters office. (See the Encouraged, IRM 1.2.19.1.9. the employee; or (d) the United States (10) Disclose information to a Appendix published in the Federal is a party to, has an interest in, or is defendant in a criminal prosecution, the Register on August 10, 2012, for likely to be affected by the proceeding, DOJ, or a court of competent jurisdiction address.) and the IRS determines that the records when required in criminal discovery or CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE are relevant and useful. by the Due Process Clause of the SYSTEM: (2) Disclose information in a Constitution. Individuals who are recommended by proceeding (including discovery) before (11) Disclose information to IRS for placement in the Federal witness a court, administrative tribunal, or other appropriate agencies, entities, and security program. adjudicative body when: (a) the IRS or persons when (a) the IRS suspects or has any component thereof; (b) any IRS confirmed that the security or CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: employee in his or her official capacity; confidentiality of information in the Personal information about (c) any IRS employee in his or her system of records has been individuals recommended by IRS for personal capacity if the IRS or the DOJ compromised; (b) the IRS has placement in the Federal witness has agreed to provide representation for determined that as a result of the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13095

suspected or confirmed compromise CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: Services Business; and other forms there is a risk of harm to economic or See ‘‘Notification Procedure’’ above. required by the Bank Secrecy Act property interests, identity theft or 26 U.S.C. 7852(e) prohibits Privacy Act (FinCEN .003). fraud, or harm to the security or amendment of tax records. integrity of this system or other systems AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: or programs (whether maintained by the RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: 5 U.S.C. 301; 26 U.S.C. 7801 and IRS or another agency or entity) that rely This system of records contains 7803; 31 U.S.C. 5311 et seq.; Department upon the compromised information; and investigatory material compiled for law of the Treasury Delegation Orders and (c) the disclosure made to such enforcement purposes whose sources Directives authorizing CI to conduct agencies, entities, and persons is need not be reported. investigations into specified non-tax reasonably necessary to assist in crimes. EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: connection with IRS efforts to respond PURPOSE: to the suspected or confirmed Records in this system are exempt compromise and prevent, minimize, or from sections (c)(3)–(4), (d)(1)–(4), To maintain, analyze, and process remedy such harm. (e)(1)–(3), (e)(4)(G)–(I), (e)(5), (e)(8), (f), records and information that may and (g) of the Privacy Act, pursuant to identify patterns of financial POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2). (See 31 CFR 1.36.) transactions indicative of criminal and/ RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, AND DISPOSING OF or civil noncompliance with tax, money RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: TREASURY/IRS 46.050 laundering, Bank Secrecy Act, and other STORAGE: SYSTEM NAME: financial laws and regulations delegated Paper records and electronic media. Automated Information Analysis and to CI for investigation or enforcement, Recordkeeping, Criminal Investigation— and that identifies or may identify the RETRIEVABILITY: Treasury/IRS. individuals connected to such activity. By the name, address, taxpayer To establish linkages between identification number, or other SYSTEM LOCATION: fraudulent transactions or other identifying detail (such as telephone, Headquarters, Field, Campus, and activities, and the individuals involved driver’s license, passport, or financial Computing Center offices. (See the in such actions, that may be used to account numbers); investigation number Appendix published in the Federal further investigate such activity and to pertaining to the individual whom CI Register on August 10, 2012, for perfect filters that identify information recommends enter the Federal witness addresses.) pertaining to such activity. protection program; the identity of the person against whom that individual CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND testified. SYSTEM: Individuals involved in financial THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: SAFEGUARDS: transactions that require the reporting of Disclosure of returns and return Access controls are not less than those information reflected in the ‘Categories information may be made only as published in IMR 10.2, Physical of Records’ below. provided in 26 U.S.C. 6103. Material Security Program, and IRM 10.8, covered by rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules Information Technology (IT) Security. CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: of Criminal Procedure may be disclosed Financial records pertaining to only as permitted by that rule. RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: transactions with reporting Disclosure of information covered by 31 Records are retained and disposed of requirements under the Internal U.S.C. 5311, et seq. or 12 U.S.C. 1951, in accordance with the record control Revenue Code, the Bank Secrecy Act, or et seq. (Bank Secrecy Act) may be made schedules applicable to the records of other Federal law, and reports of only as provided by Title 31, U.S.C., and Criminal Investigation, IRM 1.15.30. suspicious activity pertaining to such Treasury guidelines. Other records may SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: transactions. Such transactions include be used as described below if the IRS international transportation of currency deems that the purpose of the disclosure Chief, Criminal Investigation. (See the or monetary instruments, cash payments is compatible with the purpose for Appendix published in the Federal over $10,000 received in a trade or which the IRS collected the records and Register on August 10, 2012, for business, financial institution currency no privilege is asserted. address.) transaction reports, registrations of (1) Disclose information to the NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: money services businesses, and Department of Justice (DOJ) when Individuals seeking notification of maintenance of accounts in banks or seeking legal advice, or for use in any and access to any record contained in other financial institutions outside the proceeding, or in preparation for any this system of records, or seeking to U.S. Some records in this system are proceeding, when: (a) The IRS or any contest its content, may inquire in copied from other systems of records, component thereof; (b) any IRS writing in accordance with instructions including: Individual Master File employee in his or her official capacity; appearing at 31 CFR part 1, subpart C, (Treasury/IRS 24.030); Business Master (c) any IRS employee in his or her Appendix B. Written inquiries should File (Treasury/IRS 24.046); Currency individual capacity if the IRS or the DOJ be addressed as stated in the Appendix Transaction Reports (CTRs) (FinCEN has agreed to provide representation for published in the Federal Register on .003); Report of International the employee; or (d) the United States August 10, 2012. This system of records Transportation of Currency or Monetary is a party to, has an interest in, or is contains records that are exempt from Instruments (CMIRs) (FinCEN .003); likely to be affected by the proceeding, the notification, access, and contest Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) and the IRS determines that the records requirements pursuant to 5 U.S.C. (FinCEN .002); Foreign Bank and are relevant and useful. 552a(j)(2). Financial Accounts (FBARs) (FinCEN (2) Disclose information in a .003); Reports of Cash Payments over proceeding (including discovery) before RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: $10,000 Received in a Trade or Business a court, administrative tribunal, or other See ‘‘Notification Procedure’’ above. (FinCEN .003); Registration of Money adjudicative body when: (a) The IRS or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 13096 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices

any component thereof; (b) any IRS confirmed that the security or contains records that are exempt from employee in his or her official capacity; confidentiality of information in the the notification, access, and contest (c) any IRS employee in his or her system of records has been requirements pursuant to 5 U.S.C. personal capacity if the IRS or the DOJ compromised; (b) the IRS has 552a(j)(2) and (k)(2). has agreed to provide representation for determined that as a result of the the employee; or (d) the United States suspected or confirmed compromise RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: is a party to, has an interest in, or is there is a risk of harm to economic or See ‘‘Notification Procedure’’ above. likely to be affected by, the proceeding, property interests, identity theft or CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: and the IRS or the DOJ determines that fraud, or harm to the security or the information is relevant and integrity of this system or other systems See ‘‘Notification Procedure’’ above. necessary. Information may be disclosed or programs (whether maintained by the 26 U.S.C. 7852(e) prohibits Privacy Act to the adjudicative body to resolve IRS or another agency or entity) that rely amendment of tax records. issues of relevancy, necessity, or upon the compromised information; and RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: privilege pertaining to the information. (c) the disclosure made to such (3) Disclose information to Federal, This system of records contains agencies, entities, and persons is investigatory material compiled for law State, local, tribal, and foreign law reasonably necessary to assist in enforcement and regulatory agencies enforcement purposes whose sources connection with IRS efforts to respond need not be reported. regarding violations or possible to the suspected or confirmed violations of Bank Secrecy Act, money compromise and to prevent, minimize, EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: laundering, tax, and other financial laws or remedy such harm. Records in this system are exempt when relevant and necessary to obtain POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, from sections (c)(3)–(4), (d)(1)–(4), information for an investigation or (e)(1)–(3), (e)(4)(G)–(I), (e)(5), (e)(8), (f), enforcement activity. RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: and (g) of the Privacy Act, pursuant to (4) Disclose information to a Federal, 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) and (k)(2). See 31 STORAGE: State, local, or tribal agency, or other CFR 1.36.) public authority responsible for Paper records and electronic media. [FR Doc. 2014–04947 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] implementing, enforcing, investigating, BILLING CODE 4830–01–P or prosecuting the violation of a statute, RETRIEVABILITY: rule, regulation, order, or license, when By name, address, taxpayer a record on its face, or in conjunction identification number, or other with other records, indicates a potential identifying detail (such as telephone, DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS violation of law or regulation and the driver license, passport, criminal record, AFFAIRS information disclosed is relevant to any financial account, or professional [OMB Control No. 2900–NEW] regulatory, enforcement, investigative, license numbers) of the subject or an or prosecutorial responsibility of the associate of the subject, a witness, or a Proposed Information Collection receiving authority. victim of alleged identity theft or other (Bowel and Bladder Care Billing Form) (5) Disclose information to a fraudulent refund or tax scheme; Activity; Comment Request; contractor hired by the IRS, including identity of the individual who provided Withdrawal an expert witness or a consultant, to the information; name or employee number extent necessary for the performance of of the assigned employee(s). AGENCY: Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans a contract. SAFEGUARDS: (6) Disclose information to third Affairs. parties during the course of an Access controls are not less than those ACTION: Notice; withdrawal of request investigation to the extent necessary to published in IRM 10.2, Physical for comments. obtain information pertinent to the Security Program, and IRM 10.8, investigation. Information Technology (IT) Security. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 (7) Disclose information to officials of RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: labor organizations recognized under 5 U.S.C. 3501–3521), the Department of Records are retained and disposed of Veterans Affairs (VA) published a U.S.C. Chapter 71 when relevant and in accordance with the record control necessary to their duties of exclusive collection of information notice in the schedules applicable to the records of Federal Register on January 17, 2014, at representation. Criminal Investigation, IRM 1.15.30. (8) Disclose information to foreign 79 FR 3276, announcing an opportunity governments in accordance with SYSTEM MANAGER AND ADDRESS: for public comment on the proposed international agreements. Chief, Criminal Investigation. (See the collection of certain information by the (9) Disclose information to the news Appendix published in the Federal agency. The notice solicited comments media as described in the IRS Policy Register on August 10, 2012, for on information required for National Statement 11–94 (formerly P–1–183), address.) Non-VA Medical Care Program Office to News Coverage to Advance Deterrent pay eligible caregivers for time spent Value of Enforcement Activities NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: providing eligible Veterans with Encouraged, IRM 1.2.19.1.9. Individuals seeking notification of specifically defined services such as: (10) Disclose information to a and access to any record contained in bowel and bladder care, showering, defendant in a criminal prosecution, the this system of records, or seeking to shaving, brushing teeth, dressing, DOJ, or a court of competent jurisdiction contest its content, may inquire in transferring to wheelchair, when required in criminal discovery or writing in accordance with instructions catheterization, undressing, transferring by the Due Process Clause of the appearing at 31 CFR part 1, subpart C, to bed, putting away clothes, etc. With Constitution. Appendix B. Written inquiries should respect to the collection of information (11) Disclose information to be addressed as stated in the Appendix in that notice, we are withdrawing our appropriate agencies, entities, and published in the Federal Register on request for comments because of persons when (a) the IRS suspects or has August 10, 2012. This system of records implementation constraints in the use of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Notices 13097

the form limiting the ability to By direction of the Secretary. Committee Act) that the meeting of the operationalize at this time. Crystal Rennie, Advisory Committee on Disability This document withdraws the Notices Department Clearance Officer, U.S. Compensation scheduled to be held at at 78 FR 52824 (August 26, 2013) and Department of Veterans Affairs. VA Central Office, 810 Vermont Avenue 79 FR 3276 (January 17, 2014). [FR Doc. 2014–04967 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] NW., Washington, DC on March 3–4, BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 2014 has been cancelled. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For more information, please contact Crystal Rennie, Records Management Ms. Nancy Copeland, Designated Service (005R1B), Department of DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS Federal Officer at (202) 461–9684. Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue AFFAIRS NW., Washington, DC 20420, at (202) Dated: March 3, 2014. Advisory Committee on Disability 632–7492. Jelessa Burney, Compensation, Notice of Meeting Committee Management Officer. Dated: March 4, 2014. The Department of Veterans Affairs [FR Doc. 2014–04943 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] gives notice under 92 (Federal Advisory BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM 07MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Vol. 79 Friday, No. 45 March 7, 2014

Part II

Department of Homeland Security

6 CFR Part 115 Standards To Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Sexual Abuse and Assault in Confinement Facilities; Final Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13100 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND NAICS North American Industry DHS is committed to preventing, SECURITY Classification System detecting, and responding to sexual NDS National Detention Standards abuse in facilities used to detain 6 CFR Part 115 NPREC National Prison Rape Elimination individuals for civil immigration Commission [ICEB–2012–0003] NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking purposes. Sexual abuse is not an ODO ICE Office of Detention Oversight inevitable feature of detention, and with RIN 1653–AA65 OIG DHS Office of the Inspector General DHS’s strong commitment, DHS OMB Office of Management and Budget immigration detention and holding Standards To Prevent, Detect, and OPR ICE Office of Professional facilities have a culture that promotes Respond to Sexual Abuse and Assault Responsibility safety and refuses to tolerate abuse. DHS in Confinement Facilities ORR HHS Office of Refugee Resettlement is fully committed to its zero-tolerance PBNDS Performance Based National AGENCY: Department of Homeland Detention Standards policy against sexual abuse in its Security. PRA Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 confinement facilities, and these ACTION: Final rule. PREA Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 standards will strengthen that policy PSA Prevention of Sexual Assault across DHS confinement facilities. DHS SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland QAT Quality Assurance Team is also fully committed to the full Security (DHS) is issuing regulations RCA Risk Classification Assessment implementation of the standards in DHS setting standards to prevent, detect, and RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act confinement facilities, and to robust RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis respond to sexual abuse and assault in oversight of these facilities to ensure SAAPID Sexual Abuse and Assault this implementation. DHS confinement facilities. Prevention and Intervention Directive DATES: This rule is effective May 6, SAFE Sexual Assault Forensic Examiner The standards build on current U.S. 2014. SANE Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner Immigration and Customs Enforcement SBA Small Business Administration FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (ICE) Performance Based National SIJ Special Immigrant Juvenile Detention Standards (PBNDS) and other Alexander Y. Hartman, Office of Policy; SPC Service Processing Center U.S. Immigration and Customs DHS detention policies. The standards TVPRA Trafficking Victims Protection also respond to the President’s May 17, Enforcement, Department of Homeland Reauthorization Act Security; Potomac Center North, 500 UMRA Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 2012 Memorandum, ‘‘Implementing the 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20536; 1995 Prison Rape Elimination Act,’’ which Telephone: (202) 732–4292 (not a toll- U.S.C. United States Code directs all agencies with Federal free number). USCIS U.S. Citizenship and Immigration confinement facilities to work with the Services Attorney General to create rules or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: USMS U.S. Marshals Service procedures setting standards to prevent, I. Abbreviations VAWA Reauthorization Violence Against detect, and respond to sexual abuse in Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 confinement facilities, and to the ANPRM Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking II. Executive Summary Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (VAWA ASR Administrative Stay of Removal A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action BJS Bureau of Justice Statistics Reauthorization), which directs DHS to BOP Bureau of Prisons The purpose of this regulatory action publish a final rule adopting national CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection is to set standards to prevent, detect, standards for the detection, prevention, CDF Contract Detention Facility and respond to sexual abuse in reduction, and punishment of rape and CFR Code of Federal Regulations Department of Homeland Security sexual assault in facilities that maintain CMD Custody Management Division (DHS) confinement facilities.1 Sexual custody of aliens detained for a CRCL DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil violence, against any victim, is an violation of U.S. immigrations laws. See Liberties assault on human dignity and an affront DHS Department of Homeland Security Public Law 113–4 (Mar. 7, 2013). DOJ Department of Justice to American values. Many victims report persistent, even lifelong mental B. Summary of the Provisions of the DSM Detention Service Manager Regulatory Action ERO ICE Enforcement and Removal and physical suffering. As the National Operations Prison Rape Elimination Commission The DHS provisions span eleven FOD ICE Field Office Director (NPREC) explained in its 2009 report: categories that were originally used by FR Federal Register Until recently . . . the public viewed FOJC ICE Field Office Juvenile Coordinator the NPREC to discuss and evaluate sexual abuse as an inevitable feature of FSA Flores v. Reno Settlement Agreement prison rape elimination standards: confinement. Even as courts and human HHS Department of Health and Human Prevention planning, responsive rights standards increasingly confirmed that Services planning, training and education, prisoners have the same fundamental rights HSI ICE Homeland Security Investigations assessment for risk of sexual to safety, dignity, and justice as individuals ICE U.S. Immigration and Customs living at liberty in the community, vulnerable victimization and abusiveness, Enforcement men, women, and children continued to be reporting, official response following a IGA Intergovernmental Agreement sexually victimized by other prisoners and detainee 3 report, investigations, IGSA Intergovernmental Service Agreement corrections staff. Tolerance of sexual abuse of discipline, medical and mental care, INA Immigration and Nationality Act prisoners in the government’s custody is IRFA Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis data collection and review, and audits totally incompatible with American values.2 IRIA Initial Regulatory Impact Analysis and compliance. Each provision under JIC Joint Intake Center these categories reflects the context of 1 LEP Limited English Proficient/Proficiency As discussed in greater detail below, in this final DHS confinement of individuals and LGBTI Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, rule, ‘‘sexual abuse’’ includes sexual abuse and assault of a detainee by another detainee, as well draws upon the particular experiences Intersex as sexual abuse and assault of a detainee by a staff LGBTIGNC Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, member, contractor, or volunteer. 3 For simplicity, all persons confined in DHS Transgender, Intersex, Gender Non- 2 National Prison Rape Elimination Commission immigration detention facilities and holding conforming Report 1 (2009), http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ facilities are referred to as ‘‘detainees’’ in this MOU Memorandum of Understanding 226680.pdf. rulemaking.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13101

and requirements DHS faces in fulfilling • DHS now requires immigration detention facilities, most of which are its missions. detention facilities to notify a regional governed by a contract with another For example, DHS has broken down ICE supervisor whenever a detainee entity, will likely be less, because it the standards to cover two distinct types victim has been held in administrative depends on the pace of contract of facilities: (1) Immigration detention segregation for longer than 72 hours. renewals and substantive modifications facilities, which are overseen by ICE and Upon receipt of such notification, the which are unlikely to be universally used for longer-term detention of aliens official must conduct a review of the completed in the first year after the rule in immigration proceedings or awaiting placement to consider whether is finalized. DHS has not endeavored in removal from the United States; and (2) placement is only as a last resort and the RIA to project the actual pace of holding facilities, which are used by ICE when no other viable housing options implementation. and U.S. Customs and Border Protection exist, and, in cases where the detainee With respect to benefits, DHS (CBP) for temporary administrative victim has been held in segregation for conducts what is known as a ‘‘break detention of individuals pending release longer than five days, whether the even analysis,’’ by first estimating the from custody or transfer to a court, jail, placement is justified by extraordinary monetary value of preventing various prison, other agency or other unit of the circumstances or is at the request of the types of sexual abuse (incidents facility or agency. detainee. In addition, the standards reflect the • DHS is now requiring immigration involving violence, inappropriate characteristics of the population detention facilities to complete sexual touching, or a range of other behaviors) encountered by DHS in carrying out its abuse incident reviews within 30 days and then, using those values, calculating border security and immigration of the completion of the investigation, the reduction in the annual number of enforcement missions by providing, for and is requiring that the review include victims that would need to occur for the example, language assistance services consideration of whether the incident or benefits of the rule to equal the cost of for limited English proficient (LEP) allegation was motivated by, among compliance. This analysis begins by detainees, safe detention of family units, other things, sexual orientation or estimating the recent levels of sexual and other provisions specific to DHS’s gender identity. abuse in covered facilities using data needs. A more detailed discussion of all • DHS is now requiring explicitly that from 2010, 2011, and 2012. In 2010, ICE of the provisions in the rulemaking is facilities keep data collected on sexual had four substantiated sexual abuse included below in Section V of this abuse and assault incidents in a secure allegations in immigration detention preamble, ‘‘Discussion of PREA location. facilities, two in 2011, and one in 2012. Standards,’’ including a section-by- • DHS is now requiring that the There were no substantiated allegations section analysis of the DHS rule. agency maintain sexual abuse data for at by individuals detained in a DHS In this final rule, DHS has modified least 10 years after the date of the initial holding facility. (This does not include the proposed regulatory text in multiple collection unless Federal, State, or local allegations involved in still-open areas, including the following: law requires otherwise. investigations or allegations outside the • In addition to implementing these DHS has also modified the regulatory scope of these regulations.) In the RIA, standards at both DHS facilities and at text and clarified its interpretation of DHS extrapolates the number of non-DHS facilities whenever there is a the rule in a number of ways, as substantiated and unsubstantiated new contract or contract renewal, DHS explained more fully below. allegations at immigration detention will also implement the standards at facilities based on the premise that there non-DHS facilities whenever there is a C. Costs and Benefits may be additional detainees who may substantive contract modification. The anticipated costs of full have experienced sexual abuse, but did • In addition to requiring that nationwide compliance with the rule as not report it. assessments for risk of victimization or well as the benefits of reducing the Next, DHS estimates how much abusiveness include an evaluation of prevalence of sexual abuse in DHS monetary benefit (to the victim and to whether the detainee has been immigration detention facilities and society) accrues from reducing the incarcerated previously, DHS is now holding facilities, are discussed at annual number of victims of sexual also requiring consideration of whether length in section VI, entitled ‘‘Statutory abuse. This is, of course, an imperfect the detainee has been detained and Regulatory Requirements— endeavor, given the inherent difficulty previously. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563’’ and in assigning a dollar figure to the cost • DHS now requires immigration in the accompanying Regulatory Impact of such an event. Executive Order 13563 detention facilities to notify a regional Analysis (RIA), which is found in the recognizes that some benefits and costs ICE supervisor no later than 72 hours docket for this rulemaking. are difficult to quantify, and directs after the initial placement into As shown in the Summary Table agencies to use the best available segregation whenever a detainee has below, DHS estimates that the full cost techniques to quantify benefits and been held in administrative segregation of compliance with these standards at costs. Executive Order 13563 also states on the basis of a vulnerability to sexual all covered DHS confinement facilities that agencies ‘‘may consider (and abuse or assault. Upon receipt of such would be approximately $57.4 million discuss qualitatively) values that are notification, the official must conduct a over the period 2013–2022, discounted difficult or impossible to quantify, review of the placement to consider at 7 percent, or $8.2 million per year including equity, human dignity, whether continued segregation is when annualized at a 7 percent discount fairness, and distributive impacts.’’ Each warranted, whether any less restrictive rate. This is the estimated cost of of these values is relevant here, housing or custodial alternatives may compliance if all facilities adopt and including human dignity, which is exist (such as placing the detainee in a implement the standards within the first offended by acts of sexual abuse. less restrictive housing option at year after the rule is finalized. This is an another facility or other appropriate accurate reflection of implementation of DHS uses the Department of Justice custodial options), and whether the these standards in holding facilities, (DOJ) estimates of unit avoidance values placement is only as a last resort and which are fully owned and operated by for sexual abuse, which DOJ when no other viable housing options DHS agencies. However, the annual cost extrapolated from the existing economic exist. for implementation at immigration and criminological literature regarding

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13102 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

rape in the community.4 The RIA from a potential reduction in sexual society resulting in unstable concludes that when all facilities and abuse in facilities, so too will DHS employment. Preventing these incidents costs are phased into the rulemaking, agencies and staff, other detainees, and will decrease the cost of health care, the breakeven point would be reached if society as a whole. As noted by spread of disease, and the amount of the standards reduced the annual Congress, sexual abuse increases the public assistance benefits required for number of incidents of sexual abuse by levels of violence within facilities. Both victims upon reentry into society, 122 from the estimated benchmark staff and other detainees will benefit whether such reentry is in the United levels, which is 147 percent of the total from a potential reduction in levels of States or a detainee’s home country. number of assumed incidents in ICE violence and other negative factors. 42 confinement facilities, including an U.S.C. 15601(14). This will improve the Chapter 3 of the RIA presents detailed estimated number of those who may not safety of the environment for other descriptions of the monetized benefits have reported an incident.5 detainees and workplace for facility and break-even results. The Summary There are additional benefits of the staff. In addition, long-term trauma from Table, below, presents a summary of the rule that DHS is unable to monetize or sexual abuse in confinement may benefits and costs of the final rule. The quantify. Not only will victims benefit diminish a victim’s ability to reenter costs are discounted at seven percent.

SUMMARY TABLE—ESTIMATED COSTS AND BENEFITS OF FINAL RULE [$Millions]

Immigration detention Holding facilities Total DHS PREA facilities rulemaking

10-Year Cost Annualized at 7% Discount Rate ...... $4.9 $3.3 $8.2 % Reduction of Sexual Abuse Victims to Break Even With Monetized Costs ... N/A N/A *147%

Non-monetized Benefits ...... An increase in the general wellbeing and morale of detainees and staff, the value of equity, human dignity, and fairness for detainees in DHS custody.

Net Benefits ...... As explained above, we did not estimate the number of incidents or victims of sexual abuse this rule would prevent. Instead, we conducted a breakeven analysis. Therefore, we did not estimate the net benefits of this rule. * For ICE confinement facilities.

III. Background charged the Attorney General, within recommends supplemental standards one year of NPREC issuing its report, to for facilities with immigration Rape is violent, destructive, and a ‘‘publish a final rule adopting national detainees. Id. at 219–220. Specifically, crime, no matter where it takes place. In standards for the detection, prevention, and of particular interest to DHS, the response to concerns related to incidents of rape of prisoners in Federal, reduction, and punishment of prison NPREC made eleven recommendations State, and local prisons and jails, as well rape . . . based upon the independent for supplemental standards for facilities as the lack of data available about such judgment of the Attorney General, after with immigration detainees and four incidents, the Prison Rape Elimination giving due consideration to the recommendations for supplemental Act (PREA) was enacted in September recommended national standards standards for family facilities. NPREC 2003. See Public Law 108–79 (Sept. 4, provided by [NPREC] . . . and being asserted that standards for facilities with 2003). Some of the key purposes of the informed by such data, opinions, and immigrant detainees must be enforced statute were to ‘‘develop and implement proposals that the Attorney General in any facility that is run by ICE or national standards for the detection, determines to be appropriate to through an ICE contract. consider.’’ 42 U.S.C. 15607(a)(1)–(2). prevention, reduction, and punishment A. Department of Justice Rulemaking of prison rape,’’ and to ‘‘increase the The NPREC released its findings and available data and information on the recommended national standards in a In response to the NPREC report, a incidence of prison rape.’’ 42 U.S.C. report (the NPREC report) dated June 23, DOJ PREA Working Group reviewed the 15602(3), (4). 2009. The report is available at http:// NPREC’s proposed standards to assist in To accomplish these ends, PREA www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/226680.pdf. In the rulemaking process. DOJ published established the National Prison Rape that report, NPREC set forth four sets of an advance notice of proposed Elimination Commission (NPREC) to recommended national standards for rulemaking (ANPRM) on March 10, conduct a ‘‘comprehensive legal and eliminating prison rape and other forms 2010 (75 FR 11077). Commenters on the factual study of the penalogical, of sexual abuse. Each set was applicable ANPRM generally supported the broad physical, mental, medical, social, and to one of four confinement settings: (1) goals of PREA and the overall intent of economic impacts of prison rape in the Adult prisons and jails; (2) lockups; (3) the NPREC’s recommendations, with United States,’’ and to recommend juvenile facilities; and (4) community some division over the merits of a national standards for the reduction of corrections facilities. NPREC report at number of the NPREC’s recommended prison rape. 42 U.S.C. 15606(d). PREA 215–235. The NPREC report national standards.

4 Department of Justice, National Standards to DOJ–OAG–2011–0002, available at includes all types of sexual abuse, including Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape, Final www.regulations.gov. offensive touching (for instance, during a pat-down Rule, Final Regulatory Impact Analysis, Docket No. 5 As discussed in Chapter 1, and shown in Table search), voyeurism, harassment, and verbal abuse. 17 of the RIA, the benchmark level of sexual abuse

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13103

DOJ then issued a notice of proposed department is accountable for, and has agencies with Federal confinement rulemaking (NPRM) on February 3, statutory authority to regulate, the facilities that are not already subject to 2011, setting forth proposed national operations of its own facilities and, the DOJ final rule, such as DHS, to work PREA standards. 76 FR 6248 (Feb. 3, therefore, is best positioned to with the Attorney General to propose 2011). In response to the NPRM, DOJ determine how to implement the rules or procedures that will satisfy the received over 1,300 comments that Federal laws and rules that govern its requirements of PREA. provided general assessments of DOJ’s own operations, the conduct of its own Additionally, on March 7, 2013, the efforts as well as specific and detailed employees, and the safety of persons in VAWA Reauthorization was enacted, recommendations regarding each its custody. 77 FR 37106, 37113. In which included a section addressing standard. Pertinent to DHS, there was particular, DOJ noted that DHS sexual abuse in custodial settings. See specific concern expressed by the possesses great knowledge and Public Law 113–4 (Mar. 7, 2013). commenters with respect to NPREC’s experience regarding the specific Among requirements addressing certain recommended supplemental standards characteristics of its immigration Federal agencies, the law directs DHS to for immigration detention number six, facilities, which differ in certain publish a final rule adopting national which proposed to mandate that respects from DOJ, State, and local standards for the detection, prevention, immigration detainees be housed facilities with regard to the manner in reduction, and punishment of rape and separately from criminal detainees. The which they are operated and the sexual assault in facilities that maintain DOJ NPRM noted that several comments composition of their populations. Thus, custody of aliens detained for a to the DOJ ANPRM raised a concern that and given each department’s various violation of U.S. immigrations laws. Id. this requirement would impose a statutory authorities to regulate The standards are to apply to DHS- significant burden on jails and prisons, conditions of detention, DOJ stated that operated detention facilities and to which often do not have the capacity to Federal departments with confinement detention facilities operated under house immigration detainees and facilities, like DHS, would work with contract with DHS, including contract criminal detainees separately. Id. The the Attorney General to issue rules or detention facilities (CDFs) and detention DOJ NPRM also noted DOJ’s concern procedures consistent with PREA. facilities operated through an about other proposed supplemental intergovernmental service agreement C. The Presidential Memorandum on standards, such as imposing separate (IGSA) with DHS. Id. The statute Implementing the Prison Rape training requirements and requiring requires that the DHS standards give Elimination Act and the Violence agencies to attempt to enter into due consideration to the recommended Against Women Reauthorization Act of separate memoranda of understanding national standards provided by NPREC. 2013 with immigration-specific community Id. service providers. Id. Furthermore, On May 17, 2012, the same day DOJ Sexual abuse in custodial comments to the DOJ NPRM addressed released its final rule, President Obama environments is a serious concern with whether the proposed standards should issued a Presidential Memorandum dire consequences for victims. DHS is cover immigration detention facilities, reiterating the goals of PREA and firmly committed to protecting prompting DOJ to examine the directing Federal agencies with detainees from all forms of sexual abuse. application of PREA to other Federal confinement facilities that are not By this regulation, DHS responds to and confinement facilities, which is already subject to the DOJ final rule to fulfills the President’s directive and the discussed further below. propose rules or procedures necessary requirements of the VAWA Following the public comment period to satisfy the requirements of PREA Reauthorization by creating for its NPRM, DOJ issued a final rule within 120 days of the Memorandum. In comprehensive, national regulations for setting a national framework of the Memorandum, the President firmly the detection, prevention, and reduction standards to prevent, detect, and establishes that sexual violence, against of sexual abuse at DHS immigration respond to prison rape at DOJ any victim, is an assault on human detention facilities and at DHS holding confinement facilities, as well as State dignity and an affront to American facilities that maintain custody of aliens prisons and local jails. 77 FR 37106 values, and that PREA established a detained for violating U.S. immigration (June 20, 2012). ‘‘zero-tolerance standard’’ for rape in laws. prisons in the United States. The D. DHS Proposed Rule and Public B. Application of PREA Standards to Memorandum further expresses the Comments Other Federal Confinement Facilities Administration’s conclusion that PREA DOJ’s NPRM interpreted PREA to encompasses all Federal confinement On December 19, 2012, DHS bind only facilities operated by the facilities, including those operated by published an NPRM entitled Standards Bureau of Prisons (BOP), and extended executive departments and agencies To Prevent, Detect, and Respond to the standards to U.S. Marshals Service other than DOJ, whether administered Sexual Abuse and Assault in (USMS) facilities under other by the Federal Government or by an Confinement Facilities; Proposed Rule. authorities of the Attorney General. 76 organization on behalf of the Federal 77 FR 75300. On January 2, 2013 DHS FR 6248, 6265. Numerous commenters Government, and that each agency is published an Initial Regulatory Impact criticized this interpretation of the responsible for, and must be Analysis (IRIA), which presented a statute. In light of those comments, DOJ accountable for, the operations of its comprehensive assessment of the re-examined whether PREA extends to own confinement facilities. The benefits and costs of DHS’s proposed Federal facilities beyond those operated President charged each agency, within standards in both quantitative and by DOJ and concluded that PREA does, the agency’s own expertise, to qualitative terms. The IRIA was in fact, encompass any Federal determine how to implement the summarized in the proposed rule and confinement facility ‘‘whether Federal laws and rules that govern its was published in full in the docket administered by [the] government or by own operations, but to ensure that all (ICEB–2012–003) on the regulations.gov a private organization on behalf of such agencies that operate confinement Web site. The public comment period government.’’ 42 U.S.C. 15609(7). facilities adopt high standards to on the NPRM originally was scheduled In its final rule, DOJ further prevent, detect, and respond to sexual to end on February 19, 2013. Due to concluded that, in general, each Federal abuse. The President directed all scheduled maintenance to the Federal

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13104 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

eRulemaking Portal, DHS extended the Section 115.5 defines an immigration detainees in immigration detention comment period by one week until detention facility as a ‘‘confinement facilities operated by non-DHS private February 26, 2013. 78 FR 8987. DHS facility operated by or pursuant to or public agencies or other entities, DHS received a total of 1,724 comments on contract with [ICE] that routinely holds component agencies include in any new the proposed rule. No public meeting persons for over 24 hours pending contracts, contract renewals, or was requested, and none was held. resolution or completion of immigration substantive contract modifications the Commenters included private removal operations or processes, obligation to adopt and comply with citizens, professional organizations, including facilities that are operated by these standards. (Covered substantive social service providers, and advocacy ICE, facilities that provide detention contract modifications would include, organizations concerned with issues services under a contract awarded by for example, changes to the bed/day rate involving detainee safety and rights, ICE, or facilities used by ICE pursuant or the implementation of stricter sexual violence, discrimination, and the to an Intergovernmental Service standards, but not the designation of a mental health of both the detainees and Agreement.’’ These facilities are new Contracting Officer.) In other the facility employees. In general, designed for long-term detention (more words, DHS intends to enforce the commenters supported the goals of than 24 hours) and house the largest standards though terms in its contracts PREA and DHS’s proposed rule. number of DHS detainees. ICE is the with facilities. However, some commenters, only DHS component agency with Section 115.5 defines a holding particularly advocacy groups concerned immigration detention facilities, and it facility similarly to DOJ’s definition of with protecting the health and safety of has several types of such facilities: ‘‘lockup.’’ A ‘‘holding facility’’ is a the detainees, expressed concern that Service processing center (SPC) facility that contains holding cells, cell the proposed rule did not go far enough facilities are ICE-owned facilities staffed blocks, or other secure enclosures that towards achieving the goals that PREA by a combination of Federal employees are: (1) Under the control of the agency; set forth. Some comments were outside and contract staff; CDFs are owned by and (2) primarily used for the short-term the scope of the proposed rule, and private companies and contracted confinement of individuals who have therefore have not been included in the directly with ICE; and detention recently been detained pending release DHS responses and changes in the final services at IGSA facilities are provided or transfer to or from a court, jail, rule below. DHS thanks the public for to ICE by States or local governments prison, or other agency. These facilities, its interest and participation. through agreements and may be owned which are operated by ICE, CBP, or other DHS components, are designed for Members of Congress and others have by the State or local government, or a 6 confinement that is short-term in nature, also expressed interest in this private entity. There are two types of but are permanent structures intended rulemaking. In describing the potential IGSA facilities: Dedicated IGSA primarily for the purpose of such positive impacts of the VAWA facilities, which house detained aliens confinement. Temporary-use hold Reauthorization, Senator Richard only, and non-dedicated (i.e., shared) IGSA facilities, which may house a rooms and other types of short-term Durbin—both a PREA and VAWA confinement areas not primarily used Reauthorization legislative co-sponsor— variety of detainees and inmates. The standards set forth in Subpart A for confinement are not amenable to referred to the importance of the bill’s compliance with these standards, but provision regarding implementation of of these proposed regulations are meant ultimately to apply to all of these are covered by other DHS policies and PREA standards by DHS. Specifically, procedures. We discuss the distinctions Senator Durbin applauded DHS’s various types of immigration detention facilities—but not, notably, to facilities between these facilities in more detail efforts, through its proposed rule, to later in this rule. implement rules consistent with PREA’s authorized for use by ICE pursuant to goals. 159 Cong. Rec. S503 (daily ed. agreements with BOP or pursuant to 1. ICE Detention Facilities Feb. 7, 2013) (statement of Sen. Durbin). agreements between DOJ and state or local governments or private entities As stated above, the NPREC report Senator Durbin noted that, ‘‘It was contained eleven recommended critical . . . to have a provision in this (e.g., USMS IGA facilities). Those facilities and their immigration standards for facilities with immigration VAWA Reauthorization that clarifies detainees and four recommended that standards to prevent custodial rape detainees are covered by the DOJ PREA standards and not the provisions within standards specifically addressing family must apply to immigration detainees— facilities. ICE oversees immigration all immigration detainees—a provision Subpart A of these proposed rules. These regulations do not apply to CDF detention facilities nationwide. The vast that codifies the good work DHS is now and IGSA facilities directly; rather, majority of facilities are operated doing and ensures strong regulations standards for these facilities will be through government contracts, State and pertaining to immigration will remain in phased in through new contracts, local entities, private entities, or other place in the future.’’ Id. DHS appreciates contract renewals, or substantive Federal agencies. ICE Enforcement and this strong statement of confidence in contract modifications. Specifically, the Removal Operations (ERO) is the DHS’s proposed rule, by a legislator regulations require that when program within ICE that manages ICE who advocated for the original PREA contracting for the confinement of operations related to the immigration legislation. detention system. When the public comment period 6 In the preamble of the proposed rule, DHS listed ERO is responsible for providing closed, DHS carefully reviewed each Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) facilities adequate and appropriate custody comment and deliberated internally on among the types of immigration detention facilities. management to support the immigration the revisions that the commenters Upon further review, DHS has determined that ICE removal process. This includes does not contract with state or local governments proposed. using IGAs, and therefore has no immigration providing traditional and alternative custody arrangements for those in E. Types of DHS Confinement Facilities detention facilities that qualify as IGAs (as opposed to IGSAs). As discussed in greater detail below, removal proceedings, providing aliens This rule applies to just two types of although ICE is an authorized user of USMS IGA access to legal resources and facilities, the facilities and their immigration confinement facilities: (1) Immigration detainees would be covered by the DOJ PREA representatives of advocacy groups, and detention facilities and (2) holding standards and not the provisions within Subpart A facilitating the appearance of detained facilities. of these proposed rules. aliens at immigration court hearings.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13105

Through various immigration detention strong safeguards against all sexual Sexual Abuse and Assault Prevention reform initiatives, ERO is committed to abuse of individuals within its custody, and Intervention standard. Excluding providing and maintaining appropriate consistent with the goals of PREA. those detainees who are held in DOJ- conditions of confinement, providing ICE’s PBNDS 2011 standard on contracted facilities (and are therefore required medical and mental healthcare, ‘‘Sexual Abuse and Assault Prevention covered by the DOJ rule), as of July 2013 housing detainees in the least restrictive and Intervention’’ was developed in approximately 94% of ICE detainees, on setting commensurate with their order to enhance protections for average, are housed in facilities that criminal background, ensuring immigration detainees as well as ensure have adopted a sexual abuse and assault appropriate conditions for all detainees, a swift and effective response to standard under PBNDS 2011, PBNDS employing fiscal accountability, allegations of sexual abuse. This 2008, or Family Residential Standards.9 increasing transparency, and standard derived in significant part from The 2012 ICE SAAPID complements strengthening critical oversight, earlier policies contained in ICE’s the requirements established by the including efforts to ensure compliance PBNDS 2008, promulgated in response detention standards by delineating ICE- with applicable detention standards to the passage of PREA, and took into wide policy and procedures and through inspection programs. consideration the subsequently released corresponding duties of employees for The ERO Custody Management recommendations of the NPREC reporting, responding to, investigating, Division (CMD) provides policy and (including those for facilities housing and monitoring incidents of sexual oversight for the administrative custody immigration detainees) in June 2009 and abuse. Regardless of the standards of immigration detainees, a highly ensuing draft standards later issued by applicable to a particular facility, ICE transient population and one of the DOJ in its ANPRM in March 2010. In personnel are required under this most diverse of any correctional or drafting the PBNDS 2011, ICE also Directive to ensure that the substantive detention system in the world. CMD’s incorporated the input of the DHS response requirements of PBNDS 2011 mission is to manage ICE detention Office for Civil Rights and Civil are met, and that incidents receive operations efficiently and effectively to Liberties (CRCL), local and national timely and coordinated agency follow- provide for the safety, security and care advocacy organizations, and up. In conjunction with the PBNDS, the of aliens in ERO custody. representatives of DOJ (including SAAPID ensures an integrated and As of spring 2012, ERO was correctional experts from BOP) on comprehensive system of preventing responsible for providing custody methods for accomplishing the and responding to all incidents or management to approximately 158 objectives of PREA in ICE’s operational allegations of sexual abuse of authorized immigration detention context, and closely consulted individuals in ICE custody. facilities, consisting of 6 SPCs, 7 CDFs, information and best practices reflected On September 4, 2013, ICE issued a 9 dedicated IGSA facilities, and 136 in policies of international corrections directive entitled ‘‘Review of the Use of non-dedicated IGSA facilities (of which systems, statistical data on sexual Segregation for ICE Detainees.’’ The 64 are covered by the DOJ PREA rule, violence collected by the DOJ Bureau of directive establishes policy and not this rule, because they are USMS Justice Statistics (BJS), and reports procedures for ICE review of detainees IGA facilities). ERO has 91 other published by the United Nations High placed into segregated housing. It is authorized immigration detention Commissioner for Refugees and the intended to complement the facilities that typically hold detainees Inter-American Commission on Human requirements of the 2011 PBNDS, the for more than 24 hours and less than 72 Rights of the Organization of American 2008 PBNDS, NDS and other applicable hours, including 55 USMS IGA facilities States regarding sexual abuse and other policies. The directive states that and 36 non-dedicated IGSA facilities. In issues affecting vulnerable populations placement in segregation should occur addition, ICE has 149 holding facilities in U.S. correctional systems. The only when necessary and in compliance that hold detainees for less than 24 PBNDS 2011 establish responsibilities with applicable detention standards, hours. These holding facilities are of all immigration detention facility staff and includes a notification requirement nationwide and are located within ICE with respect to preventative measures whenever a detainee has been held ERO Field and Sub-Field Offices.7 such as screening, staff training, and continuously in segregation for 14 days 2. ICE Sexual Abuse and Assault detainee education, as well as effective out of any 21 day period and a 72-hour Policies response to all incidents of sexual notification requirement for detainees abuse, including timely reporting and placed in segregation due to a special These regulations for immigration notification, protection of victims, vulnerability, including for detainees detention facilities and holding facilities provision of medical and mental health susceptible to harm due to sexual support existing sexual abuse policies care, investigation, and monitoring of orientation or gender identity, and promulgated by ICE, including ICE’s incident data. detainees who have been victims—in or PBNDS 2011 and its 2012 Sexual Abuse The PBNDS 2008 standard on Sexual

and Assault Prevention and Intervention Abuse and Assault Prevention and 9 8 Less than one-third of ICE’s average detainee Directive (SAAPID), which provide Intervention and the Family Residential population is currently housed in facilities Standards also contain robust governed by the agency’s 2000 National Detention 7 Facilities ICE used as of spring 2012, and the safeguards against sexual abuse of ICE Standards (NDS), which does not contain a sexual abuse and assault standards to which standard specific to sexual abuse prevention and facilities were held accountable or planned to be detainees, establishing similar intervention—and nearly half of those detainees are held accountable at that time, serve as the baseline requirements with respect to each of the in USMS IGA facilities. A substantial number of for the cost estimates for this rulemaking. issues covered by the PBNDS 2011 NDS facilities with which ICE maintains an IGSA 8 ICE, Performance-Based National Detention Sexual Abuse standard. In addition, ICE have agreed to implement the PBNDS 2011’s Sexual Standards (2011), http://www.ice.gov/doclib/ has made great strides in incorporating Abuse and Assault Prevention and Intervention detention-standards/2011/pbnds2011.pdf; ICE, standard. Again excluding detainees who are held Directive No. 11062.1: Sexual Abuse and Assault standards specific to sexual abuse and in DOJ-contracted facilities (and are therefore Prevention and Intervention (2012), http:// assault in NDS facilities. In fact, since covered by the DOJ PREA rule), as of July 2013, www.ice.gov/doclib/foia/dro_policy_memos/sexual- the publication of the NPRM a nearly three quarters of ICE detainees housed in abuse-assault-prevention-intervention-policy.pdf. substantial number of NDS facilities NDS IGSA facilities are covered by the PBNDS 2011 These documents are available, redacted as sexual abuse and assault standard. For more appropriate, in the docket for this rule where with which ICE maintains IGSAs have information on the standards applicable to DOJ indicated under ADDRESSES. agreed to implement the PBNDS 2011’s facilities, see the discussion infra.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13106 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

out of ICE custody—of sexual assault, individuals in secured detention areas, hold room, restraining procedures, torture, trafficking, or abuse. while others are detained in open classification of detainees, ICE’s combined policies prescribe a seating areas where agents or officers transportation, emergency procedures, comprehensive range of protections interact with the detainee. CBP uses escort procedures, transfer procedures, against sexual abuse, addressing ‘‘hold rooms’’ in its facilities for case and property disposition. prevention planning, reporting, processing and to search, detain, or U.S. Border Patrol Policy No. 08– response and intervention, interview persons who are being 11267, Hold Rooms and Short-Term investigation, and oversight, including: processed. CBP does not currently Custody—establishes national policy Articulation of facility zero-tolerance contract for law enforcement staff describing the responsibilities and policies; designation of facility and within its holding facilities; CBP procedures for the short-term custody of component sexual assault coordinators; employees oversee detainees directly. persons in Border Patrol hold rooms screening and classification of CBP generally detains individuals for pending case disposition. The policy detainees; staff training; detainee only the short time necessary for also contains requirements regarding the education; detainee reporting methods; inspection and processing, including handling of juveniles in Border Patrol staff reporting and notification; first pending release or transfer of custody to custody. responder duties following incidents or appropriate agencies. Some examples of DHS referenced all of these policies in allegations of sexual abuse (including to situations in which CBP detains protect victims and preserve evidence); individuals prior to transferring them to its consideration of DHS-wide standards emergency and ongoing medical and other agencies are: (1) Persons processed to prevent, detect, and respond to sexual mental health services; investigation for administrative immigration abuse in DHS confinement facilities. procedures and coordination; discipline violations may, for example, be The policies are available, redacted as of assailants; and sexual abuse incident repatriated to a contiguous territory or appropriate, in the docket for this rule data collection and review. transferred to ICE pending removal from at www.regulations.gov. These policies are tailored to the the United States or removal IV. Discussion of PREA Standards particular operational and logistical proceedings with the Executive Office of circumstances encountered in the DHS Immigration Review; (2) A. DHS’s PREA Standards confinement system in order to unaccompanied alien children placed in With this final rule, DHS reiterates maximize the effective achievement of removal proceedings under § 240 of the that sexual violence against any victim the goals of PREA within the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), is an assault on human dignity. Such immigration detention context. To 8 U.S.C. 1229a, are transferred, in acts are particularly damaging in the further improve transparency and coordination with ICE, to the detention environment, where the enforcement, DHS has decided to issue Department of Health and Human power dynamic is heavily skewed this regulation and adopt the overall Services (HHS), Office of Refugee against victims and recourse is often structure of the DOJ standards, as well Resettlement (ORR); and (3) persons limited. Until recently, however, this as the wholesale text of various detained for criminal prosecution are has been viewed by some as an individual DOJ standards where DHS temporarily held pending case inevitable aspect of detention within the has deemed them appropriate and processing and transfer to other Federal, United States. This view is not only efficacious, to meet the President’s goal State, local or tribal law enforcement incorrect but incompatible with of setting high standards, government- agencies. CBP policies and directives American values. wide, consistent with the goals of PREA currently cover these and other As noted in the NPRM, DHS keeps and Congress’s expressed intent that detention scenarios. DHS adopt national standards for the records of any known or alleged sexual detection, prevention, reduction, and 4. CBP Detention Directives and abuse incidents in its facilities. DHS punishment of rape and sexual assault Guidance reiterates that the allegations that have in immigration confinement settings. The various CBP policies and been tracked are unacceptable, both to Where appropriate, DHS also has used directives containing guidance on the DHS and the Administration, which has the results of DOJ research and topics addressed in these regulations articulated a ‘‘zero-tolerance’’ standard considered public comments submitted include, but are not limited to: for sexual abuse in confinement in response to the DOJ ANPRM and Personal Search Handbook, Office of facilities. Accordingly, DHS continues NPRM in formulating the DHS Field Operations, CIS HB 3300–04B, to work to achieve its mandate to standards. July 2004—describes in detail the eliminate all such incidents. procedures for personal searches. The With respect to this rule, DHS did not 3. U.S. Customs and Border Protection handbook further explains the begin its work from a blank slate. Many Holding Facilities procedures for transportation and correctional administrators have CBP has a priority mission of keeping detention of, and reporting procedures developed and implemented policies terrorists and their weapons out of the for, persons detained for prolonged and practices to more effectively United States. CBP also is responsible medical examinations as well as prevent and respond to sexual abuse in for securing and facilitating trade and detentions lasting more than two hours. confinement facilities, including DHS travel while enforcing hundreds of U.S. CBP Directive No. 3340–030B, Secure confinement facilities. DHS applauds statutes and regulations, including Detention, Transport and Escort these efforts, and views them as an immigration and drug laws. All persons, Procedures at Ports of Entry— excellent first step. However, as noted baggage, and other merchandise arriving establishes CBP’s policy for the in the NPRM, DHS has decided to in or leaving the United States are temporary detention, transport, and promulgate regulations to meet PREA’s subject to inspection and search by CBP escort of persons by the Office of Field goals and comply with the President’s officials for a number of reasons relating Operations. The policy also provides directive that can be applied effectively to its immigration, customs, and other guidance on issues regarding the to all covered facilities in light of their law enforcement activities. detention of juveniles, medical particular physical characteristics, the CBP detains individuals in a wide situations, meals, water, restrooms, nature of their diverse populations, and range of facilities. CBP detains some phone notifications, sanitation of the resource constraints.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13107

DHS appreciates the considerable to sexual abuse. The definitions in this custodial transport for the purposes of work DOJ has done in this area, and also section largely mirror those used in the removal, such allegations are required to recognizes that each DHS component DOJ rule, with adjustments as necessary be documented and promptly reported has extensive expertise regarding its for DHS operational contexts. DHS has to the Joint Intake Center (JIC) and the own facilities, particularly those also largely relied on the NPREC’s PSA Coordinator, and will promptly housing unique populations, and that definitions in the Glossary sections that receive appropriate follow-up, including each DHS component is best positioned accompanied the NPREC’s four sets of a sexual abuse incident review at the to determine how to implement the standards, but has made a variety of conclusion of the investigation by the Federal laws and rules that govern its adjustments and has eliminated appropriate investigative authorities. In own operations, the conduct of its own definitions for various terms that either situations involving transportation employees, and the safety of persons in do not appear in the DHS standards or between a holding facility maintained its custody. Thus DHS, because of its whose meaning is sufficiently clear so by one DHS component and an own unique circumstances, has adopted as not to need defining. immigration detention facility the overall structure of DOJ’s regulations Facility, holding facility— maintained by another component, the and has used its content to inform the transportation. Numerous commenters, Prevention of Sexual Assault (PSA) provisions of the NPRM and this final including advocacy groups and former Coordinators at each component will be rule, but has tailored individual Commissioners of NPREC, questioned responsible for addressing the allegation provisions to maximize their efficacy in this definition of facility, noting that it in their respective annual reports. DHS confinement facilities. did not extend to custodial transport, By including explicit references to DHS also reemphasizes that these when detainees are in transit between such custodial transportation in its standards are not intended to establish facilities. An advocacy group stated that policies, DHS reaffirms its commitment a safe harbor for otherwise the transfer of detainees, either between to preventing, detecting, and responding constitutionally-deficient conditions facilities or to facilitate removal, is a to sexual abuse and assault against regarding detainee sexual abuse. common aspect of immigration individuals detained in DHS custody. Likewise, while the DHS standards aim detention, necessitating clear inclusion Consistent with DOJ’s approach, to include a variety of best practices due of PREA protections during these however, DHS declines to include to the need to adopt standards situations. Another advocacy group additional separate standards on applicable to a wide range of facilities stated that detainees are vulnerable transportation. while accounting for costs of when being transported and that, unlike One advocacy group, basing its implementation, the standards do not within the DOJ system, facility staff comment on ICE standards under incorporate every promising avenue of regularly transport immigration PBNDS, suggested a separate section in combating sexual abuse. The standards detainees. One organization stated that the final rule addressing transportation represent policies and practices that are definitions for both facility and holding that would require that two attainable by DHS components and their facility should explicitly include transportation staff members be contractors, while recognizing that other transportation settings to provide for assigned to transport a single detainee, DHS policies and procedures can, and zero tolerance of abuse in such including at least one staff member of in some cases currently do, exceed these situations, with some groups stating that the same gender as the detainee, except standards in a variety of ways. DHS such definitions should include the in exigent circumstances. The suggested applauds such efforts, and encourages language in PBNDS § 1.3 that addresses standards would specify similar its components and contractors to transportation. requirements for multiple-detainee further support the identification and DHS has considered these comments transit, provide detailed timekeeping adoption of additional innovative and decided to adopt the scope of the accountability guidelines for exigent methods to protect detainees from proposed rule—immigration detention circumstances situations, provide sexual abuse. facilities and holding facilities. DHS documentation requirements when notes that some standards indirectly aberrations from the above suggestions B. Section by Section Analysis cover custodial transport. For example, occur, and provide separate rules for The DHS rule follows the DOJ rule in the DHS standards cover all staff conduct and documentation devising separate sets of standards conduct, including staff and employee requirements of pat-downs during tailored to different types of conduct while transporting detainees. transportation. The group also suggested confinement facilities utilized by DHS: In addition, DHS has addressed the standards require minors to be Immigration detention facilities and custodial transport in numerous other separated from unrelated adults at all holding facilities. Each set of standards contexts. The written zero tolerance times during transport, seated in an area consists of the same eleven categories policy applies to all forms of sexual of the vehicle near officers, and remain used by the DOJ rule: Prevention abuse and assault by agency employees under their close supervision. planning, responsive planning, training and contractors. This policy applies to Additionally, the commenter suggested and education, assessment for risk of transport of detainees in DHS custody to detainees of different genders be sexual victimization and abusiveness, and from holding facilities and transported separately—or, if in one reporting, official response following a immigration detention facilities, vehicle, in separately partitioned detainee report, investigations, between a holding facility and a areas—with transgender detainees being discipline, medical and mental care, detention facility, and to custodial transported in a manner corresponding data collection and review, and audits transport for the purposes of removal. to their gender identity. and compliance. As in the DOJ rule, a Moreover, the ICE SAAPID provides As noted above, DHS recognizes the General Definitions section applicable protection for all detainees when they importance of protecting detainees in all to both sets of standards is provided. are in ICE custody, including custodial custodial settings, including during transport. And whenever DHS is alerted transport. For this reason, and as noted General Definitions (§ 115.5) to an alleged incident of sexual abuse by the commenters, ICE has Sections 115.5 and 115.6 provide and assault during DHS transport to or promulgated, and is currently in the definitions for key terms used in the from a holding facility or immigration process of implementing, 2011 PBNDS, standards, including definitions related detention facility or during DHS which provides greater protection for

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13108 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

detainees being transported while in ICE provisions, including those pertaining contractors to be covered under the final custody. These detention standards to supervision and monitoring and rule’s definition of staff in § 115.5, include a number of the protections upgrades to facilities and technologies, which ‘‘means employees or contractors recommended by the commenter, as would be impracticable, inefficient, and of the agency or facility, including any do—to a lesser extent—the PBNDS 2008 at times impossible to apply outside of entity that operates within the facility.’’ and NDS. As noted above, detainees in the contexts contemplated in the rule as Family unit. Multiple commenters ICE custody are also protected by DHS’s drafted. recommended changing the requirement zero-tolerance policy, ICE’s zero- Former NPREC Commissioners in the proposed rule that provided that tolerance policy and ICE’s SAAPID commented that based on the proposed to qualify as a family unit under Subpart which prohibits sexual abuse and rule’s definition of facility, it is unclear A, none of the juvenile(s) or his/her/ assault by any ICE employee in any whether external audit standards apply their parent(s) or legal guardian(s) may custodial setting. CBP detainees are to contract facilities. To clarify, DHS have a known history of criminal or protected under DHS’s zero-tolerance notes that the external audit standards delinquent activity. The commenters policy and other policies, including CBP do apply to all facilities, including expressed concern that this could lead Directive No. 3340–030B, Secure contract facilities, in which the to the separation of a detained family Detention, Transport and Escort standards have been adopted. where a member had a non-violent Procedures at Ports of Entry. Exigent circumstances. Multiple adjudication or committed a non-violent Following careful review, DHS commenters objected to the definition of offense years ago, where a member determined that the combination of ‘‘exigent circumstances’’ as too broad. committed an immigration-related generally applicable provisions of this The rule allows detainee pat-down and crime, or where a juvenile was engaged final rule and other existing policies strip search searches to be conducted by in a delinquent activity. Some groups address the commenters’ concerns in an staff of the opposite sex in exigent suggested that the qualifier ‘‘violent’’ be effective and operationally practicable circumstances. The former NPREC used to describe disqualifying criminal way. Therefore, DHS has decided not to Commissioners commented that the or delinquent activity and that only add specific transportation standards to definition might weaken the effect of the ‘‘violent criminal or delinquent activity, the regulation and instead, relies on proposed standards by too readily or . . . sexual abuse, violence or existing policies and guidelines which allowing cross-gender searches. The substance abuse that could reasonably provide for detainee protection. Commissioners recommended that DHS put the safety or well-being of other Facility, holding facility—temporary- replace ‘‘exigent circumstances’’ with a family members at risk’’ should prevent use holding rooms. Former more restrictive exception, such as ‘‘in an otherwise qualifying group from Commissioners of NPREC and some case of emergency circumstances.’’ falling into the family unit definition. advocacy groups recommended that Another group stated that many One group recommended that DHS extend the definition of holding standards would not apply because protection of the family unit be facility to include temporary-use exigent circumstances exceptions could paramount, with exceptions being holding rooms not in immigration be continuously invoked and swallow narrower than in the proposed rule. The detention facilities or holding facilities, the rule, suggesting instead that the former Commissioners also seemed to but in locations sporadically used to definition specify that a threat must be assert that the definition could exclude detain for short periods of time during of serious nature. One organization situations where juveniles are other DHS operations, such as U.S. suggested replacing the word accompanied by non-parental family Coast Guard vessels, conference rooms, ‘‘unforeseen’’ in the definition with members or family friends, and further and hotel rooms. Groups urged DHS to ‘‘unforeseeable.’’ expressed concern that the definition include additional regulatory After considering these comments, was too narrow and could jeopardize protections for this temporary type of DHS has determined to retain the keeping family units intact. Advocacy confinement. Although such temporary- definition in the final rule. The groups stated the definition should use facilities are covered by existing definition in § 115.5 is properly tailored better reflect ‘‘the child’s lived reality’’ policy, the former Commissioners to ensure that standards are followed and more closely comply with existing recommended that DHS memorialize except in ‘‘temporary and unforeseen Federal standards. such guidance in binding Federal circumstances that require immediate While DHS must take steps to ensure standards. action in order to combat a threat to the the safety of minors in its custody, the DHS reiterates that its zero-tolerance security or institutional order of a agency also recognizes the important policy applies to all of its detention facility or a threat to the safety or goal of keeping families intact. DHS has settings, and additional existing policies security of any person.’’ It is necessary revised the ‘‘family unit’’ definition in also cover temporary-use holding for operational purposes to carve out a the final rule to provide a more rooms. Moreover, any allegation of limited exception to certain standards. straightforward regulatory description sexual abuse and assault will be For example, threats to the safety of a in a manner that accords with current reported to the JIC promptly and will detainee or officer must be considered. ICE policy and that recognizes the need promptly receive appropriate follow-up, In addition, a facility might have to for flexibility due to the operational regardless of the particular setting adjust to the unforeseen absence of a realities of ensuring a safe detention within DHS control in which the staff member whose presence is environment. DHS’s revised definition allegation arises. As DHS noted in the typically necessary to carry out a states that family unit means a group of proposed rule, this rulemaking defines specific standard. detainees that includes one or more facility and holding facility broadly, Contractor. Multiple commenters non-United States citizen juvenile(s) including a number of settings that, suggested that DHS clarify the definition accompanied by his/her/their parent(s) while built for the purpose of detaining of contractor to include all employees or legal guardian(s), whom the agency individuals, are used infrequently. DHS and subcontractors of the person or will evaluate for safety purposes to declines to further extend the entity referred to in the relevant protect juveniles from sexual abuse and requirements of the rule to settings that provision. In response to these violence. This modified definition are not built for the purposes of comments, DHS notes that it considers ensures the necessary language to detaining individuals, as many of the all facility employees and sub- qualify as a ‘‘family unit’’ under the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13109

Family Detention and Intake Guidance lesbian, heterosexual/straight, and ‘‘encouraging’’ detainees to engage in remains in the regulatory text. The bisexual. such an act. revised definition also permits the After considering the comment to It appears that the commenters are agency to maintain needed flexibility to include these terms in the final rule, comparing the DHS definition of sexual ensure the safety of juveniles in DHS DHS decided not to add them to the abuse to the definition of sexual custody. definitions section for several reasons. harassment in DOJ’s standards. DHS has Revising the ‘‘family unit’’ definition First, DHS used the DOJ PREA final not added this language because the as applied in Subpart A to allow all rule—which does not define gay, DHS standards already include a similar individuals with a non-violent criminal lesbian, and bisexual—as a general definition of sexual harassment within history to stay with minors, and to guide when determining which the current DHS definition of sexual expand the definition of family to definitions should be included. Second, abuse. Specifically, the DHS definition include non-parental family members or as a general matter, the regulation of sexual abuse in § 115.6 forbids family friends, as recommended by currently relies on self-identification for ‘‘threats, intimidation, or other actions commenters, potentially could conflict classification and protective purposes. or communications by one or more with the intent behind ICE’s Family Security staff, law enforcement staff. detainees aimed at coercing or Detention and Intake Guidance, which A collection of advocacy groups pressuring another detainee to engage in seeks to protect children from abuse and suggested that the proposed definitions’ a sexual act.’’ DHS believes that this human trafficking. DHS therefore distinction between security staff who coverage under the definition of sexual declines to incorporate that specific operate at immigration detention abuse is sufficient and accomplishes the recommendation into the revised facilities, and law enforcement staff who objective sought by the commenter. DHS definition. operate in a holding facility, should be also notes that the standards include eliminated and consolidated under one One commenter suggested revising sexual harassment in the definition of ‘‘security staff’’ definition so that the definition of family unit to include staff on detainee sexual abuse. security personnel at each type of Regarding the proposed rule’s not only non-U.S. citizen juvenile(s) facility are labeled in the same way. The provision on inappropriate visual accompanied by their parents or legal groups contended that DHS does not surveillance, certain advocacy groups guardians, but also non-U.S. citizen need to differentiate like the DOJ requested that the standards specifically juveniles accompanied by ‘‘a sponsor standards, and suggests consolidating by include within the definition of sexual approved by’’ HHS/ORR. The adding ‘‘or holding facility’’ to the abuse acts of voyeurism by staff commenter stated that ‘‘[i]n the context conclusion of the ‘‘security staff’’ members, contractors, or volunteers. of apprehension and enforcement, a definition. The commenters suggested that family unit should be broadened to DHS notes that under the final rule, explicitly incorporating voyeurism into include ORR-approved sponsors there is a meaningful difference between the definition was necessary in order to because they have the authority to security staff and law enforcement staff. capture the complete scope of release unaccompanied children to a Unlike holding facilities, which are prohibited behavior. The suggested ‘suitable family member’ per 8 U.S.C. staffed by law enforcement officers from more expansive definition would 1232(c).’’ either ICE or CBP, immigration include unnecessary or inappropriate The definition of ‘‘family unit’’ relates detention facilities use a wide range of visual surveillance of a detainee, to placement in the ICE Family staffing, including personnel from including requiring a detainee to expose Residential Program. An private companies who are not law his or her buttocks, genitals, or breasts, unaccompanied alien child without a enforcement officers. The general or unnecessarily viewing or taking parent or legal guardian would not meet definitions of ‘‘law enforcement staff’’ images of all or part of a detainee’s the criteria set forth in the definition of and ‘‘security staff’’ recognize this naked body or of a detainee performing a ‘‘family unit’’ for these purposes. An distinction and allow DHS to tailor its bodily functions. unaccompanied alien child would not rule to the specific contexts at issue. DHS has considered this suggested be accompanied by a sponsor approved addition to the standards and the DHS by HHS/ORR until after they are Definitions Related to Sexual Abuse final rule now expressly includes transferred from DHS to HHS/ORR. and Assault (§ 115.6) voyeurism by a staff member, Once an unaccompanied alien child is Sexual abuse. One commenter stated contractor, or volunteer as a type of transferred to HHS/ORR, they are no that the current definition should sexual abuse. Voyeurism is defined as longer within DHS’s jurisdiction. include language from the definition ‘‘inappropriate visual surveillance of a Furthermore, because the purpose of implemented by DOJ, including detainee for reasons unrelated to official this final rule is to prevent, detect, and unwelcome sexual advances, requests duties. Where not conducted for reasons respond to sexual abuse and assault in for sexual favors, or verbal comments, relating to official duties, the following confinement facilities, addressing the gestures or actions of a derogatory or are examples of voyeurism: Staring at a treatment of a family unit during offensive sexual nature. The commenter detainee who is using a toilet in his or apprehension and enforcement is encouraged DHS to add this language her cell to perform bodily functions; outside the scope of this rule. because the actions that are described in requiring an inmate detainee to expose Gay, lesbian, bisexual. One DOJ’s definition seem more likely to his or her buttocks, genitals, or breasts; immigration advocacy group requested occur than the proposed rule’s or taking images of all or part of a that the final rule define these terms, in description of sexual abuse. A number detainee’s naked body or of a detainee addition to already included definitions of advocacy groups commented that the performing bodily functions.’’ of transgender, intersex, and gender part of the proposed sexual abuse One commenter suggested that the nonconforming. The group suggested definition addressing threats, sexual abuse definition account for a first looking to the U.S. Citizenship and intimidation, harassment, profane or detained child’s legal inability to Immigration Services (USCIS) Lesbian, abusive language, or other actions or consent to sex with an adult. DHS Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex communications coercing or pressuring recognizes the extreme importance of (LGBTI) Asylum Module’s definitions into a sexual act, should include protecting minors while in custody and regarding sexual orientation, gay, ‘‘requests’’ and should also encompass remains fully committed to that end.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13110 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

DHS notes that existing Federal and efforts to comply with the DHS already provides that the PSA State laws legally preclude the standards and that each immigration Coordinator shall have sufficient time possibility of consent by a detainee to detention facility covered by Subpart A and authority to monitor sexual relations with a staff member have its own written zero-tolerance implementation. while in custody, and moreover provide policy and appoint a Prevention of Contracting With Non-DHS Entities for that any such sexual acts be Sexual Assault (PSA) Compliance Confinement of Detainees (§§ 115.12, criminalized, regardless of the age of the Manager to oversee facility efforts in 115.112) detainee. DHS considers the existence of this regard. these legal prohibitions outside the Summary of Proposed Rule Changes in Final Rule context of the regulation to DHS is adopting the regulation as The standards contained in the authoritatively establish the legal proposed rule required that covered inability of a child to consent to sex proposed, with one technical revision to the PSA Coordinator’s title. agencies that contract for the with an adult while in detention. For confinement of detainees include in this reason, DHS declines to incorporate Comments and Responses new contracts or contract renewals the additional language to the regulation in other party’s obligation to comply with response to the comment. Comment. The organization that suggested changes regarding covering the DHS sexual abuse standards. Coverage of DHS Immigration transportation in § 115.110 also Changes in Final Rule Detention Facilities (§ 115.10); Coverage recommended revising paragraph (b) to of DHS Holding Facilities (§ 115.110) include in the PSA Coordinator’s DHS revised §§ 115.12 and 115.112 to require the agency to include the Summary of Proposed Rule responsibilities for protecting detainees in the agency’s custody, including entity’s obligation to adopt and comply The standards contained in the detainees being transported to or from with these standards in all substantive proposed rule clarified that ICE its holding facilities while in DHS contract modifications. immigration detention facilities are custody, in addition to those held in all Comments and Responses governed by Subpart A of the rule. DHS of its holding facilities. holding facilities are governed by Response. As previously stated, DHS Comment. Multiple commenters Subpart B. DHS recognizes that to has zero tolerance for all forms of sexual suggested that contract facilities or IGSA effectively prevent, detect, and respond abuse and assault of individuals in facilities housing detainees should be to sexual abuse in its facilities, DHS custody. This applies to DHS custodial required to adopt DHS sexual abuse must have strong standards appropriate transport to and from holding facilities standards within a specified timeframe, to each unique context. Immigration and immigration detention facilities, with some urging no delay in detention facilities and holding facilities between a holding facility and a application and others urging are different by nature and need to have detention facility, and for the purposes compliance within 90 days or a year a respectively different set of standards of removal. The PSA Coordinators will after the standards’ effective date. The tailored to each of them for an effective oversee all component efforts to comply commenters believe that without a outcome. with the standards, including zero specific timeframe, or compliance schedule similar to that applicable to Changes in Final Rule tolerance. It is not necessary to revise the rule to include a reference to DHS’s own facilities, contract facilities DHS is adopting the regulation as transportation. could delay implementing these proposed. Comment. Former NPREC standards. Commenters expressed Comments and Responses Commissioners noted that under the concern over the potential lag between proposed standards, facilities have the standards’ effective date and their Comment. Regarding coverage, one considerable discretion to determine implementation at non-DHS facilities. organization expressed concern that their sexual abuse policies; therefore, Among the commenters that agency policies should include zero prior to permitting detainees to be recommended requiring adoption of the tolerance of sexual abuse during confined in a facility, DHS should standards during any contract transportation of detainees in DHS ensure its policies are consistent with modification, some commenters custody, as well as in detention PREA standards. suggested a set timeline of 90 days after facilities. The group suggested stating in Response. DHS concurs that it is the standards’ effective date for DHS to Subpart B’s coverage standard that the important to ensure that facility policies proactively initiate contract standard covers transportation to or are consistent with PREA standards. modification or modification-related from DHS holding facilities in addition Section 115.11(c) already requires DHS negotiations with any existing non-DHS to holding facilities themselves. to review each facility’s sexual abuse facility. One such commenter suggested Response. Please see DHS’s response and assault policy, as required by eliminating ‘‘contact renewals’’ as a in the discussion of § 115.5 above. subsection (c). Therefore, no additional scenario for when compliance with the Zero Tolerance; PSA Coordinator changes are required. standards would be triggered. The (§§ 115.11, 15.111) Comment. An advocacy group commenters also proposed that any commented generally that DHS should such negotiations conclude within 270 Summary of Proposed Rule allocate sufficient staff and provide days of the standards’ effective date. The standards in the proposed rule them with the authority and time to Additionally the commenters, in required that each covered agency have continually monitor the policies enacted paragraph (b), would also include a written zero-tolerance policy toward by the facilities to reflect the zero- ‘‘contract modifications’’ in the sexual abuse, outlining the agency’s tolerance goal. monitoring process, to allow DHS to approach to preventing, detecting, and Response. DHS recognizes the monitor compliance for modified responding to such conduct. DHS also importance of dedicating personnel to contracts. Commenters also proposed that each covered agency implement, monitor, and oversee these recommended that DHS create a new appoint an upper-level, agency-wide efforts and has employed a full-time requirement that any failure to adopt the PSA Coordinator to oversee agency PSA Coordinator. Section 115.11(b) changes via contract in the specified

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13111

timeframe would disqualify the facility would include, for example, changes to needs. As a result, some detainees are from continuing to detain individuals the bed/day rate or the implementation held in non-dedicated IGSAs and a until remedied. One group suggested of stricter standards, but not the significant number (approximately 20 that compliance with the proposed 90- designation of a new Contracting percent of the average daily population day timeline be verified by an Officer.) This change endeavors to of ICE detainees) are also held in BOP independent auditing process. ensure that facilities come into facilities or state, local, and private Response. Based on ICE’s past compliance with the regulation at a facilities operated under agreement experience with the contract negotiation faster rate, but not in a manner that is between the servicing facility and a process, it can take one year or more to operationally impossible for DHS. component of DOJ. Such agreements are complete a contract renegotiation for a Comment. Former Commissioners of often negotiated and executed by USMS. single detention facility. ICE cannot NPREC raised an issue regarding DHS components can benefit from such reasonably conduct such large numbers applicability of DOJ and DHS standards. agreements as authorized users and via of contract negotiations simultaneously The former Commissioners other indirect arrangements, which in such a short period of time. Given recommended that DHS clarify which of often do not afford DHS an opportunity that there are 132 covered immigration the two sets of standards applies to to negotiate specific terms and detention facilities that would need to immigration detainees held in state conditions at length. For these facilities, adopt the standards, without some prisons or jails, lock-ups, or community DHS relies on DOJ’s national standards additional appropriation to address residential settings. According to the to provide a baseline of PREA these staffing and logistical challenges, comment, DOJ’s standards are ‘‘facility protections. bringing contract negotiations to driven’’ as opposed to driven by sub- In part because DHS does not conclusion within one year is not population of inmates. ‘‘If a facility currently maintain privity of contract operationally feasible. meets one of the definitions for covered with these facilities, however, DHS does DHS remains committed to protecting facility types under DOJ’s Standards, not consider them to fall within the its immigration detainees from incidents then the Standards apply to the entire ambit of §§ 115.12 and 115.112. The of sexual abuse and assault. With that facility.’’ The former Commissioners standards set forth in Subpart A do not goal in mind, DHS, through ICE, will therefore urged that DHS clarify the apply to facilities used by ICE pursuant endeavor to ensure that SPCs, CDFs, and application of DHS standards in to an agreement with a DOJ entity (e.g., dedicated IGSAs adopt the standards set facilities also covered by the DOJ BOP facilities) or between a DOJ entity forth in this regulation within 18 standards. (e.g., USMS) and a state or local months of the effective date. These The former Commissioners also government or private entity. These facilities currently hold more than half recommended that DHS ensure that its facilities are not immigration detention of the immigration detainees in ICE detainees benefit from the most facilities as the term is defined in the custody and therefore should be DHS’s protective standards possible, regardless regulation because they are not highest priority. of whether their detainees happened to ‘‘operated by or pursuant to contract DHS, through ICE, will also make be placed in a DOJ-covered facility. To with U.S. Immigration and Customs serious efforts to initiate the that end, the former Commissioners Enforcement.’’ Instead, the servicing renegotiation process with the recommended that DHS avoid facility, including its immigration remaining covered facilities as quickly comingling DHS detainees with other detainees, is covered by the DOJ PREA as operational and budgetary constraints populations. This would ease standards. will allow. As a matter of policy, DHS application of immigration standards to Similarly, holding facilities that are will seek to prioritize implementation to immigration detainees and provide authorized for use by ICE and CBP reduce the most risk as early as possible, them the special protections they need, pursuant to an agreement between a DOJ taking into consideration all relevant so—for facilities housing inmates and entity and a state or local government or factors, including the resources detainees—housing detainees separately a private entity are not included in the necessary to reopen and negotiate throughout their time in custody is definition of holding facility in § 115.5 contracts, the size and composition of necessary. or the scope provision in § 115.112 each facility’s detainee population, the Response. As noted above, DHS, because DHS is not a party to the marginal cost of implementing the through ICE, will endeavor to ensure agreement with the servicing facility standards of each facility, the detention that SPCs, CDFs, and dedicated IGSAs and these facilities are not under the standards currently in effect at each adopt the standards set forth in this control of the agency. facility, the prevalence of substantiated regulation within 18 months of the DHS recognizes that facilities might incidents of sexual abuse at each effective date. These facilities currently find it easier to comply with a single set facility, and other available information hold more than half of the immigration of standards, rather than multiple related to the adequacy of each facility’s detainees in ICE custody and therefore standards simultaneously. DHS has existing safeguards against sexual abuse are appropriately DHS’s highest priority. attempted to strike a balance that covers and assault. When DHS and a facility agree to as many detainees as possible, without In further recognition of DHS’s pledge incorporate these standards into a imposing unnecessary burdens on to abide by the principles set forth in contract, such standards are binding on facilities. DHS’s approach in this area is this regulation, DHS has revised the facility with respect to DHS consistent with the Presidential §§ 115.12 and 115.112 to require detainees, notwithstanding any separate Memorandum, which specifically components to include these standards obligations the facility might have under directed Federal agencies with in contracts for facilities that undergo the DOJ rule. DHS’s standards, though confinement facilities that are not any substantive contract modification not identical with DOJ’s standards, are already subject to the DOJ final rule to after the effective date. Under this not inconsistent with them either. establish standards necessary to satisfy provision, DHS would include the While some immigration detention the requirements of PREA. The PREA standards in any contract facilities only house immigration Memorandum stated clearly that each modification that affects the substantive detainees, for operational and financial agency is responsible for, and must be responsibilities of either party. (Covered reasons, ICE cannot rely solely on such accountable for, the operations of its substantive contract modifications facilities to meet the agency’s detention own confinement facilities. VAWA 2013

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13112 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

confirmed this view, by requiring that based on the inherent differences Comment. One advocacy group DHS finalize standards for ‘‘detention between the facilities covered by suggested requiring robust oversight of facilities operated by the Department of Subpart A and Subpart B, respectively. the standards’ implementation in Homeland Security and . . . detention To the extent appropriate, Subpart A contract facilities, including facilities operated under contract with applies to DHS employees and descriptions of the manner in which the Department.’’ The latter category contractors alike; as § 115.5 states, the contract monitoring will be conducted, ‘‘includes, but is not limited to contract term ‘‘staff’’ includes ‘‘employees or the frequency of monitoring, and the detention facilities and detention contractors of the agency or facility, party or parties responsible for facilities operated through an including any entity that operates monitoring. intergovernmental service agreement within the facility.’’ Response. Once the standards set with the Department of Homeland DHS included § 115.112(c) in Subpart forth in this regulation are adopted by Security.’’ 42 U.S.C. 15607. B because DHS rarely uses contractors a facility, the facility will be expected to In short, DHS believes that facilities to run holding facilities and would only comply with them and will be subjected will know which standards to apply need to use contractors on a short-term to DHS and ICE’s multi-layered based on their relationship with DHS basis. In rare instances where DHS inspection and oversight process which and the agreements they have executed. contracts for holding facility space, will include an evaluation of DHS and DOJ are committed to ensuring paragraph (c) provides an additional compliance with these standards. smooth implementation of their layer of protection; despite the short- Currently at ICE, ERO contracts for respective standards. If implementation term nature of the detention, contractors independent inspectors to review reveals that facilities would benefit from must be fully aware of the obligation to conditions of confinement at ICE further guidance regarding the abide by the standards set forth in this facilities on an annual or biennial basis, applicability of each agency’s standards, rule. with follow-up inspections scheduled as DHS and DOJ will work to provide such Comment. Former NPREC required. All ICE facilities with an guidance. DHS makes no changes to the Commissioners suggested that the average daily population of 50 or more regulatory text as a result of this standard include a requirement that all detainees are inspected on an annual comment. contracts entered into between DHS and basis. In addition, ERO employs 40 on- Comment. One commenter suggested contracting facilities directly, through site Federal Detention Service Managers that DHS further clarify more directly IGSAs, or through other arrangements (DSMs) at key ICE detention facilities to how the standards apply to private include contract language requiring that monitor and inspect components of parties contracting with the government, the facilities abide by the applicable facility operations for compliance with noting concern about a possibility that PREA standards. Some commenters ICE detention standards. Currently, contractual remedies will serve as suggested provisions regarding DSMs are assigned to 52 detention insufficient deterrents against such consequences for failure of contract facilities, covering approximately 83 private contractors who may potentially facilities to comply with PREA, percent of ICE’s detained population. violate the standards. including taking away funding from ERO also contracts for a Quality Response. DHS recognizes the noncompliant facilities, removing Assurance Team (QAT) comprised of concern of commenters that private detainees, and closer monitoring or even three subject matter experts in the fields entities running detention facilities criminal or civil sanctions for facilities of corrections and detention. The QAT adequately comply with these that fail to comply repeatedly. performs quality assurance reviews at standards. DHS currently enforces Relatedly, some members of Congress the facilities that have assigned DSMs. detention standards through contracts have suggested strict and tangible The purpose of the QAT reviews is to with facilities and believes that PREA sanctions for noncompliance, include ensure that DSMs are effectively will be effectively implemented through termination of contracts, to ensure that monitoring the operations of the facility new contracts, contract renewals, and individuals will not be housed in and addressing concerns. substantive contract modifications. facilities that cannot protect them. The ICE Office of Detention Oversight DHS, through ICE, can transfer Response. As noted above, the final (ODO), within the Office of Professional detainees from facilities that do not rule requires that the DHS include in Responsibility (OPR), conducts uphold PREA standards after adoption new contracts, contract renewals, and compliance inspections at selected and it can terminate a facility’s contract, substantive contract modifications the detention facilities where detainees are which ICE has done in the past and will entity’s obligation to adopt and comply housed for periods in excess of 72 continue to do if a facility is unable to with the standards set forth in this hours. ODO selects facilities to inspect provide adequate care for detainees. regulation. DHS disagrees about the based on a variety of considerations, Comment. A range of advocacy groups need to articulate punitive measures for including significant compliance issues suggested adding a paragraph to noncompliant facilities in the or deficiencies identified during ERO § 115.12 that would mirror the provision regulation. DHS, through ICE, has inspections, concerns identified or in Subpart B’s similar proposed longstanding and well-established raised by the DSMs, detainee standard at § 115.112. The change procedures for sanctioning under- complaints, and allegations reported or would require all standards in Subpart performing facilities that violate its referred by the DHS Office of Inspector A that apply to the government also detention standards, including by General (OIG) or the ICE JIC. ODO apply to the contractor and all rules that putting any detainee in danger. For provides its compliance inspection apply to staff or employees also apply example, if ICE determines that a reports, recommendations and to contractor staff; the groups expressed facility is not compliant with relevant identified best practices to ERO and ICE concern that without this language, detention standards, it can reduce the leadership who ensure appropriate poorly performing contractors could number of detainees held by the facility corrective action plans are developed attempt to excuse themselves when or impose a corrective action plan on and put in place at detention facilities. failing to fully comply with the the facility. If ICE determines that At the Department level, CRCL standards. detainees remain at risk, ICE will reviews allegations related to civil rights Response. DHS declines to add terminate the facility’s contract and and civil liberties issues in immigration paragraph (c) from § 115.112 to § 115.12 remove all detainees from the facility. detention facilities. The OIG also may

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13113

respond to certain complaints by substantiated and unsubstantiated provision, which is to deter sexual conducting investigations. The OIG will incidents of sexual abuse, the findings assault and abuse. DHS believes that refer certain complaints to ERO. and recommendations of sexual abuse facility staff are trained and qualified to incident review reports, and any other conduct security inspections and that Detainee Supervision and Monitoring relevant factors, including but not these inspections are an effective and (§§ 115.13, 115.113) limited to the length of time detainees efficient deterrent to sexual abuse and Summary of Proposed Rule spend in agency custody.’’ assault. Because deterrence is the Response. DHS respectfully disagrees primary purpose of this requirement, The standards contained in the with the notion that its supervision and and because, in its experience, non- proposed rule required the agency or the monitoring provision must include the supervisory inspections are an effective facility to make its own comprehensive same enumerated factors included in deterrent, DHS declines to make the assessment of adequate supervision DOJ’s regulation regarding facilities. suggested revisions. levels, taking into account its use, if DOJ’s rule is intended to cover a broad Comment. Another comment any, of video monitoring or other range of Federal and State facilities criticized § 115.13 generally for not technology. The agency or facility must managed and overseen by a variety of articulating the frequency (e.g., regular reassess such adequate supervision and different government organizations. By inspections) or location of the monitoring at least annually and the contrast, ICE oversees detainee inspections (e.g., throughout the assessment will include an examination supervision and monitoring at all facility). The commenter believed this of the adequacy of resources it has immigration detention facilities. ICE would result in minimal deterrent effect available to ensure adequate levels of uses its well-established detention and low likelihood of identifying detainee supervision and monitoring. standards to ensure that facilities are misconduct as it occurs. Each immigration detention facility properly and effectively supervising Response. DHS notes that paragraph must also conduct frequent detainees. DHS agrees, however, that a (d) provides for unannounced security unannounced security inspections to number of factors from DOJ’s regulation inspections, which may occur with identify and deter sexual abuse of have application in the DHS context. varying frequency and in any part of a detainees. DHS has therefore incorporated into its facility. These unannounced inspections Changes in Final Rule regulation the following two additional are meant to act as a deterrent, and are factors: (1) Generally accepted detention not meant to catch detainees and/or staff DHS added two factors for the facility and correctional practices and (2) any in acts of sexual assault or abuse. to consider when determining adequate judicial findings of inadequacy. Unannounced security inspections are levels of detainee supervision and Comment. A number of comments an effective tool used by facilities to determining the need for video addressed the requirements for security deter a wide range of detainee and monitoring. These factors are (1) inspections. Regarding the standard in employee misconduct. generally accepted detention and § 115.113 for holding facilities Comment. Multiple commenters correctional practices and (2) any specifically, one organization suggested suggested additional requirements for judicial findings of inadequacy. that DHS add a requirement that such the proposed standards on developing DHS also made a minor change to facilities conduct periodic unannounced and documenting comprehensive § 115.13(d). Instead of prohibiting staff security inspections just as in Subpart detainee supervision guidelines. One from alerting others that ‘‘supervisory A, stating that video monitoring is not comment recommended that DHS rounds’’ are occurring, DHS prohibits a substitute for adequate staffing and require facility-specific development staff from alerting others about the also suggesting that the clauses in both and implementation of a concrete ‘‘security inspections.’’ The purpose of proposed sections allowing video staffing and monitoring plan, with a this change is to make the provision monitoring where applicable be struck specific provision for adequate numbers more consistent with the rest of the from paragraph (a) and instead included of supervisors. Another comment paragraph, which refers to such checks in paragraph (b) as a part of the recommended that DHS adopt an as security inspections rather than requirement to develop and document analogue to paragraph (b) of the DOJ supervisory rounds. supervision guidelines. standard, which requires that ‘‘the facility shall document and justify all Comments and Responses Response. DHS defines a holding facility similarly to DOJ’s definition of deviations from the [staffing] plan.’’ Comment. A number of commenters ‘‘lockup.’’ The DOJ rule requires Comments also suggested that the requested generally that this section unannounced security inspections of agency also document any needed more closely resemble DOJ’s standards adult prisons and jails, but not of adjustments identified in the annual regarding supervision and monitoring. lockups. Similarly, DHS provides for review, and that—when not in A human rights advocacy group such inspections in its immigration compliance with the staffing plan—a requested that DOJ’s more specific list of detention facilities, but not in its facility should be required to document factors in paragraph (a) be included. holding facilities. This is because and justify all deviations, for measuring Under this approach, the rule would holding facilities, like lockups, and compliance during auditing and explicitly require facilities to consider, generally provide detention for much oversight. when determining adequate staffing shorter periods of time. Response. These standards require levels, past findings of supervision Comment. Commenters suggested that each immigration detention facility inadequacies by courts or internal or adding another requirement for develop and document comprehensive external oversight bodies. These intermediate-level or higher-level detainee supervision guidelines, to considerations would be in addition to supervisors to conduct more ensure that the facility maintains the considerations set forth in the inspections. sufficient supervision of detainees to proposed section’s paragraph (c), which Response. DHS notes that by focusing protect detainees against sexual abuse. provides that ‘‘the facility shall take into on having only mid- to high-level As explained above, the sufficiency of consideration the physical layout of supervisors conduct inspections, the supervision depends on a variety of each facility, the composition of the facilities would not be effectively factors, including, but not limited to, the detainee population, the prevalence of accomplishing the main purpose of the physical layout of each facility, the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13114 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

composition of the detainee population, a regular basis. Once a facility adopts member if the family relationship has and each facility’s track record in these standards, it also will be subject been vetted to the extent feasible, and detainee protection. to regular auditing by an outside entity the agency determines that remaining Currently, NDS relies on performance- pursuant to the audit requirement in with the non-parental adult family based inspections to determine whether this regulation. Under section 115.203, member is appropriate, under the a facility has adequate supervision and such audits must include an evaluation totality of the circumstances. monitoring. ICE’s 2008 PBNDS and 2011 of (1) whether facility policies and Comments and Responses PBNDS require that facility procedures comply with relevant administrators determine the security detainee supervision and monitoring Comment. Commenters expressed needs based on a comprehensive standards and (2) whether the facility’s concern that the standards should not staffing analysis and staffing plan that is implementation of such policies and allow for housing of juveniles in adult reviewed and updated at least annually. procedures does not meet, meets, or facilities, particularly if not held with Section 115.13 enhances ICE’s detention exceeds the relevant standards. 6 CFR adult family members. One human standards by requiring that facilities 115.203(b)–(c). rights advocacy group stated that as develop and document comprehensive proposed, the standard on separating detainee supervision guidelines which Juvenile and Family Detainees juveniles does not set forth specific will be reviewed annually. Unlike the (§§ 115.14, 115.114) steps to prevent unsupervised contact facilities that fall under DOJ’s final rule, Summary of Proposed Rule with adults. ICE has direct oversight over Response. It is DHS policy to keep immigration detention facilities and The standards contained in the children separate from unrelated adults can, through its well-established proposed rule required juveniles to be whenever possible. To take into inspection process, effectively detained in the least restrictive setting account, in part, the resulting settlement determine whether a facility’s detainee appropriate to the juvenile. The Subpart agreement between the legacy INS and supervision guidelines are inadequate A standard required immigration plaintiffs from class action litigation, and whether a facility is not providing detention facilities to hold juveniles known as the Flores v. Reno Settlement adequate supervision and monitoring. apart from adult detainees, minimizing Agreement (FSA), INS—and Furthermore, requiring every facility sight, sound, and physical contact, subsequently DHS—have put in place to adopt specific staffing ratios under unless the juvenile is in the presence of policies covering detention, release, and this regulation could significantly an adult member of the family unit, and treatment of minors in the immigration increase contract costs without provided there are no safety or security system nationwide. Both the FSA and commensurate benefits. In short, DHS concerns with the arrangement. That the William Wilberforce Trafficking has determined that it can make more standard further required that facilities Victims Protection Reauthorization Act effective use of limited resources by provide priority attention to of 2008 (TVPRA) inform DHS policies mandating comprehensive guidelines unaccompanied alien children, as regarding juveniles. There are that each facility will review annually defined by 6 U.S.C. 279, who would be sometimes instances in which ICE and auditors will examine on a regular transferred to an HHS/ORR facility. personnel reasonably believe the juvenile to be an adult because the basis. Changes in Final Rule DHS declines to require facilities to juvenile has falsely represented himself document deviations from supervision DHS made minor changes to or herself as an adult and there is no guidelines because we do not believe § 115.14(a), (d), and (e) of the final rule. available contrary information or reason this additional documentation would The ‘‘in general’’ and ‘‘should’’ language to question the representation. Under materially assist ICE monitoring of that was suggested in the NPRM was existing policy, ICE officers must base conditions generally and compliance removed in paragraph (a) to ensure a age determinations upon all available with the supervision guidelines in clear requirement that juveniles shall be evidence regarding an alien’s age, particular. Through its comprehensive detained in the least restrictive setting including the statement of the alien. facility oversight and inspection appropriate to the juvenile’s age and In promulgating these PREA programs, ICE has sufficient tools to special needs, provided that such standards, DHS attempted to codify the ensure that facilities effectively setting is consistent with the need to fundamental features of its policy in supervise detainees and comply with protect the juvenile’s well-being and regulation, while maintaining a certain these regulations. And if ICE determines that of others, as well as with any other amount of flexibility for situations such after an inspection that a facility has laws, regulations, or legal requirements. as brief confinement in temporary failed to meet the standards set forth in DHS made a technical change to holding facilities. Additionally, DHS, § 115.13 or failed adequately justify paragraph (d) to maintain consistency through ICE, must and does enforce the deviations from supervision guidelines, between this regulation and the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency ICE has direct authority to remove statutory provision at 8 U.S.C. Prevention Act, which requires that detainees from the facility. DHS has 1232(b)(3). DHS clarified that paragraph alien juveniles not charged with any therefore elected to proceed with the (e) does not apply if the juvenile offense not be placed in secure proposed rule’s approach. described in the paragraph is not also an detention facilities or secure Comment. One group suggested that, unaccompanied alien child. correctional facilities and not be in regard to the standard on determining Regarding the Subpart B standard at detained or confined in any institution adequate levels of detainee supervision § 115.114, DHS added the same change in which they have contact with adult and video monitoring in paragraph (c), in paragraph (a) as in § 115.14(a) for inmates. See 42 U.S.C. 5633. an annual review should assess consistency. DHS also added more Comment. Former Commissioners of effectiveness and identify changes that specific language in paragraph (b) to NPREC and other groups recommended may be necessary to improve require that unaccompanied juveniles that both the Subpart A and B standards effectiveness and allow implementation. generally be held separately from adult require all sight and sound separation Response. As discussed above, detainees. The final standard also from non-familial adults, as DOJ’s staffing levels, detainee supervision, clarifies that a juvenile may temporarily standard does. Some members of and video monitoring are inspected on remain with a non-parental adult family Congress commented generally that the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13115

standards on housing of juveniles the best approach is to wholly transfer • All unaccompanied alien children should be revisited to be in line with DOJ’s standard, which fits the are required to be transferred to an DOJ’s standard. For the Subpart A correctional system rather than HHS/ORR facility within 72 hours after standard, comments suggested more immigration juvenile detention system, determining that the child is an explicit language requiring facilities to to the DHS context in the manner unaccompanied alien child, except in separate juveniles by sight, sound, and described by the commenters. exceptional circumstances; physical contact to clarify the degree of Regarding the Subpart B standard, • As stated in § 115.14(b), juveniles separation required; they recommended DHS notes that its standard is consistent will be held with adult members of the that DHS eliminate the language of with, and in some ways more detailed family unit only when there are no ‘‘minimizing’’ such situations. than, the analogous DOJ standard. safety or security concerns with the Regarding the Subpart B standard, a Finally, DHS intends that the word arrangement; and commenter suggested physical contact, ‘‘separately’’ be understood according to • As indicated in § 115.114, if sight, and sound restrictions be in place the plain meaning of the word. To keep juveniles are detained in holding particularly for shared dayrooms, the standards straightforward and easily facilities, they shall generally be held common spaces, shower areas, and administrable, DHS declines to create a separately from adult detainees. Where, sleeping quarters. Similarly, one group separate definition of the term for after vetting the familial relationship to comment suggested adding language to purposes of these standards. the extent feasible, the agency define the meaning of ‘‘separately’’ in Comment. One commenter suggested determines it is appropriate, under the Subpart B’s unaccompanied alien adding requirements for separation totality of the circumstances, the children provision to ensure placement outside of housing units to mirror the juvenile may temporarily remain with a outside of the sight and sound of, and DOJ standard’s requirement of sight and non-parental family member. to prevent physical contact with, adult sound separation. The commenter also Comment. Some commenters detainees to the greatest degree possible. recommended adding requirements for suggested that more explicit language be Response. Regarding Subpart A, DHS direct staff supervision when not incorporated in the standards to prevent does not believe the suggested changes separated. abusive use of restrictive confinement in are appropriate, as the DHS standard is Response. Consistent with the all types of facilities. Multiple groups tailored to the unique characteristics of reasoning above, DHS does not believe expressed concern that administrative immigration detention and the variances changes to conform with the DOJ segregation for juveniles must be among confinement facilities for DHS standard in this manner are appropriate, limited. One group stated that any detainees. With respect to the Subpart A as the DHS standard is tailored to the separation of juveniles from adult standard for immigration detention unique characteristics of immigration facilities, which it supported, should facilities, juveniles are primarily held in detention and the variances among not subject them to harmful segregation such facilities under the family confinement facilities for DHS or solitary confinement. Others residential program. (Rarely, DHS must detainees. suggested strict limits, including for all detain a minor who is not Comment. An immigration advocacy forms of protective custody, with a unaccompanied but who is, for group commented that it had received collection of groups suggesting an example, a lawful permanent resident preliminary data as a result of a request explicit prohibition on administrative who has committed a serious crime. In under the Freedom of Information Act, segregation and solitary confinement if this rare circumstance, DHS uses an and that data show thousands of needed to comply with the juvenile and appropriate juvenile detention facility children, including many under the age family detainee requirements. The which is subject to regular inspection by of 14, have been housed in adult groups suggested removing the phrase ICE.) Under the family residential facilities. The commenter wrote that ‘‘[in] general’’ in paragraph (a) of the program, juveniles are held with adult such a practice would violate the terms Subpart A and B standards regarding family members—not solely with other and conditions of the FSA, which sets making juvenile detention as least juveniles as would be the case in the forth a policy for the detention, release, restrictive as possible. One organization context of DOJ’s traditional juvenile and treatment of minors in the custody suggested requirements for when settings. Juveniles in the family of then-INS and requires that isolation is necessary to protect a residential setting for immigration unaccompanied minors be generally juvenile, including documenting the reason therefor, reviewing the need detention may have some contact with separated from unrelated adults. The daily, and ensuring daily monitoring by adults; however, an adult family commenter also wrote that PREA a medical or mental health professional. member will be present. Given the regulations that discourage but do not unique nature of the family detention Response. Upon reconsideration prohibit this practice are insufficient to based upon these comments, DHS has setting, maintaining the standard’s protect this exceptionally vulnerable language as proposed is the best and concluded that in the interest of clarity population from potential sexual abuse. removing the introductory words ‘‘[in] most straightforward way to meet Response. DHS has examined general’’ from paragraph (a) is PREA’s goals. available data on this subject, and appropriate. However, DHS does not see The burden of inserting additional determined that the commenter’s a need for an explicit regulatory specific restrictions would be conclusions do not reflect ICE practices. prohibition on administrative particularly high because DHS assures the commenter as follows: segregation, solitary confinement, and unaccompanied alien children are • Any individual who claims to be a the like in this context; concerns about generally transferred to an HHS/ORR juvenile during processing or while in overly restrictive confinement for facility within a short period of time— detention is immediately separated from juveniles should be alleviated by the 72 hours at most—after determining that the general adult population pending strong standards in both subparts— he or she is an unaccompanied alien the results of an investigation into the further strengthened in this final rule— child, except in exceptional claim; circumstances.10 DHS does not believe requiring juveniles to be detained in the transfer to HHS/ORR is pending in IGSA juvenile least restrictive setting appropriate to 10 ICE will occasionally and for short periods of detention facilities. These facilities are subject to the juvenile’s age and special needs, time house unaccompanied alien children whose inspection and oversight by ICE. taking into account safety concerns,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13116 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

laws, regulations, and legal providing separate housing for the child Response. DHS has considered these requirements. Administrative in the same facility. comments; however, the standard as segregation and solitary confinement Response. For immigration detention proposed, which mandates the transfer clearly do not comply with the facilities, DHS has set a regulatory of unaccompanied alien children within requirement that juveniles be detained ‘‘floor’’ in § 115.14 and in the regulatory the 72-hour timeframe except in in the ‘‘least restrictive setting definition of family unit. This suite of exceptional circumstances, is consistent appropriate.’’ requirements provide that facilities do with the TVPRA requirements. DHS is Additionally, the TVPRA mandates not hold juveniles apart from adults if confident that the transfer of that, except in exceptional the adult is a member of the family unit, unaccompanied alien children to ORR circumstances, DHS turn over any provided there are no safety or security will continue to be carried forth unaccompanied child to HHS/ORR concerns with the arrangement. DHS expeditiously. DHS will strictly enforce within 72 hours of determining that the holds immigration detention facilities this regulatory provision, as it will all child is an unaccompanied alien child and holding facilities accountable for PREA standards. With respect to the and that ORR promptly place the child complying with a range of policy, and observation on the importance of in the least restrictive setting that is in now regulatory, requirements. adequate training and internal the child’s best interest. See 8 U.S.C. With respect to the suggestion that procedures to support timely transfer to 1232(b)(3), (c)(2)(A).11 Therefore, the DHS add regulatory language addressing ORR, DHS takes the comments under types of segregation described by the intact family unit detention, DHS advisement for purposes of developing commenters are generally neither declines to adopt such a standard. ICE its training curriculum. feasible nor permissible for such has found that the PREA standards’ Comment. An advocacy group children. definition of family unit and current ICE recommended ensuring adequate policy, specifically ICE’s Family training regarding the enforcement of These concerns appear even further Detention and Intake Guidance, has the standards in general and procedures diminished when taking into account worked well, and to the extent that to avoid sexual abuse or assault of that under ICE policy juveniles are to be deficiencies might exist, DHS does not minors in DHS custody. The group supervised in an alternate setting which believe that addressing them in suggested that DHS regularly update would generally not include regulation would be beneficial to the and implement field guidance regarding administrative segregation. Because affected population. age determinations and related custody Subpart A of these standards With respect to expanding the decisions, consistent with HHS/ORR implements safeguards that will allow a regulation’s treatment of the family unit program instructions. juvenile to be in the presence of an beyond the parent or legal guardian, Response. DHS makes changes to adult member of the family unit when DHS declines to expand the ‘‘family existing guidance on issues such as age no safety or security concerns exist, unit’’ definition, given the legal determinations and custody to reflect accompanied children remaining in requirement for DHS to transfer new laws, policies, or practices, or as immigration detention will not present unaccompanied alien children to HHS, otherwise needed. situations of serious concern either. For generally within 72 hours of Comment. A number of comments these same reasons, DHS declines to determining that the child is an recommended additional protection for adopt the additional suggested unaccompanied alien child. See 8 unaccompanied children and families in requirements regarding isolation. U.S.C. 1232(b)(3). Under the Homeland family facilities specifically. The former Comment. Multiple commenters Security Act of 2002, adopted by the NPREC Commissioners recommended recommended that when possible and TVPRA, an ‘‘unaccompanied alien that DHS separate provisions dealing in the best interest of the juvenile, child’’ is defined, in part, as a child for with unaccompanied minors from family units should remain intact whom ‘‘there is no parent or legal provisions dealing with families. during detention. Some commenters guardian’’ either in the United States or Similarly, one advocacy group stated suggested that DHS include this available in the United States to provide that, because in its view detaining principle in the regulation. Some care and custody. 6 U.S.C. 279(g)(2); see juveniles in family facilities does not commenters also recommended also 8 U.S.C. 1232(g). DHS’s definition eliminate sexual assault risk and may expanding the definition of family unit of ‘‘family unit’’ takes these provisions create a greater risk, DHS should to account for more expansive on unaccompanied alien children into include additional standards specific to understandings of parentage and account. the family unit setting. guardianship in many countries of However, for Subpart B, as indicated The former NPREC Commissioners origin. They suggested that if there are above, DHS has revised § 115.114 to specifically suggested DHS adopt concerns about a child’s safety with a provide that where the agency additional standards that would apply family member, other than a parent or determines that it is appropriate, under to the family facility setting specifically. legal guardian, DHS assess the the totality of the circumstances and Proposed provisions included relationship and safety and make after vetting the familial relationship to screening/vetting of immigration appropriate placements, including the extent feasible, the juvenile may detainees in family facilities, reporting admitting such a family unit while temporarily remain with a non-parental of sexual abuse in family facilities, adult family member. investigations in family facilities, and 11 In addition, under 8 U.S.C. 1232(c)(2)(B), if an Comment. One organization suggested access to medical and mental health unaccompanied alien child reaches 18 years of age a more bright line mandate regarding care in family facilities. The former and is transferred to DHS custody, DHS must the proposed standard’s paragraph (d) Commissioners believe that these consider placement in the least restrictive setting available after taking into account the alien’s danger by requiring the transfer of additional measures would improve to self, danger to the community, and risk of flight. unaccompanied alien children to HHS/ protections in family settings. Such aliens are eligible to participate in alternative ORR within the timeframe proposed. Response. DHS has considered these to detention programs, utilizing a continuum of Another advocacy group emphasized comments and declines to make the alternatives based on the alien’s need for suggested changes to the proposed supervision, which may include placement of the the importance of adequate training and alien with an individual or an organizational procedures for meeting the timeframe standard. DHS grouped the provisions sponsor, or in a supervised group home. for transfer. specific to all juvenile detention and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13117

family detention in one section in order that they apply to other immigration of the opposite gender, except in exigent to account for current immigration detention facilities. The potential circumstances or when such viewing is detention and holding facility practice benefits of creating a separate set of incidental to routine cell checks or is and policy. Under current practice and standards for this context are not otherwise appropriate in connection policy, a single facility might detain apparent, especially in light of the fact with a medical examination or bowel individuals as well as families. (In other that the applicable standards in Part A movement under medical supervision. words, families detained while are robust. The standards also required that staff of travelling or living together may be With respect to juveniles detained the opposite gender announce their detained together, even if the facility outside of family units, as noted above, presence when entering an area where usually holds detainees as individuals unaccompanied alien children are detainees are likely to be showering, only.) Given this context, DHS believes generally placed with ORR almost performing bodily functions, or that streamlining juvenile-specific immediately; ORR is responsible for changing clothing. The proposed rule regulatory standards in a single location making decisions related to the care and prohibited cross-gender strip searches strengthens protections, as responsible custody of such children in their charge. except in exigent circumstances, or officials are able to refer to a ‘‘one-stop For the 72-hour intervening period up to when performed by medical shop’’ in §§ 115.14 and 115.114. DHS which DHS may generally maintain practitioners and prohibits facility staff believes that its decision to streamline custody, concerns about abuse should from conducting body cavity searches of the standards will not decrease the level be alleviated by the strong requirements juveniles, requiring instead that all body of protection to young detainees. DHS in both subparts that generally prohibit cavity searches of juveniles be referred will carefully monitor policies and the juveniles from being held with adult to a medical practitioner. implementation of this approach and detainees in non-familial situations. In Subpart A, the proposed rule make future policy or regulatory DHS believes that the final standards on generally prohibited cross-gender pat- changes if necessary. juvenile and family detainees, with the down searches of female detainees, With respect to the former NPREC revisions noted above, sufficiently unless in exigent circumstances. The Commissioners’ specific proposals for protect juveniles in immigration proposed rule permitted cross-gender family unit detention and/or family detention and holding facilities. Due to male detainee pat-down searches when, facilities, ICE already has strong policies these factors, DHS has declined to after reasonable diligence, staff of the in place regarding these matters. These promulgate a wholly separate set of same gender was not available at the standards and ICE policies include standards for facilities that house time the search or in exigent detailed provisions on screening/vetting juveniles. circumstances. The proposed rule of immigration detainees, reporting of Comment. One comment suggested required that any cross-gender pat-down sexual abuse, investigations, and access explicit requirements that, absent search conducted pursuant to these to medical and mental health care. exigent circumstances, juveniles have exceptions be documented. The Again, in addition to the PREA access to daily outdoor recreation; a proposed rule required these policies regulatory standards that address these number of groups suggested the same and procedures to be implemented at topics generally for all detainees, the standard for large muscle exercise, the same time as all other requirements 2007 Residential Standard addressing legally required special education placed on facilities resulting from this Sexual Abuse and Assault Prevention services, and—to the extent possible— rulemaking. The proposed rule did not and Intervention ensures that other programs. prohibit cross-gender pat-down searches individuals in family and residential Response. Except to the extent in § 115.115 of Subpart B because of the settings are protected by measures affected by standards designed to exigencies encountered in the holding relating to these precise topics. prevent, detect, and respond to sexual facility environment and the staffing Comment. One commenter abuse and assault in detention facilities, and timing constraints in those small recommended that DHS promulgate a access to activities and other services is and short-term facilities. separate set of standards to prevent In both immigration detention outside the scope of this rulemaking. abuse in facilities that detain children. facilities and holding facilities the Therefore, it is not necessary to include The group expressed that a significantly proposed rule prohibited examinations a list of specific kinds of juvenile improved accounting for the needs of of detainees for the sole purpose of detainee activities and access in these and special risks faced by such youth is determining the detainee’s gender. The standards. necessary. proposed rule further required that all Comment. One advocacy group Response. DHS has considered this security and law enforcement staff be suggested a requirement that children comment and, as a policy matter, trained in proper procedures for have meaningful access to their declines to set forth differing abuse- conducting all pat-down searches. prevention standards depending on attorneys during interactions with DHS whether a specific detainee population officials, including such interactions Changes in Final Rule happens to be present at a specific point after transfer to HHS/ORR. In paragraph (i) of § 115.15, DHS in time. Because DOJ’s standards Response. This comment is outside changed the text to prohibit a facility address juvenile-only facilities through the scope of this rulemaking. DHS from searching or physically examining either the juvenile justice system or the therefore declines to address it here. a detainee for the sole purpose of criminal justice system, DOJ’s standards Limits to Cross-Gender Viewing and determining the detainee’s genital specifically included a definition of a Searches (§§ 115.15, 115.115) characteristics. The previous language juvenile facility. See 77 FR 37105, at used the phrase ‘‘gender’’ instead of 37115. But immigration detention Summary of Proposed Rule ‘‘genital characteristics.’’ The final rule facilities and temporary holding The standards contained in the also revises paragraph (i) to allow a facilities are not so easily characterized. proposed rule required policies and detainee’s gender to be determined as For example, family unit detention procedures that enable detainees to part of a standard medical examination includes juveniles as well as adults. shower (where showers are available), that is routine for all detainees during PREA protections apply to a family unit perform bodily functions, and change intake or other processing procedures. detention facility in the same manner clothing without being viewed by staff The final rule also revises §§ 115.15(j)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13118 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

and 115.115(f) to clarify that pat-down detainees who have experienced past immigration detention facilities are searches must be conducted consistent sexual abuse, even professionally allowing detainees equal access to with all agency policy. conducted cross-gender pat-down programming without regard to detainee searches may be traumatic and gender or staffing limitations. Comments and Responses perceived as abusive. See Jordan v. Comment. Multiple commenters and Comment. A number of commenters Gardner, 986 F.2d 1521, 1526 (9th Cir. other groups expressed concerns with believed the same prohibition on cross- 1993) (en banc) (striking down cross- the phrase ‘‘incidental to routine cell gender pat-down searches should apply gender pat downs of female inmates as checks’’ and suggested it be removed as to all detainees. Two sets of advocacy unconstitutional ‘‘infliction of pain’’ an exception allowing cross-gender groups and another organization when there was evidence that a high viewing, a sentiment with which former suggested eliminating paragraph (b), percentage of female inmates had a NPREC Commissioners commented they which allows cross-gender searches of history of traumatic sexual abuse by agreed. One commenter suggested the males in limited circumstances. A men and were being traumatized by the phrase could allow a facility to not take number of these and other groups cross-gender pat-down searches). needed steps and then simply claim suggested changing paragraph (c) to Because females are staff viewing is exempted as incidental. prohibit all cross-gender pat-down disproportionately vulnerable to sexual Response. DHS respectfully disagrees searches, not just for female detainees, abuse and trauma in the cross-gender with the commenters that viewing except in exigent circumstances; some pat down context, the prohibition of incidental to routine cell checks is a members of Congress commented in such pat downs unless there are exigent gateway for abuse in detention. The favor of doing so in order to meet ‘‘civil circumstances is a crucial protection in final rule provides adequate protection confinement standards.’’ furtherance of PREA. DHS goes a step by requiring each facility to have Multiple commenters, including the further than DOJ by also prohibiting policies and procedures that oblige staff NPREC Commissioners, criticized the cross-gender pat downs of male of the opposite gender to announce their inclusion of ‘‘exigent circumstances’’ as detainees, but allows for two presence when entering an area where an exception to cross-gender searches. exceptions—exigent circumstances, and detainees are likely to be showering, These commenters perceived the circumstances where staff of the same performing bodily functions, or exception to be overly broad. One gender are not available. The slightly changing clothing. commenter expressed dissatisfaction different standard reflects the fact that Comment. Two comments suggested with the term ‘‘reasonable diligence’’ for men are less likely to be abused by removing the provisions that allow cross-gender searches when safety, similar reasons. The commenter cross-gender pat-down searches. suggested a standard that would require A categorical prohibition on cross- security, and related interests are at facilities to have sufficient male and gender pat-down searches of male stake, out of apparent concern that the female staff to sharply limit cross- detainees except in exigent provision’s breadth would allow gender pat-down searching of men. circumstances may not be operationally facilities to ‘‘mask abusive use of searches.’’ Another commenter recommended possible at facilities that detain males Response. Maintaining safety, security narrowing the circumstances under but have higher proportions of female and other related interests in detention which cross-gender pat downs of males staff. Such facilities could not guarantee in order to protect detainees, staff, are permitted. the availability of adequate numbers of contractors, volunteers, and visitors is A number of advocacy groups male staff without engaging in potential the highest priority for DHS. Searches suggested explicitly requiring that employment discrimination as a result are an effective and proven tool to facilities cannot restrict a detainee’s of attempts to inflate staffing of one ensure the safety of every person in the access to regularly available gender. Likewise, DHS declines to detention environment. As such, the programming or other opportunities in require facilities to maintain male and final standard maintains paragraph (a), order to comply with the restrictions on female staff sufficient to avoid cross- which explains why searches are a cross-gender viewing and searches. gender pat-down searches in all cases. Response. DHS adopted a standard necessary part of detention. Such a mandate could result in the Comment. Two comments suggested that generally prohibits, with limited unintended consequence of that the provision in paragraph (i) exceptions, cross-gender pat-down employment discrimination in facilities. regarding preventing searches for the searches of female and male detainees In response to commenters concerned sole purpose of determining ‘‘gender’’ in order to further PREA’s mandate of that prohibiting cross-gender pat downs be revised to instead prevent searching preventing sexual abuse without will lead to a restriction of detainees’ solely for determining ‘‘genital compromising security in detention, or access to programming, DHS notes that characteristics.’’ In the following infringing impermissibly on the any restriction based on a lack of sentence of the provision, the groups employment rights of officers. appropriate staffing for pat downs is DHS declines to incorporate the also suggest that ‘‘genital status’’ replace unacceptable and is not standard ‘‘gender’’ for when employees can take commenters’ suggestion to extend the practice. DHS will ensure that same coverage for both male and female other steps to determine. Another advocacy group suggested clear pat-down searches. Female detainees Principles for Women Offenders, at 37, NIC (2003) are especially vulnerable to sexual (‘‘In addition, standard policies and procedures in standards for classifying as male or abuse during a pat-down search because correctional settings can have profound effects on female based on a range of issues women with histories of trauma and abuse, and of their disproportionate likelihood of including self-identification and a often act as triggers to retraumatize women who medical assessment, and not based having previously suffered abuse. have post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).’’); According to studies, women with Danielle Dirks, Sexual Revictimization and solely on external genitalia or identity sexual abuse histories are particularly Retraumatization of Women in Prison, 32 Women’s documents. Stud. Q. 102, 102 (2004) (‘‘For women with Regarding the same provision, another traumatized by subsequent abuse.12 For previous histories of abuse, prison life is apt to commenter suggested removing ‘‘as part simulate the abuse dynamics already established in 12 See Barbara Bloom, Barbara Owen, and these women’s lives, thus perpetuating women’s of a broader medical examination Stephanie Covington, Gender-Responsive further revictimization and retraumatization while conducted in private, by a medical Strategies: Research, Practice, and Guiding serving time.’’). practitioner’’ as a means for making the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13119

determination, and instead replacing it cross-gender viewing and searches. showering for transgender and intersex with ‘‘through a routine medical Existing agency policy will not conflict detainees. examination that all detainees must with these standards. In consideration Response. These issues are of great undergo as part of intake or other of the commenter’s concern, however, importance to DHS, but requiring such processing procedure.’’ DHS has revised the final rule for separate policies would be outside the Response. After considering the clarity. The final rule now requires pat- scope of this rulemaking. Section comments regarding paragraph (i), DHS down searches to be conducted 115.115(d) requires policies and has revised the language to prevent ‘‘consistent with security needs and procedures that enable detainees to searches for the sole purpose of agency policy, including consideration shower, perform bodily functions, and determining ‘‘a detainee’s genital of officer safety.’’ change clothing without being viewed characteristics’’ instead of ‘‘a detainee’s Comment. Multiple comments dealt by staff of the opposite gender, with gender.’’ DHS also clarifies that while with juvenile pat-down searches. One limited exceptions. medical examinations may be done to group suggested that training for Given the limited infrastructure of determine gender, they must be part of employees, contractors, and volunteers holding facilities (most do not include a standard medical exam that is routine having contact with juveniles must showers), DHS does not believe that for all detainees during intake or other include child-specific modules. Another requiring separate showering for processing procedures. DHS believes commenter suggested a requirement that transgender and intersex detainees is an that the final rule allows a range of male juveniles only be subjected to efficient use of limited resources. issues to be considered for gender cross-gender pat-down searches in Comment. One commenter suggested determination. In addition to medical exigent circumstances. the standards should embody American examinations, the determination may be Response. In addition to the ‘‘floor’’ Bar Association Standards on the made during conversation and by set by this regulation, DHS has Treatment of Prisoners. Those standards reviewing medical records. established procedures for the custody may provide strategies and devices to Comment. One advocacy group and processing of juveniles for intake or allow personnel of the opposite gender suggested that searches of transgender transfer to ORR. DHS also provides of a prisoner to supervise the prisoner and intersex detainees should have clear training related to the treatment of without viewing the prisoner’s private standards and by default be conducted juveniles in basic training and in follow- bodily areas. by female personnel, as the group Response. DHS believes that the contends risk of sexual abuse is up training courses on a periodic basis. For example, ICE’s Family Residential requirements set forth in §§ 115.15 and generally lower when the search is 115.115 establish sufficient safeguards conducted by females. Standards, applicable to juveniles in the immigration detention facility context, to limit the cross-gender viewing of Two comments suggested adding a detainees by staff, and are fully provision in paragraphs (j) and (f), for provide that a pat-down search shall only occur when reasonable and consistent with the above-referenced Subparts A and B, respectively, to standards. require that same-gender searches for articulable suspicion can be transgender and intersex detainees be documented. The standard on searches Accommodating Detainees With conducted based on a detainee’s gender also provides a requirement for explicit Disabilities and Detainees With Limited identity absent a safety-based objection authorization by the facility English Proficiency (§§ 115.16, 115.116) by the detainee. One commenter also administrator or assistant administrator Summary of Proposed Rule suggested that we replace the phrase in order for a child resident fourteen ‘‘existing agency policy’’ with ‘‘these years old or younger to be subject to a The standards in the proposed rule regulations, and compatible agency pat-down, requires facilities to have required each agency and immigration policy’’ for clarity. further written policy and procedures detention facility to develop methods to Response. DHS respectfully disagrees for such searches, and provides that ensure that inmates who are LEP or with the commenters about including such searches should be conducted by disabled are able to report sexual abuse specific provisions within this section a staff member of the same gender as the and assault to staff directly, and that describing how pat-down searches detainee. The stated goal of the standard facilities make accommodations to should be conducted for transgender is to ensure that residential searches are convey sexual abuse policies orally to and intersex detainees. While a facility conducted without unnecessary force inmates with limited reading skills or can, on a case-by-case basis, adopt its and in ways that preserve the dignity of who are visually impaired. The own policies for pat-down searches of the individual being searched. All staff proposed standards required each transgender or intersex detainees, the must receive initial and annual training agency and immigration detention agency does not believe that an on effective search techniques. facility to provide in-person or additional mandatory rule is necessary Standards applicable to all minors held telephonic interpretation services in in this context. DHS believes pat-down by ICE ensure that the least intrusive matters relating to allegations of sexual searches must be conducted in a practical search method is employed abuse, unless the detainee expresses a professional manner for all detainees and include similar pat-down preference for a detainee interpreter and and is reluctant to carve out unique pat- parameters to those described above. the agency determines that is down search standards for transgender These policies are the best practices for appropriate. and intersex detainees. Additional the agency and subsequent revisions to Changes in Final Rule standards may make the regulation more the final rule are unnecessary. cumbersome to implement on a day-to- Comment. Regarding the Subpart B- In response to a comment received day basis. specific paragraph (d), one collective regarding another section of the DHS declines to change the wording group comment suggested provisions be standards, DHS is modifying this of §§ 115.15(j) and 115.115(f) to added requiring agency policies language by clarifying that a detainee ‘‘compatible agency policy,’’ because addressing health, hygiene, and dignity may use another detainee to provide once a facility adopts the standards set in facilities, requiring replacement interpretation where the agency forth in this regulation, the facility is garments and access to showers when determines that it is both appropriate expected to abide by the standards in necessary, and allowing separate and consistent with DHS policy.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13120 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Comments and Responses background investigations every five Response. DHS declines to implement Comment. One commenter expressed years for agency employees and for a per se rule that a past history as a concern that further explanation, facility staff who may have contact with victim of abuse will serve as an outside of ‘‘literature describing the detainees and who work in automatic disqualifier for employment. protection’’ for detainees, is necessary. immigration-only facilities. Past victimization is not necessarily a Response. DHS recognizes the Changes in Final Rule useful indicator of future likelihood to importance of ensuring that all engage in abuse. Moreover, DHS detainees, regardless of disability or LEP DHS is adopting the regulation as believes that any blanket rule status, can communicate effectively proposed. disqualifying past victims of abuse from with staff without having to rely on Comments and Responses employment would be discriminatory detainee interpreters, in order to and cannot be accepted. Comment. Commenters suggested Comment. Regarding the Subpart A facilitate reporting of sexual abuse as changing the background investigation accurately and discreetly as possible standard on hiring and promotion, a standard’s language to include making commenter stated that it is unclear why and to provide meaningful access to the the investigation a requirement for staff agency’s sexual abuse and assault paragraph (g)—applying the that work in facilities that house a mix requirements of the section otherwise prevention efforts. As a result, this of residents, including non-immigration standard includes other methods of applicable to the agency also to contract inmates, but may have contact with facilities and staff—only appears in this communication aside from written detainees. The commenters suggest materials to ensure that every detainee section on hiring and promotion issues, separating this requirement out from the rather than in all standards. is educated on all aspects of the investigation requirement for all facility agency’s efforts to prevent, detect, and Response. DHS included § 115.17(g) staff who work in immigration-only respond to sexual abuse. Such methods to clarify that any standards applicable detention facilities for purposes of include in-person, telephonic, or video to the agency also extend to any clarity. interpretive services, as well as written contracted facilities and staff, as well. Response. DHS recognizes the critical By its terms, much of the rest of the materials that are provided in formats or importance of performing thorough through methods that ensure effective regulation also applies to non-DHS background investigations as part of the facilities, to the extent that they meet communication with detainees who hiring and promotion process. DHS may have disabilities that result in the definition of immigration detention remains committed to ensuring such facility under Subpart A. Although limited literate and vision abilities. background investigations are The final standard, in conjunction paragraph (g) may be redundant, DHS is conducted prior to hiring new staff that with Federal statutes and regulations retaining it for clarity nonetheless. may have contact with detainees, or protecting the rights of individuals with before enlisting the services of any Upgrades to Facilities and Technologies disabilities and LEP individuals, contractor who may have contact with (§§ 115.18, 115.118) protects all inmates while providing detainees. However, DHS declines to agencies with discretion in how to Summary of Proposed Rule expand the requirement for background provide requisite information and investigations to include staff that work The standards in the proposed rule interpretation services. The final in facilities with non-immigration required agencies and facilities to take standard does not go beyond that which inmates and do not have contact with into account how best to combat sexual is required by statute, but clarifies the detainees due to the lack of DHS abuse when designing or expanding agencies’ specific responsibilities with authority. facilities and when installing or regard to PREA related matters and Comment. Commenters suggested updating video monitoring systems or individuals who are LEP or who have requiring that background investigations other technology. disabilities. for all employees who may have contact Changes in Final Rule Hiring and Promotion Decisions with juveniles must include records (§§ 115.17, 115.117) related to child abuse, domestic DHS is adopting the regulation as violence registries and civil protection proposed. Summary of Proposed Rule orders. One commenter also suggested Comments and Responses The standards in the proposed rule these background requirements be DHS did not receive any public prohibited the hiring of an individual explicit for all new staff that may have comments on this provision during the that may have contact with detainees contact with female detainees. and who previously engaged in sexual Response. DHS agrees that criminal public comment period. abuse in an institutional setting; who records related to allegations that a Evidence Protocols and Forensic has been convicted of engaging in potential employee has engaged in child Medical Examinations (§§ 115.21, sexual activity in the community abuse, domestic violence registries and 115.121) facilitated by force, the threat of force, civil protection orders are an important or coercion; or who has been civilly or component of the background Summary of Proposed Rule administratively adjudicated to have investigation. The standard background The standards contained in the engaged in such activity. The standards investigation process for employees and proposed rule required agencies and also required that any substantiated staff already includes the search of such facilities responsible for investigating allegation of sexual abuse made against records. Therefore, no additional allegations of sexual abuse to adopt a staff be taken into consideration when changes are required. protocol for the preservation of usable making promotion decisions. The Comment. A commenter physical evidence as well as to provide standards in the proposed rule also recommended that DHS investigate to detainee victims access to a forensic required a background investigation discover if border officers themselves medical examination at no cost to the before the agency or facility hires have been hurt as children or adults detainee. The standard further required employees, contractors, or staff who because of the commenter’s belief that if that such developed protocols be may have contact with detainees. The it is in their history, they will be more appropriate for juveniles, where standards further required updated apt to abuse others. applicable, and that outside victim

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13121

services be available after incidents of required by applicable state laws to Comment. One commenter sexual abuse to the extent possible. report all incidents of child sexual recommended that facilities make In situations when the component abuse or assault, including incidents updated lists of resources and referrals agency or facility is not responsible for where the parent or legal guardian is the to appropriate professionals available if investigating alleged sexual abuse perpetrator, to designated law and when assault happens. within their facilities, the proposed enforcement agencies. The law Response. DHS declines to make this standards required them to request that enforcement official is then responsible recommended edit to the current the investigating entity follow the for ensuring that child welfare services provision because it is outside the scope relevant investigatory requirements set are notified where appropriate. of the provision. Section 115.53 out in the standard. Therefore, the inclusion of this currently requires facilities to have Changes in Final Rule provision in these standards is not access for detainees to current necessary. community resources and services and DHS made one change to this Comment. A commenter should satisfy the commenter’s request. provision, providing that a Sexual recommended that DHS provide a Comment. One collective comment Assault Forensic Examiner (SAFE) or a means for protection from removal— from advocacy groups suggested a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) including withholding of removal, number of added provisions for should be used where practicable. prosecutorial discretion, or deferred proposed paragraph (c)’s forensic Comments and Responses action—while an investigation into a medical examination requirement. The groups suggested that the facility Comment. With respect to forensic report of abuse is ongoing, and also arrange for the examination ‘‘when medical examinations, some advocacy require facilities to provide application developmentally appropriate’’ and that groups commented that before a child information to detainee victims and, if another requirement be added that the undergoes such an examination or applicable, parents, guardians, or legal examination is performed by a SAFE or interview, facility officials should representatives. a SANE, with other qualified medical contact and provide advance notice to Response. DHS recognizes that in practitioners only being allowed to the juvenile’s legal guardian or other some cases, it may be appropriate for examine if a SAFE or SANE cannot be appropriate person or entity. For ICE not to remove certain detainee made available. The agency or facility unaccompanied alien children, the victims.13 However, DHS does not would then have to document efforts to groups suggest requiring the agency to believe that every detainee who reports provide a SAFE or SANE. Regarding immediately notify and consult with an allegation should necessarily receive such examinations for juveniles, the HHS/ORR regarding the forensic some type of relief or stay of removal. groups suggested requiring that, except examination and facilitate the OPR has the authority to approve in exigent circumstances, the immediate transfer upon request of ORR deferred action for victimized detainees evaluations be conducted by a qualified and the juvenile. One commenter when it is legally appropriate. professional with expertise in child suggested adding a provision in case a As mandated in §§ 115.22(h) and forensic interviewing techniques. 115.122(e), all alleged detainee victims legal guardian is an alleged perpetrator, Response. It is not necessary for a of sexual abuse that is criminal in in which case the agency should be medical practitioner to be a SAFE or nature will be provided U required to notify a designated state or SANE to be qualified to perform a nonimmigrant status (also known as ‘‘U local services agency under applicable complete forensic examination. Many visa’’) information. OPR and Homeland mandatory reporting laws. detention facilities are located in rural Response. DHS declines to make the Security Investigations (HSI) have the communities where there are healthcare suggested revisions because they would delegated authority for ICE to certify professionals who are qualified to have no practical application in this USCIS Form I–918, Supplement B for perform forensic exams, but may not context. First, it would not be victims of qualifying criminal activity have a SAFE or SANE designation. appropriate to immediately transfer a that ICE is investigating where the Adding a SAFE or SANE requirement to juvenile who was sexually assaulted, victim seeks to petition for U the provision could in some even if requested by ORR and the nonimmigrant status. circumstances lead to delayed juvenile, as the juvenile should first be Because these are routine agency treatment, as there might not be a SAFE referred to an appropriate medical care practices and subject to agency or SANE nearby to the facility. As a professional and local law enforcement discretion, DHS has declined to make result, DHS declines to absolutely agency, potentially in conjunction with changes in the final rule to specifically require use of a SAFE or SANE. DHS, the appropriate child welfare authority. address the various prosecutorial however, has added to the standard that Responsibility for determining who has discretion methods that may be used. examinations should be performed by a legal authority to make decisions on ICE can and will use these prosecutorial SAFE or SANE where practicable. With behalf of the juvenile would lie with the discretion methods for detainees with respect to the comment about investigating law enforcement agency substantiated sexual abuse and assault developmentally appropriate and the medical provider because the claims. evaluations, DHS notes that under juvenile would be a victim involved in §§ 115.21(a) and 115.121(a), uniform a criminal investigation. 13 See U.S. Immigration and Customs Second, juveniles in the family evidence protocols must be Enforcement, Policy No. 10076.1, Prosecutorial developmentally appropriate. residential program would be present as Discretion: Certain Victims, Witnesses, and a member of a family unit and therefore Plaintiffs (2011), available at http://www.ice.gov/ Policies To Ensure Investigation of doclib/secure-communities/pdf/domestic- would be with an individual who violence.pdf and U.S. Immigration and Customs Allegations and Appropriate Agency possesses authority for making legal Enforcement, Policy No. 10075.1, Exercising Oversight (§§ 115.22, 115.122) determinations for the juvenile present Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with Civil at the facility. Immigration Enforcement Priorities of the Agency Summary of Proposed Rule for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of With respect to the comment about Aliens (2011), available at http://www.ice.gov/ The standards contained in the reporting abuse by a parent or guardian, doclib/secure-communities/pdf/prosecutorial- proposed rule mandated that each DHS notes that agencies are already discretion-memo.pdf. allegation of sexual abuse have a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13122 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

completed investigation by the DHS anticipates, however, that covered groups also suggested the standard appropriate investigative authority. agencies and facilities may at times prevent the victim from being Each agency and immigration detention receive complaints that are framed as transferred to another facility in a way facility would establish and publish a sexual abuse allegations, but do not rise that materially interferes with the protocol for investigation for to the level of potentially criminal investigation of the allegation unless investigating or referring allegations of behavior. For consistency with the DOJ essential to the protection of the victim, sexual abuse. All allegations received by standards, and to ensure that mandatory in which case the agency must ensure the facility would be promptly referred referrals do not deplete scarce criminal that the victim continues to be available to the agency and, unless the allegation investigative resources, DHS declines to to cooperate with the investigation. did not involve potential criminal require referral to a criminal Several advocacy groups, including a behavior, promptly referred for investigative entity in all cases. number of collective advocate investigation to an appropriate law Comment. Commenters also comments, suggested a further provision enforcement agency. Finally, when an recommended that DHS insert a be added to require that the agency allegation of detainee abuse that is requirement that the facility head or an ensure the victim is not removed from assignee must request the law criminal in nature is being investigated, the United States if the victim indicates enforcement investigation, and that the each agency would ensure that any a wish to petition for U nonimmigrant facility’s own investigation must not alleged detainee victim of criminal status and moves to file such a petition abuse is provided access to relevant supplant or impede a criminal one. Response. DHS declines to require the within a reasonable period, so long as information regarding the U the victim cooperates with the nonimmigrant visa process. facility head to request the law enforcement investigation and declines investigation and the allegations are not Changes in Final Rule to incorporate a requirement that the found to be unfounded. In such a case, DHS made one clarification to both facility’s own investigation must not one group suggested the agency should subparts, in paragraphs (h) and (e), supplant or impede a criminal one. be required to ensure the victim is not respectively, that replaces the term ‘‘U These revisions are not necessary removed before obtaining necessary nonimmigrant visa information’’ with because under this regulation, PBNDS certified documents to apply for such ‘‘U nonimmigrant status information.’’ 2011, and the SAAPID, all status; others suggested a bar on This change is consistent with the term investigations into alleged sexual removal unless the U nonimmigrant used in the Form I–918 (Petition for U assault must be prompt, thorough, petition is denied by USCIS. Nonimmigrant Status). DHS also objective, fair, and conducted by Response. DHS recognizes that in changed both paragraphs to make clear qualified investigators. Furthermore, some cases, it may be appropriate for its intention that the information be facilities are required to coordinate and ICE not to remove certain detainee timely provided. assist outside law enforcement agencies victims.14 However, DHS does not during their investigations and therefore believe that every detainee who reports Comments and Responses not impede those investigations. DHS an allegation should receive some type Comment. In connection with the declines to add the suggested language of stay of removal. OPR has the proposed requirement that each facility because it does not strengthen the authority to approve deferred action for ensure allegations are reported to an investigative mandates that are victimized detainees when it is legally appropriate law enforcement agency for currently in place. appropriate. As mandated in §§ 115.22 criminal investigation, several Comment. A commenter suggested, (h) and 115.122 (e), all alleged detainee commenters recommended that DHS regarding the requirement that the victims of sexual abuse that is criminal remove the exception for allegations facility ensure incidents be promptly in nature will be provided U that do not involve potentially criminal reported to the JIC, ICE’s OPR, or the nonimmigrant status information. OPR behavior. One group stated that any DHS OIG, as well as the appropriate ICE and HSI have the delegated authority for allegation of sexual abuse as defined in Field Office Director (FOD), that the ICE to certify USCIS Form I–918, proposed § 115.6 is potentially criminal. language ‘‘ensure that the incident is Supplement B for victims of qualifying Response. DHS agrees with the promptly reported’’ be replaced with criminal activity that ICE is commenter that both appropriate agency ‘‘report.’’ investigating where the victim seeks to oversight and criminal referrals are Response. In some cases, the incident petition for U nonimmigrant status. essential components of DHS efforts in will be reported by an ERO officer and Because these are routine agency this context. DHS is therefore not an employee of the facility or the practices and subject to agency implementing standards that require facility administrator. In such cases, the discretion, DHS has declined to make strong and transparent agency and facility will have met the standards of changes in the final rule to specifically facility protocols for reporting and the provision by ensuring that the address the various prosecutorial referring allegations of sexual abuse. incident was reported while not doing discretion methods that may be used. Under the regulation, covered agencies the reporting itself. Therefore, DHS ICE can and will use these prosecutorial and facilities must promptly report all declines making this addition as it does discretion methods for detainees with sexual abuse allegations to the not believe this change will make the appropriate administrative offices, provision more effective. 14 See U.S. Immigration and Customs without exception. Also under the Comment. Multiple commenters Enforcement, Policy No. 10076.1, Prosecutorial regulation, covered agencies and suggested a requirement that the Discretion: Certain Victims, Witnesses, and facilities must promptly refer all detainee victim not be removed while Plaintiffs (2011), available at http://www.ice.gov/ doclib/secure-communities/pdf/domestic- potentially criminal sexual abuse an investigation is pending, unless the violence.pdf and U.S. Immigration and Customs allegations to a law enforcement agency detainee victim specifically and Enforcement, Policy No. 10075.1, Exercising with the legal authority to conduct expressly waives this prohibition in Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with Civil criminal investigations. writing. In the case of a family unit, the Immigration Enforcement Priorities of the Agency for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of DHS agrees that acts of sexual abuse, recommendation would require that no Aliens (2011), available at http://www.ice.gov/ as defined in this regulation, most often non-abuser family members be removed doclib/secure-communities/pdf/prosecutorial- involve ‘‘potentially criminal behavior.’’ during the pending investigation. The discretion-memo.pdf.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13123

substantiated sexual abuse and assault concerns highlighted by the Comment. One group recommended claims. commenters, and reserves appropriate that access to U nonimmigrant status Furthermore, when a victimized flexibility for the agency to tailor its information be provided not later than detainee is petitioning for U practice to specific circumstances. DHS two weeks following an incident. nonimmigrant status, appears to have notes that ICE already provides access to Response. ICE’s SAAPID, section 5.7, been a victim of qualifying criminal approved informational materials or sets forth the agency’s responsibilities activity, and appears to meet the appropriate national hotlines. for providing U nonimmigrant status helpfulness requirement for the Given the potentially broad scope of information to sexual assault victims. investigation or prosecution, this provision (which applies to all The Directive states that OPR, in prosecutorial discretion should be allegations of sexual assault), DHS coordination with the FOD and/or HSI utilized by ICE. To prevent unintended believes that additional changes would SAC, will ensure alleged victims of removals, OPR must sign off on any be unnecessary and potentially sexual abuse or assault who have made ERO request to remove a victimized counterproductive to the goal of allegations involving criminal behavior detainee when an investigation has been providing timely, accurate, and useful will be provided access to U filed and is pending. DHS does not access to information. For instance, with nonimmigrant status information. DHS believe that adding the suggested respect to the question of who ought to believes that this policy ensures victims language substantially strengthens the provide U nonimmigrant status will have timely access to the U current provision as it is current information, DHS agrees with the nonimmigrant status information. practice and therefore DHS declines the commenter that a facility’s PSA Accordingly, DHS declines to recommendation. Compliance Manager is one good option implement a two week regulatory Comment. Several commenters for providing such information. requirement. suggested that there be increased access However, ICE OPR would also provide Comment. Collective comments from to existing types of legal status for abuse such information pursuant to the advocates suggested a requirement that survivors. SAAPID, section 5.7, which states that the agency designate various qualified Response. DHS is currently able to ‘‘in cases where the allegation involves staff members or DHS employees to provide detainee victims with behavior that is criminal in nature, OPR, complete USCIS Form I–918, information concerning U Supplement B for any detainee victim of in coordination with the FOD and/or nonimmigrant status when the sexual sexual abuse who meets U HSI SAC, as appropriate, will ensure abuse is criminal in nature. DHS may nonimmigrant status certification any alleged victim of sexual abuse or also effect deferred action or significant requirements. A comment noted that assault who is an alien is provided public benefit parole when appropriate. this ‘‘is meant to prevent qualified access to U non-immigrant visa DHS declines to make additional agency personnel from declining to information. . . .’’ changes in this rulemaking because any assist a detainee with a U visa additional access to existing types of DHS does not believe that including application.’’ The same comment noted legal status for abuse victims other than these detailed requirements in a that in some cases, agencies do not what is currently authorized would be regulatory provision or designating the complete the Supplement B ‘‘because of outside the scope of this rulemaking. PSA Compliance Manager as the a lack of understanding [that] Comment. Several advocacy groups individual responsible for providing the completing Supplement B is not an recommended the standards relating to information to qualifying detainees admission of liability on the part of the access to U nonimmigrant status would strengthen this provision or agency but simply an acknowledgement information contain more detailed provide more support to the detainee. that the detainee was or is likely to be requirements. A number of comments DHS notes that it also already provides helpful in an investigation.’’ suggested expanding the provision to such information to the public on DHS Response. U nonimmigrant status is ensure that the information include Web sites and through DHS’s Blue available to victims of certain qualifying instructions on how to apply and Campaign to end human trafficking. crimes under U.S. laws who assist law contact legal experts for information to Comment. Several advocacy groups enforcement in the investigation or assist with the process. Some of these suggested that the standard require the prosecution of the criminal activity. The comments suggested specifically facility head or his or her assignee to only agencies that have authority to providing that the PSA Compliance make every effort to ensure that the certify the Form I–918, Supplement B Manager (or his or her assignee)—rather victim has legal counsel who can are those Federal, State, or local than the ‘‘agency’’—should ensure the provide advice on petitions for U agencies with responsibility for the alleged detainee victim be provided nonimmigrant status, unless law investigation or prosecution of a access to the information, in order to enforcement investigators were to qualifying crime or criminal activity, clarify who has responsibility for determine the allegation to be including agencies with criminal providing the U nonimmigrant status unfounded. investigative jurisdiction. See 8 CFR information. One group recommended Response. DHS declines to add the 214.14(a)(2). OPR and HSI have been that access to U nonimmigrant status suggested language with respect to legal delegated the authority for ICE to information be provided not later than counsel. Immigration detention facilities complete and certify the USCIS Form I– two weeks following an incident. already provide information about legal 918, Supplement B when they are the Response. DHS agrees that these services to detainees, consistent with investigating authority on a Federal case provisions should be more specific, and existing standards regarding access to for victims of qualifying criminal therefore has clarified the regulatory the law library and other information activity. ERO does not have this text to make clear its intention that about legal services. Facilities also delegated authority because ERO does access to the information should be facilitate access to legal counsel through not have criminal investigative provided in a timely manner—i.e., visitation and communication by jurisdiction. within a reasonable period of time, telephone. DHS notes that § 115.53 In most instances where a detainee under the totality of the circumstances. requires facilities to ensure detainees would seek to petition for U This change is consistent with current have access to current community nonimmigrant status, the appropriate ICE practice and responsive to the resources and services. investigative authority and therefore the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13124 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

certifying agency would be local law ‘‘unaccompanied alien child in Changes in Final Rule enforcement. With respect to the removal,’’ the PSA Compliance Manager DHS is adopting the regulation as specific request that DHS prevent or his or her assignee notify ORR proposed. qualified agency personnel from immediately and facilitate the declining to assist a detainee with a U immediate transfer of the juvenile to Comments and Responses nonimmigrant petition, DHS declines to ORR, so long as the detainee victim Comment. A number of advocacy set such policy in this context. DHS has wishes to remain in the United States group commenters objected to the clearly delegated authority to select while the investigation is pending. timeframe for initial training. With officers who may certify a U Additionally, the groups suggest that if respect to Subpart A’s requirement that nonimmigrant petition. These officers the detainee victim is a juvenile in a the agency train, or require the training receive appropriate training with regard family unit and the sole parent or legal of, all facility staff and agency to this process and must use their guardian in that unit has allegedly employees who may have contact with professional judgment when deciding victimized any juvenile, the PSA immigration detention facility detainees whether to certify petitions. DHS does Compliance Manager or its assignee be within one year, one advocacy group not believe it is necessary or appropriate required to consult with the designated suggested that the standard require to require additional involvement in the state or local mandatory reporting training completion within a shorter certification process for U agency regarding the release and time period of six months. With respect nonimmigrant petitions. to Subpart B, commenters suggested that Comment. One commenter suggested placement of all juvenile(s) in the family all training pertaining to holding that DHS extend the visa information unit with a state or local social services facilities be completed within one year provisions to include a requirement that agency. The group suggests that if the of this publication. an alleged detainee victim of sexual state or local social services agency Response. DHS has considered these abuse receive notification and assistance refrains from assuming custody but a comments and determined that the for Special Immigrant Juvenile status criminal or administrative investigation proposed standard still provides the and T nonimmigrant status (commonly results in ‘‘a finding,’’ the juveniles most aggressive timeframe appropriate known as the ‘‘T visa’’). must be deemed unaccompanied and Response. DHS declines to accept the ORR must be notified for the transfer. for training in immigration detention suggested language, as T nonimmigrant facilities. DHS’s timeframe is in line Response. DHS declines to add the with the DOJ standard’s one-year period status and Special Immigrant Juvenile suggested language concerning this (SIJ) status are outside the scope of this for employees who may have contact population. Unaccompanied alien with inmates. DHS declines to shorten rulemaking. Whereas an alleged children are generally transferred to an incident of sexual assault of a detainee the timeframe for training in holding HHS/ORR facility within 72 hours. facilities, in light of the large number of may constitute a qualifying criminal Moreover, taken together, various activity for U nonimmigrant status, this CBP personnel who will receive the provisions in the regulations training. rulemaking is not germane to T appropriately address the concern nonimmigrant status, which is for Comment. Commenters suggested that raised by the comment. Section 115.14 certain victims of a severe form of training be ongoing, with a number of addresses issues relating to juvenile human trafficking. SIJ status is groups suggesting adopting DOJ’s detainees. If an alleged victim is under applicable to an alien child who must language on mandatory refresher meet certain criteria including: (1) the age of 18, §§ 115.61(d) and training every two years and refresher Having been declared dependent on a 115.161(d) require the agency to report information on current sexual abuse and juvenile court, or legally committed to the allegation to the designated state or harassment policies in years when or placed under the custody of a state local services agency under applicable training is not required. According to agency, individual, or entity; (2) that the mandatory reporting laws. Per §§ 115.64 some advocacy groups, the intent of the child cannot be reunified with a parent and 115.116, upon learning of an ongoing training rather than one-time because of abuse, abandonment, neglect, allegation that a detainee was sexually training would be to ensure that staffs or a similar reason under state law; and abused, the first responder must focus on zero tolerance and appreciation (3) that it is not within the best interest separate the alleged victim and abuser. of an abuse-free environment, to allow of the child to return to his/her home DHS believes the requirements in these staff to share experiences about country. See 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(27)(J). For referenced sections provide sufficient implementation of the standards, and to those unaccompanied alien children protections that adequately meet the increase the likelihood that training who may seek SIJ status, DHS’s custody goals of the comments’ suggested themes are internalized in daily staff- of the unaccompanied alien child would changes. detainee interactions. Response. With respect to Subpart A, generally be limited to 72 hours after Staff Training (§§ 115.31, 115.131) determining that the child is an the proposed rule stated that the agency unaccompanied alien child, after which Summary of Proposed Rule or facility shall provide refresher the child would be transferred from information every two years. With DHS custody to HHS/ORR custody. As The standards in the proposed rule respect to Subpart B, the proposed rule a result, DHS would no longer have required all employees that have contact stated that the agency shall provide jurisdiction over the unaccompanied with detainees as well as all facility staff refresher information, as appropriate. alien child, making notification and receive training concerning sexual DHS proposed these refresher assistance for SIJ status outside the abuse, with refresher training provided requirements to foster a culture of scope of this rule. as appropriate. The standards mandated awareness, without denying its Comment. Two comments suggested that current staff complete the training component agencies the flexibility standards be added—in accordance with within one year of the effective date of necessary to adjust refresher training what a comment described as standard the standard for immigration detention requirements to respond to operational child welfare practices when juveniles facilities and within two years of the realities. Considerations include the are survivors of sexual abuse—to require effective date of the standard for holding time and cost of developing adequate that if the alleged detainee victim is an facilities. training that is sufficiently tailored to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13125

the unique immigration detention and contract personnel on those diverse detainees, some of which may population and the time and cost for standards’ Sexual Abuse and Assault have different understandings of staff to participate in such training. Prevention and Intervention Program, acceptable and unacceptable sexual With respect to Subpart A with annual refresher training behavior. specifically, DHS, through CRCL and thereafter. Finally, DHS will endeavor to Response. The DHS provision ICE, has developed a training module on ensure that facilities are compliant with regarding staff training provides ‘‘Preventing and Addressing Sexual PREA standards as quickly as detailed and comprehensive Abuse and Assault in ICE Detention’’ operational and budget constraints will expectations for training. DHS rejects which the ICE Director required in ICE’s allow, ensuring that SPCs, CDFs and using the DOJ standard’s exact language 2012 SAAPID to have been already dedicated IGSAs are compliant within because DHS’s standard provides the completed for all ICE personnel who 18 months of the effective date of this agency greater flexibility to ensure that may have contact with individuals in regulation. For these reasons, contractor the provision is consistent with existing ICE custody and which is also required and volunteer personnel will be detention standards. ICE’s current for newly hired officers and agents. This adequately aware of the zero-tolerance training curriculum focuses on module specifically addresses the zero- policy. promoting techniques of effective tolerance policy for sexual abuse and Comment. Two advocacy groups communication with detainees from all assault, among other issues. The suggested language be added to ensure backgrounds and in a variety of settings. training has recently been updated to that staff who may interact with The curriculum is a skills-based incorporate certain terms and language detainees understand the training, either approach that emphasizes the from the proposed rule, and will be through a comprehension examination importance of interacting with all updated again following this final rule. or through some form of verification of detainees in a culturally sensitive ICE believes that this training module training. manner. ICE intends to continue to addresses the substantive concerns Response. The mandatory training provide such training, and to modify it expressed by the commenters. module mentioned above for ICE as necessary in the coming years. ICE Comment. One commenter suggested employees who have contact with does not believe, however, that an that contractors be included in the detainees contains 10 pre-test questions independent regulatory requirement to training requirements along with and 10 post-test questions covering key conduct such training would current facility staff and agency teaching points. The learner must meaningfully enhance the experience of employees, and that it should be receive an 80% passing score on the ICE detainees. specified that the training be by DHS or post-test to receive verification of Comment. Some advocacy groups using DHS-approved materials, and that completing the training. The slides focused on need for specifically the agency documentation requirement include the correct answers and addressing training for juveniles for in Subpart B be applicable to additional explanation following each employees who may be in contact with contractors and volunteers in addition question. DHS is confident this training them. A collection of groups suggested to employees. module serves the purposes of a training requirement in this area that Response. Section 115.31, outlining examination and verification. Once an would include factors making youth training requirements for detention immigration detention facility has vulnerable to sexual abuse and sexual facility staff, embraces contractors who adopted these standards, the agency will harassment; adolescent development for work and provide regularly recurring ensure pursuant to this section that all girls and boys, including normative services in detention facilities. The facility staff, including employees or behavior; the prevalence of trauma and rule’s definition of contractor excludes contractors of the facility, complete abuse histories among youth in individuals, hired on an intermittent similar training. Subsection (c) already confinement facilities; relevant age of basis to provide services for the facility requires that the agency and each consent and mandatory reporting laws; or the agency. These contractors, who facility shall document that staff have and child-sensitive interviewing do not provide services on a recurring completed applicable training. techniques. basis pursuant to a contractual Comment. One commenter stated that Response. DHS appreciates the agreement, are covered under section all components of the DOJ training commenter’s input, and will consider 115.32 of these standards. These PREA standard should be incorporated into including this information in future standards are applicable within one year the DHS standard. Another commenter curricula. For purposes of this to the facilities required to implement recommended generally that the rulemaking, however, DHS is satisfied them; PBNDS 2011 § 2.11, which is in standard on staff training should be that the current list of training the process of being implemented revisited to be in line with DOJ’s requirements in regulation is through modification agreements, which standard. Similarly, the former NPREC sufficiently detailed to accomplish the have already been implemented in a Commissioners suggested adding the core goal, while leaving the agency large number of over-72-hour facilities, following training components from the flexibility to prioritize and develop also requires staff training on a facility’s Commission’s draft standards and DOJ’s training on additional topics over time. sexual abuse or assault prevention and final standards: The right of inmates and As noted above, the current list of topics intervention program for employees, employees to be free from retaliation for is consistent with existing detention volunteers and contract personnel and reporting sexual abuse and sexual standards (PBNDS 2011, PBNDS 2008, in refresher training based on level of harassment; the dynamics of sexual and FRS) covering approximately 94% contact with detainees, among other abuse and sexual harassment in of ICE detainees, on average, excluding criteria, with the zero-tolerance policy confinement; the common reactions of those detainees who are held in DOJ being a requirement for having any sexual abuse and sexual harassment facilities (and are therefore covered by contact with detainees. Additionally, victims; and how to detect and respond the DOJ rule). Additionally, regarding some facilities that have not yet agreed to signs of threatened and actual sexual training geared toward juveniles, all ICE to modification agreements are abuse. The former Commissioners and Field Office Juvenile Coordinators operating under PBNDS 2008, which other groups also expressed concern (FOJCs) are required to attend training contains a substantially similar training that the provision should include to fulfill their responsibilities to find requirement for employees, volunteers, training on sensitivity to culturally suitable placement of juveniles in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13126 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

facilities designated for juvenile the same reasons expressed above, DHS who provide services to the facility on occupancy, and all ERO officers declines to incorporate these a recurring basis are covered by undergo basic training that includes a requirements into the regulation. § 115.31. juvenile component. FOJCs are trained Comment. One group suggested DHS also removed the word ‘‘may’’ in the demeanor, tone and simple type replacing the training provision in from paragraph (c) of the same standard, of language to use when speaking to all paragraph (a)(8) regarding procedures for consistency with paragraph (a). Prior minors and on the importance of for reporting knowledge or suspicion of to the change, the substantive training building rapport with them to reinforce sexual abuse with training on ‘‘how to requirement in this section applied to a feeling of safety. Maintaining fulfill their responsibilities under those ‘‘who have contact with flexibility to adapt these training agency sexual abuse and sexual detainees,’’ but the documentation requirements through policy will ensure harassment prevention, detection, requirement applied to those ‘‘who may employees in contact with juveniles are reporting, and response policies and have contact with immigration trained based upon the most current procedures.’’ detention facility detainees.’’ developments relating to juvenile Response. DHS believes it is not Comments and Responses interaction and protection. necessary to broaden proposed Comment. One group suggested paragraph (a)(8) in this way. The intent Comment. One advocacy group was adding a requirement that training be of the enumerated requirements in concerned that the training tailored to the gender of the detainees at paragraph (a) was to designate specific requirements applicable to contractors the employee’s facility, with the elements of sexual abuse training which and volunteers should be the same as employee receiving additional training are mandated for all employees who described in proposed § 115.31(a) for if reassigned from a facility that houses have contact with detainees and for all employees, with additional training detainees of only one sex to a facility facility staff. Additionally, paragraph (a) being provided based on the services the housing only detainees of the opposite of each provision already requires individuals provide and level of contact sex. generally that training for facility staff as they have with detainees. Response. As with the comment well as employees, contractors, and Response. DHS has considered this immediately above, DHS intends that all volunteers, respectively, address suggestion; however, because detainees be protected from sexual fulfilling the responsibilities under each immigration detention facilities host a abuse and assault through Subpart’s standards. The proposed wide range of volunteers and implementation of comparable measures revision would be redundant and specialized contractors who provide across the board for all detainees in potentially confusing. valuable services to facilities and covered facilities. Additionally, DHS Comment. A group suggested adding detainees, requiring the same training has considered general concerns about a training provision on complying with level for these individuals may result in employee transfer and is confident that relevant law related to mandatory a reduction or delay in services. The the training standard’s requirement for reporting of sexual abuse to outside proposed separate unique standard in refresher information, both in Subpart A authorities. Subpart A allowing for areas of and in Subpart B, will address the Response. DHS has considered this flexibility for volunteers and other potential for any changes in training comment and determined that proposed contractors who provide services on a needs over time or between facilities. paragraphs (8) and (9) requiring training non-recurring basis was determined to Comment. An advocacy group on various aspects of reporting sexual be more sufficient to accomplish the expressed concern about the provision abuse or suspicion of abuse are core education goal without unintended in paragraph (a)(7) regarding training on sufficient to cover this and other aspects impact. The standard sets a ‘‘floor’’ for effectively and professionally of reporting. basic training under the regulation, but communicating with detainees, also directs additional training for including lesbian, gay, bisexual, Other Training; Notification to volunteers and other contractors based transgender, intersex, and gender non- Detainees of the Agency’s Zero- on the services they provide and level conforming (LGBTIGNC) detainees, Tolerance Policy (§§ 115.32, 115.132) of contact they have with detainees. stating that the standard should extend Comment. A comment from an Summary of Proposed Rule further to include sensitivity training. advocacy group raised the same Another group suggested this provision The standard in § 115.32 of the concerns with this standard regarding also explicitly include detainees who do proposed rule required all volunteers the timeframe prior to initial training, not speak English, and detainees who and contractors at immigration the lack of mandatory refresher training, may have survived trauma in their detention facilities that have contact and lack of an examination to test each countries of origin. with detainees receive training trainee’s comprehension. Response. DHS has considered these concerning sexual abuse. The standard Response. DHS declines to make any suggestions; however, the 2012 in § 115.132 of the proposed rule changes to § 115.32 for the same reasons SAAPID—which requires training for all required the agency to make public its described regarding these suggested ICE personnel who may have contact zero-tolerance policy regarding sexual changes to §§ 115.31 and 115.131. with individuals in ICE custody— abuse and ensure that key information Comment. Some commenters were provides for training on vulnerable regarding the policy is available for concerned that there should be a populations, including ensuring detainees. requirement that these types of facility professional, effective communication workers receive comprehensive training, Changes in Final Rule with LGBTIGNC detainees and other including LGBTI-related training. An vulnerable individuals. The 2012 DHS clarified that the training advocacy group suggested training for SAAPID also includes training on requirements in the Subpart A standard volunteers and contractors include accommodating LEP individuals. DHS apply to contractors who provide child-specific modules and prevent re- believes these training requirements to services to the facility on a non- victimization of children who are be sufficient to address the concerns recurring basis. DHS also revised the victims of sexual abuse. regarding sensitivity for LGBTIGNC, title of the standard for clarity and Response. DHS appreciates the LEP, and trauma survivor detainees. For consistency. As noted above, contractors commenter’s input, and will consider

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13127

including this information in future Comments and Responses have already gone through intake prior curricula. For purposes of this to the effective date of the final rule. Comment. One commenter stated that rulemaking, however, DHS is satisfied Likewise, there would not be a the standards should contain additional that the current list of training practical need to provide refresher requirements in regulation is explanation to detainees regarding the education after 30 days from intake; this sufficiently detailed to accomplish the PREA standards beyond the negates the need for any opting-out of core goal, while leaving the agency explanations, information, notification, such refresher education. Providing the flexibility to prioritize and develop and orientation descriptions in the information up-front to detainees is not training on additional topics over time. proposed standard. The commenter was only the most practical solution given As noted above, the current list of topics concerned that detainees fear reporting the nature of immigration detention, but is consistent with existing detention seemingly based upon potential also ensures the detainee is informed at standards. retaliation. the earliest point possible to maximize Comment. A group suggested the Response. Paragraph (a) of the prevention of sexual abuse and assault. standard should include a time limit in proposed standard already required After the intake education and in which volunteers or contractors must be that, at a minimum, the intake process cases where intake has taken place prior trained to prevent ambiguity over the at orientation contain instruction on, to the effective date of this final rule, timing for these types of individuals to among other areas, ‘‘Prohibition against detainees can refer back to aids such as come into compliance before contact retaliation, including an explanation the Detainee Handbook and posters with with detainees would be forbidden. that reporting sexual abuse shall not sexual abuse prevention information, as Response. The final rule is effective negatively impact the detainee’s needed. May 6, 2014. Covered facilities must immigration proceedings.’’ DHS Comment. Some commenters meet the requirements of § 115.32 by the believes this explicitly enumerated suggested that additional information date that any new contract, contract content requirement, along with the should be conveyed to detainees, renewal, or substantive contract other five minimum requirements, are including information regarding their modification takes effect. sufficient to address the commenter’s legal rights. One advocacy group Comment. One advocacy group concern. suggested revising the provision on the suggested that DHS develop Comment. One advocacy group Detainee Handbook to require that the comprehensive training materials, expressed concerns that the proposed Handbook contain more comprehensive including information about conducting standard failed to address the education information, including detainees’ rights appropriate, culturally-sensitive of current detainees who will not and responsibilities related to sexual communication with immigration receive the information at the time of abuse, how to contact the DHS OIG and detainees and how staff can fulfill their their intake; the commenting group CRCL, the zero-tolerance policy, and responsibilities under the PREA suggested such detainees be required to other policies related to sexual abuse standards. complete the education within a prevention and response. Response. DHS agrees with this relatively short specified period of the Response. DHS agrees that the suggestion, but does not believe effective date of the DHS standards, information described is important for additional rule revisions are necessary. such as one month. protecting detainees. Accordingly, DHS Paragraph (a) of the Subpart A standard has already required public posting and Some commenters expressed concerns already requires a facility to ensure that distribution of similar information over the potentially overwhelming all volunteers and contractors who have under paragraphs (d) and (e) of the nature of the amount of information contact with detainees have been proposed standard. ICE’s Detainee contained in an up-front education trained on their responsibilities under Handbook contains detailed information requirement and the possibility that the agency’s and the facility’s sexual about sexual abuse and assault, detainees may not fully understand abuse prevention, detection, including definitions for detainee-on- DHS’s multi-faceted initiative upon intervention and response policies and detainee and staff-on-detainee sexual intake, a potentially stressful time. procedures. DHS will take reasonable abuse and assault; information about steps to ensure that staff, contractors, A number of advocacy groups prohibited acts and confidentiality; and volunteers are familiar with and suggested adding a 30-day time period instructions on how to report assaults to comfortable using appropriate terms and following intake for completion of the facility, the FOD, DHS, or ICE; next concepts when discussing sexual abuse instruction on all the areas that were to steps after a sexual assault is reported; with a diverse population, and be addressed upon intake in the what to expect in a medical exam; equipped to interact with immigration proposed standard; within this period, understanding the investigative process; detainees who may have experienced the agency would provide and the emotional consequences of trauma. comprehensive education to detainees sexual assault. DHS believes that in either in person or through video. Detainee Education (§ 115.33) addition to the paragraphs (d) and (e), One group suggested requiring the information provided in the Summary of Proposed Rule facilities to repeat PREA education Detainee Handbook provides sufficient The standard in the proposed rule programs every 30 days, of which the protection to address the commenters’ mandated that upon custody intake, detainee could opt out. concerns. ICE will review and update each facility provide detainees Response. The average length of stay the Detainee Handbook as necessary or information about the agency’s and the in immigration detention facilities is useful. facility’s zero-tolerance policies with approximately 30 days, and the median Comment. One group suggested respect to all forms of sexual abuse, length of stay is shorter still—8 days. requiring that upon a detainee’s transfer including instruction on a number of Thus it is common that a detainee will to another facility, the detainee receive specified topics. be confined in a facility for less than a refresher of the facility’s sexual abuse one month, and it would not be prevention, detection, and response Changes in Final Rule practical or effective to place a one- standards. DHS is adopting the regulation as month-from-effective date requirement Response. A general orientation proposed. for education for those detainees who process that includes the information

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13128 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

described in this standard is a inappropriate in this context. The major General training on investigation requirement each time a detainee enters difference between the two techniques is included in OPR Special a new facility, including when Departments’ standards is that DOJ is Agent Training and is covered in OPR’s transferred from another facility; responsible for ensuring that current Investigative Guidebook and other therefore, it is not necessary to create a inmates receive the PREA education internal policies and training. In separate standard regarding refresher within one year of the rule’s addition, ICE’s 2012 SAAPID prescribes information upon an immigration implementation. DHS’s detainee more detailed requirements for the detainee’s transfer. population has an average length of stay content of specialized investigator Comment. Regarding the proposed of 30 days, resulting in a much more training, requiring that such training for standard to ensure education materials transient population. To ensure that all agency investigators cover, at a are accessible to all detainees, one current detainees receive the PREA- advocacy group suggests adding a minimum, interviewing sexual abuse related information, DHS relies on and assault victims, sexual abuse and requirement that if a detainee cannot several material sources posted assault evidence collection in read or does not understand the throughout the facilities, such as confinement settings, the criteria and language of the orientation and/or handbooks, pamphlets, notices, local Handbook, the facility administrator organization information, PSA evidence required for administrative would provide the material using audio Compliance Manager information, etc. action or prosecutorial referral, and or video recordings in a language the For those detainees that are LEP, information about effective cross-agency detainee understands, arrange for the visually impaired, or otherwise coordination in the investigation orientation materials to be read to the disabled, DHS provides the necessary process. DHS believes that this standard detainee, or provide a translator or resources, such as interpreters, for those maintains a proper focus on PREA interpreter within seven days. detainees to still obtain the knowledge implementation—training tailored for Response. DHS understands the that is provided by the posted visuals. sexual abuse detection and response concern expressed by this comment; through the investigative process. however, the standards found in Specialized Training: Investigations §§ 115.16 and 115.116 regarding (§§ 115.34, 115.134) DHS declines to require the specialized training provision to state accommodating LEP detainees are Summary of Proposed Rule adequate to address any problems with that such training be provided accessibility with respect to orientation The standards in the proposed rule separately from staff training. The fact materials. Under those provisions, the required that the agency or facility that the PREA standards differentiate agency and each facility must ensure provide specialized training to between staff training and specialized meaningful access to all aspects of the investigators that conduct investigations training and specifically denote the agency’s and facility’s efforts to prevent, into allegations of sexual abuse at types of agency employees and facility detect, and respond to sexual abuse— confinement facilities and that all such staff who must participate demonstrate which would include the education investigations be conducted by qualified DHS’s commitment to ensuring that requirements at orientation. Moreover, investigators. additional higher-level training will be DHS policy addresses DHS-wide efforts Changes in Final Rule provided to those who require it. to provide meaningful access to people Comment. One group requested with limited English proficiency. DHS is adopting the regulation as clarification in the standard as to Information regarding these efforts is proposed, with a minor technical publicly available at the following link: change clarifying the scope of the whether DHS intends the specialized http://www.dhs.gov/department- documentation requirement. training apply to persons responsible for investigations in state, local, or private homeland-security-language-access- Comments and Responses plan. To further strengthen §§ 115.16 facilities, in addition to training for ICE and 115.116, DHS revised the language Comment. Some commenters and CBP personnel. to require the component and each suggested additional details of the Response. To clarify, while the agency facility to provide in-person or specialized investigative training be is responsible for and will be directly telephonic interpretation services that expressly required by the standard, training its own personnel in this including techniques for interviewing enable effective, accurate, and impartial manner, the standard also requires each sexual abuse victims, proper use of interpretation, by someone other than facility to train their own personnel that Miranda and Garrity warnings, sexual another detainee, unless the detainee will be working on the investigations abuse evidence collection in expresses a preference for another addressed in the standard. Any criminal detainee to provide interpretation and confinement settings, and the criteria investigations will continue to be the agency determines that such and evidence required for handled by the relevant outside law interpretation is appropriate and administrative action or prosecution enforcement personnel. consistent with DHS policy. referral. One group suggested the Comment. Some members of Congress standard expressly require this Comment. One group suggested a commented generally that the standard specialized training to be separate from provision be added expressly requiring regarding detainee education should be staff training. that investigators receive the training revised to be in line with DOJ’s Response. DOJ’s final rule regarding mandated for employees and for standard. specialized training standardizes contractors and volunteers under Response. DHS’s detainee education training for a broad spectrum of federal, §§ 115.31 and 115.32, respectively. provision is detailed and state and local investigators. DHS is not Response. Paragraph (a) of this section comprehensive. It is also tailored to the faced with the same challenges and unique characteristics of immigration maintains direct control over makes clear that investigators must detention and the variances among investigators and their training. DHS receive the general training mandated confinement facilities for DHS believes that its current policies and for employees and facility staff under detainees. DHS believes that merely procedures effectively govern § 115.31, in addition to the specialized repeating the DOJ standard would be specialized training for investigators. training outlined by § 115.34.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13129

Specialized Training: Medical and concerning specialized training to as provisions of the proposed rule. The Mental Health Care (§ 115.35) medical providers would make the 2012 SAAPID—required to have been regulations redundant and cumbersome. already completed for all ICE personnel Summary of Proposed Rule DHS declines to make this revision. who may have contact with individuals The standard in the proposed rule With respect to the second and third in ICE custody and required for newly required that the agency provide recommendations, DHS believes that hired officers and agents—provides specialized training to DHS employees adding standards mandating that training on vulnerable populations, who serve as medical and mental health practitioners receive the training under including ensuring professional, practitioners in immigration detention §§ 115.31 and 115.32, respectively, effective communication with LGBTI facilities where such care is provided. would also be redundant. The medical detainees. Furthermore, under §§ 115.31 and mental health practitioners would and 115.131, practitioners will already Changes in Final Rule already be obligated to receive the be required to receive training relating DHS is adopting the regulation as training required under §§ 115.31 and to this population of detainees. Section proposed. 115.32, as the positions fall under the 115.32 requires practitioner volunteers Comments and Responses definitions of staff, contractor, and and contractors to receive similar volunteer listed in § 115.5 of this final training as well, due to their close level Comment. Commenters suggested that rule. Under §§ 115.31 and 115.32 the of contact to most if not all detainees. the standard be expanded for medical training the practitioners receive would DHS therefore declines to revise the and mental health practitioners. These then be documented; as such DHS proposed rule in response to this commenters made the following declines to make this revision. comment. recommendations: With respect to the fourth Comment. One advocacy group 1. Practitioners who are not DHS or recommendation, DHS believes that suggested that in paragraph (a), the basic agency employees but who work in the adding standards for sensitivity to specialized training provision of the facilities should receive similar culturally diverse populations, standard, the qualifier ‘‘where medical specialized training, and any facility including appropriate terms and and mental health care is provided’’ be that does not use DHS medical concepts to use when discussing sex removed to clarify in the agency’s practitioners should provide training for and sexual abuse, and sensitivity detention standard that all immigration its own medical providers; awareness regarding past trauma that detention facilities should provide 2. Such practitioners should receive may have been experienced by access to medical and mental health the training mandated for employees immigration detainees, would be care. and for contractors and volunteers superfluous and potentially beyond Response. Views on the general under §§ 115.31 and 115.32, DHS’s relative expertise when compared structure of immigration detention respectively, depending upon the to the extensive training on medical and facility medical and mental care are practitioner’s status at the agency; mental health care already received by outside the scope of this rulemaking. 3. The agency should maintain certified medical health care Assessment for Risk of Victimization documentation that medical and mental professionals. Furthermore, any new or and Abusiveness (§§ 115.41, 115.141) health practitioners have received and additional terms or concepts will likely understand the training, either from the be taught during the required training Summary of Proposed Rule agency or elsewhere; described in § 115.35(c). Adding this The standards in the proposed rule 4. The practitioners should receive specific requirement to this standard mandated that the facility assess all special training for sensitivity to would also be redundant and therefore, detainees on intake to identify those culturally diverse populations, not add to the goal or integrity of the likely to be sexual aggressors or sexual including appropriate terms and rule. DHS declines to make this victims and required that the detainees concepts to use when discussing sex revision. be housed to prevent potential sexual and sexual abuse, and sensitivity and With respect to the fifth abuse. The standard for immigration awareness regarding past trauma that recommendation, DHS believes that detention facilities further required that may have been experienced by additional revisions are unnecessary to the facility reassess each detainee’s risk immigration detainees; ensure that training is universally of victimization or abusiveness between 5. The training be universally implemented and ingrained into the 60 and 90 days from the date of initial implemented and ingrained into the work of all employees, contractors, and assessment as well as any other time work of all employees, contractors, and volunteers coming into detainee contact. when warranted to avoid incidents of volunteers coming into detainee contact; The portions of this regulation on abuse or victimization. and training and education are designed to 6. A number of groups suggested that ensure that all employees, contractors, Changes in Final Rule the standard contain training and volunteers are trained and educated Sections 115.41 and 115.141 of the specifically on LGBTI issues, including to prevent, detect and respond to sexual final rule have been revised to require training to ensure competent, abuse of detainees while in DHS that assessments for risk of appropriate communications with custody. Inserting additional explicit victimization or abusiveness include an LGBTIGNC detainees. requirements would be redundant. DHS evaluation of whether the detainee has Response. With respect to the first therefore declines to revise the proposed been previously detained in addition to recommendation, DHS believes that rule in response to this comment. previously incarcerated. A technical adding standards requiring facility With respect to the sixth revision also is incorporated into medical staff to receive training to recommendation, DHS believes that § 115.41(a) to clarify that the victims ensure that victims of sexual abuse are adding a standard requiring training that the provision describes are sexual examined and treated thoroughly and specifically on LGBTI issues, including abuse victims. effectively is redundant. The staff are training to ensure competent, already receiving the necessary training appropriate communications with Comments and Responses provided through § 115.35(c). Adding LGBTI detainees, would be redundant to Comment. A number of advocacy more specific criteria in this section current ICE practice and policy, as well groups suggested that among the risk

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13130 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

factors listed in the standard, DHS Comment. A collection of advocacy provided with treatment during should also require the facility to groups suggested adding the word confinement. consider whether a detainee is ‘‘abuse’’ to paragraph (a) when Response. The proposed and final ‘‘perceived’’ to be LGBTIGNC. (The describing intake identification of rules clearly require that female proposed rule focused on whether the potential victims, which would detainees and minors be afforded each detainee ‘‘has self-identified’’ as seemingly more fully describe the kind of the protections outlined by the LGBTIGNC.) Commenters argued that of potential sexual victimization. standards, including with regard to the risk of sexual victimization for those Response. DHS agrees with the screening, assessment, and treatment. who are perceived as LGBTIGNC is concern expressed in this comment and Comment. A commenter suggested similar to the risk of sexual has made the recommended change. adding a specific requirement for victimization for those who self-identify Comment. Two collective comments assessment with respect to juvenile as LGBTIGNC. from many groups also suggested detainees (including juvenile overnight Response. DHS disagrees with the explicitly requiring that the detainees in the holding facility addition of ‘‘perceived’’ LGBTIGNC vulnerability assessments be conducted context). The comment suggested that status to the criteria which facilities using an objective screening instrument, qualified professionals conduct such must consider in assessing detainees for to ensure useful assessments and avoid assessments out of sight and sound of risk of sexual victimization would assist any confusion. any adult detainees outside of the in accurate identification of likely Response. DHS believes that §§ 115.41 family unit, and that if a family unit victims. Unlike self-identification as and 115.141 as currently written clearly member is suspected of posing a danger LGBTIGNC (currently included in set forth the factors that a facility must to the health or well-being of the paragraph (c)(7) of the standard), a consider to adequately assess detainees juvenile, qualified professionals detainee’s ‘‘perceived’’ LGBTIGNC for risk of sexual victimization. With conduct such assessments out of sight status cannot be reliably ascertained by respect to Subpart A, ICE’s current and sound of all adult detainees. facility staff as it will vary based on screening methods for assigning Response. Juveniles in custody as part individual perceptions and cannot be detainees to a particular security level of the Family Residential Program standardized. In addition, a requirement employ the standardized RCA pursuant to § 115.14 are accompanied for facility staff to make subjective instrument to guide decision-making by an adult family member who would determinations regarding an using objective criteria and a uniform be present during any questioning, individual’s LGBTIGNC status may lead scoring system; in addition, the specific unless the presence of the adult would to potentially discriminatory decisions criteria in the regulation complement pose a risk to the juvenile. by staff. already existing classification Moreover, DHS believes that Comment. Some commenters and requirements in ICE’s detention §§ 115.14 and 115.114, in conjunction advocacy groups encouraged DHS to standards that are designed for the with §§ 115.41 and 115.141, provide consider options other than detention purpose of assigning detainees to the sufficient, comprehensive protection to for vulnerable populations. For least restrictive housing consistent with juvenile detainees in immigration example, some groups suggested safety and security. If DHS were to detention and holding facility settings. requiring that vulnerable individuals— require the use of an objective screening The §§ 115.14 and 115.114 standards including LGBT and mentally ill instrument in all immigration detention ensure that the need to protect the detainees—should be detained in only facilities, the cost of developing and juvenile’s well-being (and that of others) extraordinary circumstances or be implementing such an instrument in all is observed, while providing that the candidates for alternatives to detention covered facilities would be prohibitive juvenile be detained in the least under the standards, including for ICE. restrictive setting appropriate to the humanitarian parole, bond release, in- Comment. With respect to paragraph juvenile’s age and special needs. They person and telephonic check-ins, or (c), which sets forth additional also reinforce the importance of any electronic monitoring. Others suggested considerations for the assessment for other applicable laws, regulations, or that LGBT individuals or sexual abuse risk of victimization, commenters legal requirements. victims who cannot be safely housed by suggested adding a provision that the Sections 115.41(a) and 115.141(b) are the government be released or granted facility consider information made intended to ensure the safety of all prosecutorial discretion rather than be available by the detainee through the detainees (including juveniles) who may detained. assessment process. Additionally, they be held overnight in holding facilities Response. DHS believes that existing suggest revising the ‘‘previous with other detainees. Paragraph (c) in ICE screening methods and practices incarceration’’ factor to also include both sections also makes certain that the sufficiently address the concern previous detention. agency considers the age of the detainee expressed by these commenters. The Response. The proposed and final as a criterion in assessing the detainee’s agency’s Risk Classification Assessment rule mandate that information made risk for sexual victimization. This (RCA) instrument evaluates the available by the detainee through the standard, as proposed and in final form, potential vulnerability of all individuals assessment process be considered as is consistent with DOJ’s standards and— apprehended by ICE to determine part of the screening, through the in conjunction with §§ 115.14 and whether detention is appropriate, or requirement at paragraph (c)(9) that 115.114—will protect juveniles in whether some form of release under facilities consider ‘‘the detainee’s own holding facilities. supervision or alternatives to detention concerns about his or her physical The DHS standard provides more may be preferable. RCA screenings safety.’’ DHS accepts the proposed detailed protection than the DOJ consider a wide range of factors that revision to paragraph (c)(4) to require standard by stating explicitly that staff may represent a special vulnerability in that previous detention history, as well must ask each detainee about his or her the custody context, including physical as previous incarceration history, be own concerns regarding physical safety. or mental illness or disability, sexual considered. Moreover, DHS notes that it is orientation/gender identity, and prior Comment. One commenter suggested impractical to require, in the context of history of abuse or victimization, among a requirement that female detainees and holding facilities, that all conversations others. minors be screened, assessed, and with juveniles take place ‘‘out of sight

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13131

and sound.’’ Given the many facilities sexual orientation or gender identity, detainee’s self-assessed safety needs, that fall within the definition of holding but requires that the facility consider and the advice of a medical or mental facilities, separate spaces are not always detainees’ gender self-identification and health practitioner. available. Finally, DHS notes that make an individualized assessment of DHS declines to incorporate the unaccompanied alien children, as the effects of placement on detainee additional specific reference to single- defined by 6 U.S.C. 279, are generally mental health and well-being. DHS gender facilities, to maintain flexibility transferred to an HHS/ORR facility believes that retaining some flexibility to address these issues through within 72 hours. will allow facilities to employ a variety guidance, on case-by-case basis, and of options tailored to the needs of consistent with developing case law. Use of Assessment Information detainees with a goal of offering the Comment. One comment suggested (§ 115.42) least restrictive and safest environment applying the rest of the paragraph to the Summary of Proposed Rule for individuals. DHS acknowledges that ‘‘agency’’ as well as facilities. This placement of detainees in special change would require the agency to The standard in the proposed rule housing for any reason is a serious step consider the relevant factors not only required the facilities to use the that requires careful consideration of once the detainee has arrived at a given information obtained in the risk alternatives. In consideration of the facility, but before sending the detainee assessment process to separate detainees risks associated with special housing, to that facility. This could eliminate the who are at risk of abuse from those at DHS takes great care to ensure that need to transfer a transgender or risk of being sexually abusive. The detainees who are placed in any type of intersex detainee from one single-gender proposed standard provided that special housing receive access to the facility to another. facilities shall make individualized same programs and services available to Response. DHS declines to make the determinations about how to ensure the detainees in the general population. additional suggested changes. Although safety of each detainee, and required Comment. One advocacy group the PREA standards do not specifically that, in placing transgender or intersex suggested modifying paragraph (b) to state that the agency consider detainees, the agency consider on a provide that in addition to considering enumerated factors for transgender and case-by-case basis whether a placement gender self-identification in making intersex detainee placement, they do would ensure the detainee’s health and placement decisions, the facility should provide effective guidelines for safety, and whether the placement also consider sexual orientation and assessing risk for all detainees pursuant would present management or security gender identity. to § 115.41. This section mandates that problems. The proposed standard also Response. The protections outlined in the facility use the risk assessment provided that transgender and intersex paragraph (b) of this standard are information to inform assignment of detainee placement be reassessed at intended to address issues and concerns detainees to housing, recreation and least twice each year, and that such unique to transgender and intersex other activities, and volunteer work. detainee’s own views as to their safety detainees, including the use of physical This section also describes additional be given serious consideration. anatomical traits and medical factors for the facility to use in its assessment of transgender and intersex Changes in Final Rule assessments to appropriately classify and house individuals. DHS believes detainees in particular and requires the DHS is adopting the regulation as that safety and welfare concerns related agency to make individualized proposed. to screening of gay, lesbian, bisexual, determinations to ensure the safety of Comments and Responses and other gender non-conforming each detainee. Because DHS, unlike individuals are adequately addressed by DOJ, has more direct oversight regarding Comment. One advocacy group and the requirements of §§ 115.41 and the treatment of all detainees in some commenters suggested that the 115.42. immigration detention facilities, DHS rule allow the agency to place LGBTI Comment. Regarding the same determined that requiring the agency to detainees with other LGBTI detainees paragraph, commenters suggested that also use the risk assessment information on a voluntary basis, for the purpose of the first sentence be clarified to state would not provide additional protecting such detainees. Similarly, more specifically that ‘‘[i]n deciding protections for transgender and intersex commenters suggested provisions— whether to assign a transgender or detainees, and could cause operational described as being partly based on DOJ intersex inmate to a facility for male or confusion about the facility’s standards both regarding adult female detainees, and in making other responsibilities under this section. confinement facilities and civil juvenile housing and programming assignments, Comment. Commenters suggested detention facilities—that would prohibit the agency or facility’’ is to consider the adding a prohibition on any facilities, LGBTI unit assignment solely on the issues included in the proposed for the purpose of preventing sexual basis of identification or status, but provision. The stated purpose of this abuse, adopting restrictions on which would allow for such detainees change is to ‘‘put[] facility staff on clear detainees’ access to medical or mental to agree to be assigned to an LGBTI notice that transgender detainees can be health care, or on manners of dress or housing area, so long as detainees in any housed based on their gender identity.’’ grooming traditionally associated with such facility, unit, or wing have access Response. As recommended by the one gender or another. One comment to programs, privileges, education, and commenters, the proposed and final suggested there could be constitutional work opportunities to the same extent as rules prohibit facilities from making concerns if such access were to be other detainees. Some members of placement decisions for transgender or restricted. Congress commented generally that the intersex detainees solely on the basis of Response. DHS has determined that standard regarding housing of LGBTI identity documents or physical an explicit prohibition against detainees should be revisited to be in anatomy. Covered facilities making restrictions on access to medical or line with DOJ’s standard. assessment and housing decisions for a mental health care is unnecessary. Response. As DHS noted in the transgender or intersex detainee must Access to medical or mental health care proposed rule, the proposal does not consider a variety of factors, including that is medically necessary and include a ban on assigning detainees to the detainee’s gender self-identification appropriate may not be limited under particular units solely on the basis of and health and safety needs, the ICE’s detention standards. In addition,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13132 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

grooming and dress requirements are criminal detainees may not yield day limit, instead substituting either generally outside the scope of this rule. sufficient benefits to justify the cost, release and potential alternatives to Neither the NPREC Commission Report because detention facilities generally detention thereafter if the detainee nor the DOJ final rule included use a classification system, like the cannot be safely housed in a detention standards on this issue, and DHS did system employed by ICE, to govern the facility, or more appropriate housing not raise this issue for comment in its housing and programming activities of away from the problematic facility. NPRM. Although DHS declines to its inmates to ensure safety. Another human rights group suggested include in this final rule a provision on requiring any facility housing detainees this issue, we note that as a matter of Protective Custody (§ 115.43) in administrative segregation for more practice, ICE generally does not accept Summary of Proposed Rule than 30 days to notify the appropriate or have dress or appearance restrictions agency supervisor, to conduct a prompt The proposed standard provided that based on gender. NDS and PBNDS 2008 review of the continuing necessity for vulnerable detainees may be placed in and 2011 reaffirm detainees’ right to the segregation—also recommended by involuntary segregated housing only nondiscrimination based on gender and the former Commissioners—and to work after an assessment of all available sexual orientation. with the facility to establish an Comment. In paragraph (c), two alternatives has been made—and only alternative housing situation. Some comments suggested that the qualifying until an alternative housing other groups suggested specific phrase ‘‘[w]hen operationally feasible’’ arrangement can be implemented. The processes regarding notification of the be removed to ensure that facilities standard also provided that segregation FOD after various periods of days of always provide transgender and intersex shall not ordinarily exceed 30 days. In administrative segregation, with one detainees with the ability to shower addition, the proposed standard group suggesting further official privately. provided that, to the extent possible, notification and consideration of Response. DHS declines to make the involuntary protective custody should detainee transfer to general population proposed change, based on not limit access to programming. in an alternate facility or placement in infrastructural limitations of housing Changes in Final Rule an alternative to the detention program. and showering capacities at many Some groups suggested DHS consider facilities. While some immigration The final standard adds a requirement altogether releasing victim-detainees detention facilities may have the for facilities to notify the appropriate anytime a facility cannot safely separate infrastructural capacity to permit ICE FOD no later than 72 hours after the them without resorting to protective transgender and intersex detainees to initial placement into segregation, custody, with such custody being shower privately, this cannot be whenever a detainee has been placed in reserved for only limited, emergency, or guaranteed at all facilities. DHS administrative segregation on the basis exigent situations. therefore requires the flexibility in of a vulnerability to sexual abuse or Response. A categorical 30-day § 115.42 to accommodate facilities assault. limitation on the use of administrative where only open shower areas exist for Upon receiving such notification, the segregation to protect detainees may not detainee use. ICE FOD must review the placement to be possible depending on available Comment. One commenter suggested consider its continued necessity, alternative housing and custodial that detainees with no criminal record whether any less restrictive housing or options for ensuring the safe placement should not be housed alongside custodial alternatives may be of vulnerable detainees. However, DHS criminal detainees. appropriate and available, and whether agrees that agency oversight over cases Response. DHS believes that existing the placement is only as a last resort and of administrative segregation would ICE classification processes and related when no other viable housing options assist in effectuating the spirit of the requirements for detention facilities exist. standard, and has amended the standard sufficiently address this concern, The final standard clarifies that it to require agency review of such cases ensuring that housing decisions are applies to administrative segregation of in order to ensure the continued based on an objective and standardized vulnerable detainees for a reason appropriateness of segregation and to assessment of each detainee’s criminal connected to sexual abuse or assault. As evaluate whether any less restrictive background and likely security risks. noted below, ICE has issued a custodial alternatives may be Comment. A human rights advocacy segregation review policy directive appropriate and available. group and former Commissioners of which establishes policy and Furthermore, ICE has finalized a NPREC recommended that immigration procedures for ICE review and oversight segregation review policy directive detainees be housed separately from of segregated housing decisions. The which establishes policy and inmates; the advocacy group suggested final standard also makes technical procedures for ICE review and oversight that if cohabitation is in fact necessary, changes in paragraphs (a) and (b) for the of segregated housing decisions. The the detainees should be assigned to cells purpose of clarity. ICE segregation review directive is or areas that allow for no unsupervised intended to complement the Comments and Responses contact between detainees and inmates. requirements of PBNDS 2011, PBNDS The former Commissioners stated there Comment. Numerous groups, 2008, NDS, and other applicable ICE should be heightened protection for including a collection of advocacy policies. Proceeding by policy in this those immigration detainees identified groups and former Commissioners of area is consistent with § 115.95 of the as abuse-vulnerable during the NPREC, criticized the language regulation, which authorizes both screening process. regarding the ‘‘ordinarily’’ 30-day limit agencies and facilities to implement Response. ICE contracts with on protective housing as providing too policies that include additional detention facilities generally require much leeway for facilities to maintain requirements. The directive would also that immigration detainees be housed that no better alternatives were be consistent with § 115.43(e) of the separately from any criminal inmates available. The groups suggested final rule, which requires facilities to that may also be present at the facility. restricting more narrowly any notify the appropriate FOD no later than DHS notes that a categorical prohibition extensions, with some groups stating 72 hours after initial placement into on commingling of immigration and there should be no exceptions to the 30- segregation whenever a detainee has

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13133

been placed administrative segregation time they would not be placed in documentation of: the limited on the basis of a vulnerability to sexual protective custody. In addition, DHS opportunities, the duration, and the abuse or assault. notes that access to activities and other reasons therefor. Comment. With respect to supervisory services is outside the scope of this Response. ICE’s existing detention staff review during administrative rulemaking, except to the extent affected standards uniformly require that segregation periods, one commenter by standards designed to prevent, facilities document the precise reasons suggested that the facility detect, and respond to sexual abuse and for placement of an individual in administration be required to notify the assault in detention facilities. administrative segregation, as well as FOD when a detainee has been held in Comment. One advocacy group (under PBNDS 2008 and 2011) any segregation for 20 days. The comment suggested a provision be added to the exceptions to the general requirement also suggested the review occur each standard to require facilities to submit a that detainees in protective custody be week after seven days ‘‘for the quarterly report to ICE ERO containing provided access to programs, visitation, remaining 20 days,’’ rather than every statistics and reasons regarding counsel, and other services available to week for the first 30 days and every 10 protective custody. The provision the general population to the maximum days thereafter. would also require that, as part of the extent practicable, consistent with the Response. The final rule includes a standards’ auditing process, the agency practices advocated by commenters. ICE change that requires facilities to notify review all instances involving the use of has also finalized a segregation review the local ICE FOD no later than 72 hours administrative segregation, and that— policy directive which establishes after initial placement into segregation if where a facility is found to have relied policy and procedures for ICE review a detainee has been held in on segregation for purposes other than and oversight of segregated housing administrative segregation on the basis as the least restrictive means—the decisions. of a vulnerability to sexual abuse or facility be subject to appropriate Comment. Some groups and a assault. The final rule also retains the remedial measures consistent with the collective comment of advocates other extensive review requirements overall audit scheme. suggested including a provision that contained in the proposed rule, because Response. DHS believes that current would make explicit that protective facility staff review of ongoing facility reports to ICE regarding custody always be accomplished in the segregation placement is an effective individual instances of protective least restrictive manner capable of tool. As noted above, ICE has finalized custody, as required by ICE’s detention maintaining the safety of the detainee a directive for ICE to review and provide standards, suffice to facilitate effective and the facility; commenters expressed oversight of a facility’s decision to place agency oversight of these cases. As concern about long-term detrimental detainees in segregated housing. noted above, ICE has finalized a health effects from segregation. One Comment. Former Commissioners of directive for ICE to review and provide commenter stated his belief that NPREC additionally found the term oversight of a facility’s decision to place segregation can be used for punitive ‘‘reasonable efforts’’ problematic for detainees in segregated housing, and purposes rather than to protect imprecision, stating that its this directive includes additional detainees, which should be addressed. interpretation could vary among reporting requirements. Response. DHS believes the concern facilities. Comment. Some advocate comments, is adequately addressed by the revised Response. DHS believes that including one from former rule, which requires that use of ‘‘reasonable efforts’’ to provide Commissioners of NPREC, suggested administrative segregation to protect appropriate housing for vulnerable further oversight or record-keeping vulnerable populations be used only as detainees will necessarily vary across similar to DOJ’s standards for facilities a last resort and when no other viable facilities, depending on available where protective custody or housing option exist. resources and the circumstances of administrative segregation are Comment. One advocacy group individual cases, and cannot be defined implemented. A number of these suggested detailed requirements with precision ex ante. groups, including two collective group describing the minimum privileges of Comment. Regarding protective comments, suggested that proposed detainees in protective custody, custody for juvenile detainees, one paragraph (a) be modified or a new including normal access to educational commenter suggested a maximum limit paragraph be created to ensure ‘‘detailed and programming opportunities; at least of two days. Another suggested language documentation’’ of the reasons for five hours a day of out-of-cell time, that would require facilities to make placing an individual in administrative including at least one hour daily large best efforts to avoid placing juveniles in segregation and also include ‘‘the reason muscle exercise that includes access to isolation, and that would prohibit— why no alternative means of separation outdoor recreation; access to the normal absent exigent circumstances—agencies from likely abusers can be arranged.’’ meals and drinking water, clothing, and from denying juveniles daily large- The same groups also suggested similar medical, mental health and dental muscle exercise and legally required changes—in line with DOJ’s standards— treatment; access to personal property, education services, along with other to proposed paragraph (c), including including televisions and radios; access programs and work opportunities to the documenting duration of protective to books, magazines, and other printed extent possible. This group custody and requiring reasonable steps material; access to daily showers; and recommended that when isolation is to remedy conditions that limit access, access to the normal correspondence necessary to protect a juvenile, the including a prohibition on denial of privileges and number of visits and facility must document the reason it is access to telephones and counsel. In a phone calls, including but not limited to necessary, review the need at least similar vein, one group suggested the comparable level of contact with family, daily, and ensure daily monitoring by a agency be informed each time a friends, legal guardians, and legal medical or mental health professional. suspected victim is placed in custody. assistance. Response. DHS has determined such Former Commissioners suggested that Response. Existing ICE detention a provision to be unnecessary, since any segregated individuals have access standards address in detail the unaccompanied juveniles are generally to programs, privileges, education, and minimum programs, services, and not detained in ICE’s detention system work opportunities to the extent privileges to which detainees in for longer than 72 hours, during which possible, but if restricted, required segregation must be afforded access,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13134 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

including recreation, visitation, legal multiple methods of reporting sexual members or employees do not speak the counsel and materials, health services, assault and abuse. This key protection same language as the detainee, they may meals, correspondence, religious requirement is reflected in the standard use a third party translation service that services, and personal hygiene items, and in current agency practices. With is under contract with the agency. The among others. DHS does not believe that regard to immigration detention translation service fees are not charged this level of specificity is necessary to facilities, detainees can report incidents to the detainee and although the fees are additionally include in this regulation. in several ways, including by calling the paid by DHS, the translation companies JIC or the point of contact listed on the are not otherwise affiliated with the Detainee Reporting (§§ 115.51, 115.151) sexual abuse and assault posters. agency. Summary of Proposed Rule Detainees may also call the OIG, the Comment. An organization stated that Community and Detainee Helpline, or Sections 115.51 and 115.151 of the the standard should include a provision report incidents to CRCL. The Detainee proposed rule required agencies to allowing staff to report sexual abuse Handbook and posters provide contact enable detainees to privately report anonymously. information to detainees and also note sexual abuse, prohibit retaliation for Response. Under the final standard that detainee reports are confidential. staff are required to report incidents of reporting the abuse, and related With respect to holding facilities, misconduct. The proposed standards sexual abuse, and may fulfill that detainees are provided with multiple obligation by reporting outside the required DHS to provide instruction to ways to privately report sexual abuse, detainees on how to confidentially chain of command. Separate and apart including reporting to the DHS OIG. from this obligation, staff may call the report such misconduct. The proposed Comment. The former Commissioners standards also required that DHS JIC and OIG with anonymous reports of suggested including volunteers and sexual abuse and assault. Therefore, provide and facilities inform detainees medical and mental health practitioners of at least one way to report sexual DHS declines to add a specific in the standard due to their unique regulatory provision allowing staff to abuse to an outside public or private situation of common contact with entity that is not affiliated with the report abuse anonymously. detainees. Comment. The former Commissioners agency, and that is able to receive and Response. The purpose of this suggested including an explicit immediately forward the detainee’s provision is to ensure that the agency provision in this standard and in reports of sexual abuse to agency and facilities create effective procedures § 115.52 prohibiting any report by a officials, while allowing the detainee to for detainee incident reporting. detainee regarding sexual abuse from remain anonymous, upon request. Although the provision does not being referred to a staff member who is Changes in Final Rule explicitly address reporting to volunteers or healthcare practitioners, the subject of the complaint. DHS is adopting the regulation as nothing in this standard prohibits such Response. DHS recognizes the proposed. reporting. In this connection, DHS notes importance of ensuring that alleged abusers are not involved in any way Comments and Responses that volunteers and healthcare practitioners will receive specialized with a detainee who lodges a complaint, Comment. Commenters expressed training regarding how to recognize and and agrees that referral to the subject of general concern regarding the manner in handle detainees who have been a complaint would be inappropriate. which reporting opportunities may be sexually abused or assaulted and how to Accordingly, multiple provisions of this available. One advocacy group respond to detainee allegations. DHS regulation separate the detainee victim suggested that allowing posting of believes that volunteers and healthcare from the subject of a complaint, information regarding consular practitioners will be a valuable resource including a requirement that the agency notification as a means to satisfy the for detainees, but declines to add review and approve facility policies and requirement that detainees have at least specific regulatory provisions for procedures for staff reporting. Moreover, one way to report sexual abuse outside individual avenues of reporting, beyond the regulation requires such procedures the agency is inadequate because those already identified in the to include a method by which staff can cultural or other concerns may prevent regulation. report outside of the chain of command. victims from being able or willing to Comment. Some members of Congress More comprehensive, appropriately inform an official of their government. commented generally that the standard tailored rules will be contained therein. The group also expressed concern that regarding abuse reports and responses to Similarly, § 115.66 requires that other avenues be available to the reports of abuse should be revisited to volunteers, staff, and contractors who detainee regardless of whether detained be in line with DOJ’s standard. are suspected of perpetrating sexual in a holding facility. Former Response. DHS respectfully notes that abuse be removed from duties requiring Commissioners of NPREC stressed the with regard to detainee reporting, the detainee contact, and § 115.166 requires need for detainees to have the ability to final standards are closely aligned with agency management to take appropriate report sexual abuse to non-staff outside DOJ’s inmate reporting provisions. The action when an allegation has been the agency or facility, while another final standard allows for multiple ways made. Further, §§ 115.64 and 115.164 commenter suggested there be either a to privately report sexual abuse, require covered entities, upon learning separate entity or an assigned retaliation for reporting sexual abuse, or of an allegation that a detainee was trustworthy officer to whom a detainee staff neglect or violations of sexually abused, to separate the alleged could report an incident. One responsibilities. victim and abuser. Current policy would organization stated the standard should Comment. One organization suggested prevent an individual who is the subject require proactive notification to that any translations of a detainee’s of an allegation from being responsible detainees of opportunities to report complaints should be provided by a for investigating the allegation. Taken crimes confidentially, one-on-one, to an ‘‘neutral’’ translation company at no together, these factors sufficiently auditor. cost to the detainee. address the concern that underlines the Response. DHS believes that these Response. DHS routinely uses comment, and DHS declines to amend provisions adequately address the translation services during interviews the regulatory text to further address the important need for detainees to have and when taking complaints. When staff issue.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13135

Comment. A human rights advocacy With regard to transfers, ICE policy retaliation. Also, the standard as well as group suggested that the standard 11022.11, entitled Detainee Transfers, current practices provide multiple ways specify that detainees are able to make governs the transfer of all aliens in ICE a detainees can report sexual abuse that free, preprogrammed calls to the OIG custody. Pursuant to the policy, do not involve confronting an officer or and CRCL, and that facilities must transfers are discouraged unless a FOD staff member. provide access to telephones, along with or his or her designee deems the transfer Comment. One collective comment contact information to reach consular necessary for the following reasons: (a) from advocacy groups suggested that officials. To provide appropriate medical or DHS make explicit in paragraph (a) that Response. Under current agency mental health care; (b) to fulfill an the policies and procedures to be practice, all calls made by a detainee to approved transfer request by the developed by the agency to ensure the OIG and the JIC are preprogrammed detainee; (c) for the safety and security multiple ways of private detainee and free of charge. CRCL is unable to of the detainee, other detainees, reporting are to be available while in handle a large volume of calls from detention personnel, or any ICE custody and after release or removal. detainees and is not staffed outside of employee; (d) at ICE’s discretion, for the Response. The agency recognizes the business hours, but detainees may send convenience of the agency when the benefit to detainees of reporting written complaints to CRCL, including venue of DOJ Executive Office for incidents of sexual abuse or assault to by email. The standard already requires Immigration Review proceedings is a private entity. Detainees in that facilities provide instructions on different than the venue in which the immigration facilities already have how detainees may contact their alien is detained; (e) to transfer to a access to phone numbers for many consular official. more appropriate facility based on the private organizations that provide Comment. An advocacy group and detainee’s individual circumstances and assistance in response to a wide range former Commissioners of NPREC risk factors; (f) upon termination of of complaints or inquiries. recommended including a provision facility use; or (g) to relieve or prevent Once a detainee has been removed or that DHS will not remove from the facility overcrowding. ICE’s transfer is otherwise no longer in agency country or transfer to another facility policy is designed to limit transfers for custody, the agency is not obligated to detainees who report or make a all aliens and provides adequate provide reporting procedures. However, grievance regarding sexual abuse before protection for aliens who have sexual it is available to former detainees to the investigation of the abuse is abuse complaints or grievances. contact the OIG, the JIC, CRCL or a complete, except at the detainee’s Comment. One group suggested that private entity to report any incidents request. the standard provide for young even after they are no longer in agency Response. DHS routinely considers survivors of sexual abuse to have the custody. whether detainees are suitable option of release on their own candidates for alternatives to detention recognizance and to remain lawfully in Grievances (§ 115.52) or prosecutorial discretion. Certainly, the United States during the Summary of Proposed Rule DHS through ICE evaluates the investigation. Another organization and detention status and removal a collective comment of advocacy The standard contained in the proceedings for any sexual abuse victim groups stated that the standard should proposed rule prohibited the facility to determine whether the detainee provide for an assessment of any alleged from imposing any deadline on the should be placed on an order of victim who has reported abuse to submission of a grievance regarding supervision, released on bond, or determine if he or she would be safer sexual abuse incidents. The standard whether he or she is eligible for a form under alternatives to detention. mandated that facilities allow detainees of prosecutorial discretion such as Response. DHS routinely considers to file a formal grievance at any time deferred action or parole. ICE’s OPR has whether detainees are suitable before, during, after, or in lieu of the authority to approve deferred action candidates for alternatives to detention. lodging an informal complaint related to for victimized detainees on a case-by- Certainly, DHS through ICE evaluates sexual abuse. The standard further case basis where appropriate. As the detention status of any sexual abuse required the facility to issue a decision mandated in §§ 115.22(h) and victim to determine whether the on the grievance within five days of 115.122(e), all alleged detainee victims detainee should be placed on an order receipt. of sexual abuse that is criminal in of supervision, released on bond, or Changes in Final Rule nature will be provided U granted parole or deferred action. nonimmigrant status information. OPR Because these are routine agency DHS is modifying paragraph (e) by and HSI have the delegated authority to practices and subject to agency adding a requirement that the facility certify USCIS Form I–918, Supplement discretion, DHS has declined to make respond to an appeal of the grievance B for victims of qualifying criminal changes in the final rule to specifically decision within 30 days and by activity that ICE is investigating where address the various methods that could requiring facilities to send all grievances the victim seeks to petition for U be used to release a detainee victim related to sexual abuse to the nonimmigrant status. Because these are from detention. appropriate ICE Field Office Director at routine agency practices and subject to Comment. Some commenters the end of the grievance process. agency discretion, DHS has declined to expressed concern in regard to both this Comments and Responses make changes in the final rule to reporting standard and other of the specifically address the various methods proposed standards that detainees may Comment. Some commenters that could be used to release a detainee fear speaking up due to retaliation or are suggested that DHS provide additional victim from detention. The agency, unlikely to report incidences of sexual processes and procedures for emergency through ICE, can and will use these abuse to officers. grievances. One advocacy group methods for detainees with Response. DHS acknowledges that suggested that proposed paragraph (c)’s substantiated sexual abuse and assault some detainees may fear reporting requirement for protocol on time- claims. DHS does not believe that a sexual abuse. As such, the final sensitive, immediate-threat grievances is uniform stay of removal for all aliens standard includes §§ 115.67 and too open-ended, as it should set out who lodge complaints is warranted. 115.167 which protect detainees from criteria or guidance as to what facilities’

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13136 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

procedures should accomplish and appropriate ICE Field Office Director at information, a qualified staff member require agency approval of the the end of the grievance process. In from a community-based organization, procedures. Another organization stated addition, facilities are required under or a qualified agency staff member. the filing process itself for an emergency §§ 115.89 and 115.189 to keep all Section 115.21 also provides that a at-risk grievance should be explicitly grievances on file. Each facility is forensic medical examination shall be included in the standard, for when a inspected under §§ 115.88 and 115.188 arranged when appropriate for medical detainee alleges he or she is subject to to ensure that it is following the or evidentiary reasons and at no cost to a substantial risk or imminent sexual grievance process and handling each the detainee. abuse. grievance properly. Sections 115.81–115.83 require Response. The final standard is meant referrals for medical follow-up, to enhance existing agency policies and Detainee Access to Outside Confidential unimpeded access to emergency detention standards that seek to prevent, Support Services (§ 115.53) medical treatment and crisis detect, and respond to sexual abuse Summary of Proposed Rule intervention services, medical and incidents by establishing general mental health evaluations, and follow- regulatory requirements for immigration The standard contained in the up services. detention facilities. ICE’s detention proposed rule required agencies to Comment. Commenters expressed standards provide detailed grievance provide detainees with access to outside concerns over confidentiality provisions procedures, including requirements for confidential support services and that in this standard. Regarding the outside individual facility emergency grievance the information about these services support services, an advocacy group processes. Common elements of these will be provided to them. The standard stated that all communications between procedures have been included in the further required that detainees and these detainees—particularly LGBTI regulatory language. However, the confidential support services will have detainees—and such organizations agency believes that its longstanding reasonable communication in as private should remain confidential, with a grievance procedures are a manner as possible. detainee being notified when comprehensive and adequately address Changes in Final Rule confidentiality of a communication is the public’s concerns. Furthermore, not guaranteed. Two collections of each facility’s grievance procedures are DHS is adding paragraph (d) requiring advocacy groups expressed similar inspected to ensure that they are being facilities to inform detainees, prior to concern, calling for replacing ‘‘in as properly executed. giving them access to outside resources, confidential a manner as possible’’ with Comment. An advocacy group of the extent to which such complete confidentiality, and adding suggested that proposed paragraph (e)’s communications will be monitored and requirements for an exception that— grievance-response timeframe should to which reports of abuse will be when such confidentiality is not also include a provision adding a 30-day forwarded to authorities in accordance possible—the facility document the maximum time limit for the agency’s with mandatory reporting laws. reason(s) therefor and inform the response to an appeal of an agency’s Comments and Responses detainee of the extent of monitoring and decision on a grievance. the extent of any forwarding of reports Response. DHS accepts the suggested Comment. One commenter suggested of abuse to authorities under mandatory revision to the grievance appeal process that when an assault occurs, facilities reporting laws. Some members of described in paragraph (e) by including should make available to detainees Congress also stated that full a requirement to respond to an appeal updated lists of resources and referrals confidentiality is necessary in of the grievance decision within 30 to professionals. communications with service providers days. Response. DHS agrees that detainees like rape crisis counselors. Another Comment. Regarding the substance of should have access to resources and advocacy group as well as a collection the grievance itself, a group suggested referrals to professionals when of youth, immigration and disability that the standard should require that no appropriate. The final standards groups and a human rights group sexual abuse-related grievance should adequately address these needs in this focused, respectively, on the specific be denied based upon any detainee section and also in §§ 115.21, 115.81– needs for confidentiality in regard to failure to properly fill out and submit a 83. This section provides that each medical and mental health care records formal grievance; the substance of the facility use available community and also trauma and support services. grievance should be sufficient to trigger resources and services to provide Response. DHS agrees that it is the facility’s response on the merits. support to detainees. In addition, important for all victims, regardless of Response. Any allegation of sexual § 115.53 requires facilities to maintain their sexual orientation, to have access assault is thoroughly investigated by the or attempt to enter into agreements with to confidential services. The standard agency or by local law enforcement, if community service providers or requires agencies to ‘‘enable reasonable appropriate. The fact that a grievance national organizations that provide legal communication between detainees and form was not properly filled out or advocacy and emotional support. these organizations and agencies, in as submitted would never be grounds to Section 115.33 also requires facilities to confidential a manner as possible.’’ not investigate a detainee’s abuse claim. provide detainees with information Unfortunately, DHS cannot guarantee Comment. A commenter expressed about local organizations that can assist complete confidentiality in all concern that the standard should detainees. A detainee does not have to situations, because it may be difficult require facilities to provide DHS with a wait for his or her allegation to be for agencies to ensure complete copy of each grievance and disposition substantiated before being able to use confidentiality with all forms of so DHS can effectively monitor the these services; the facility must make communication due to factors such as facilities. the services available much earlier on. the physical layout of the facility or the Response. DHS has revised the Section 115.21, which covers forensic use of automatic phone monitoring regulatory text to require facilities to medical examinations, requires facilities systems, which may be difficult to send all grievances related to sexual to make use of outside victim services suspend for support calls without abuse and the facility’s decisions with following sexual abuse incidents. These requiring the detainee to make a specific respect to such grievances to the services include rape crisis center request. As a result of confidentiality

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13137

concerns, DHS added paragraph (d), anyone other than to the extent policy and the SAAPID, agency staff is which will require facilities to inform necessary to make medical treatment, required to ensure immediate reporting detainees prior to giving them access to investigation, law enforcement, and of any incident of sexual abuse or outside resources, of the extent to which other security and management assault by the facility to the local ICE such communications will be monitored decisions. personnel, who must then notify the ICE and the extent to which reports of abuse Changes in Final Rule JIC telephonically within two hours and will be forwarded to authorities in in writing within 24 hours. Reporting accordance with mandatory reporting DHS now explicitly requires covered directly to the JIC allows staff to report laws. staff to report retaliation against incidents anonymously without having As ICE’s Detainee Handbook explains, detainees or staff who participated in an to report up through their chain of communications between detainees and investigation of an incident of sexual command. DHS believes that the investigators are private and detainees’ abuse that occurred in a facility. allowance of anonymous reporting is medical and administrative files are Previously, the reporting requirement in adequately addressed between these locked in secure areas to ensure these standards did not explicitly cover policies and paragraph (a) of this confidentiality. such retaliation (although it did cover standard which allows for ‘‘methods by DHS encourages facilities to establish retaliation against detainees or staff who which staff can report outside of the multiple procedures for detainee reported an incident of sexual abuse). chain of command.’’ Because an express victims of sexual abuse to contact Otherwise, DHS is adopting the regulatory provision would be external advocacy and support groups. regulation as proposed. redundant to a number of measures that While not ensuring ideal privacy, Comments and Responses are currently in place, and because DHS phones may provide the best believes that the anonymous reporting Comment. A commenter suggested opportunity for detainees to ask for option must be carefully controlled to expanding paragraph (a) to require staff assistance in a timely manner. Privacy ensure that staff also meet their to report not only ‘‘any knowledge, concerns may be addressed through mandatory reporting duties properly suspicion, or information regarding . . . other means of contacting outside and effectively, DHS does not believe retaliation against detainees or staff who organizations, such as allowing that the recommended added language reported’’ an incident of sexual abuse, confidential correspondence, is necessary. opportunities for phone contact in more but also any knowledge, suspicion, or private settings, or the ability of the information regarding retaliation against Protection Duties (§§ 115.62, 115.162) detainees or staff that provided detainee to make a request to contact an Summary of Proposed Rule outside advocate through a chaplain, information pertaining to such an clinician, or other service provider. incident. The standards contained in the Response. DHS agrees that anti- proposed rule required that when an Third-Party Reporting (§§ 115.54, retaliation measures are of paramount agency employee or facility staff has a 115.154) importance in this context, and has reasonable belief that a detainee is Summary of Proposed Rule therefore included a range of measures, subject to a substantial risk of imminent including §§ 115.67 and 115.167, sexual abuse, he or she must take Standards 115.54 and 115.154 in the intended to deter retaliatory conduct. immediate action to protect the proposed rule required facilities to Under these provisions, agency detainee. establish a method to receive third-party employees (and others) may not retaliate reports of sexual abuse and publicly against any person, including a Changes in Final Rule distribute information on how to report detainee, for, inter alia, reporting, DHS is adopting the regulation as such abuse on behalf of a detainee. complaining about, or participating in proposed. Changes in Final Rule an investigation into an allegation of sexual abuse. Comments and Responses DHS is adopting the regulation as With respect to staff reporting proposed. DHS did not receive any public specifically and in response to the comments on this provision during the Comments and Responses comment, DHS revised §§ 115.61(a) and public comment period. 115.161(a) to require all staff to DHS did not receive any public immediately report retaliation against Reporting to Other Confinement comments on this provision during the detainees or staff who reported or Facilities (§§ 115.63, 115.163) public comment period. participated in an investigation about Summary of Proposed Rule Staff Reporting Duties (§§ 115.61, sexual abuse incidents. Prior to this 115.161) revision, the reporting requirement did The standards contained in the require reporting about retaliation proposed rule mandated that upon Summary of Proposed Rule against detainees or staff who reported receiving an allegation that a detainee The standards in the proposed rule an incident of sexual abuse, but did not was sexually abused while confined at required that staff immediately report: explicitly cover reports of retaliation another facility, the facility receiving (1) Any knowledge, suspicion, or against individuals who participated in the allegation must (1) notify the information regarding an incident of investigations. appropriate office of the facility where sexual abuse that occurred in a facility; Comment. An advocacy group the sexual abuse is alleged to have (2) retaliation against detainees or staff suggested adding language to paragraph occurred as soon as possible, but no who reported such an incident; and (3) (a) that would allow staff to later than 72 hours after receiving the any staff neglect or violation of anonymously report sexual abuse and allegation; and (2) document the efforts responsibilities that may have harassment of detainees. taken under this section. The agency contributed to an incident or retaliation. Response. DHS agrees that it is office that receives such notification, to The proposed standards prohibited the essential for staff to have anonymous the extent covered by the regulation, agency from revealing any information methods of reporting sexual abuse and must ensure the allegation is referred for related to a sexual abuse report to assault incidents. Under 2006 agency investigation.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13138 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Changes in Final Rule which would not be in the best interest required agency management to DHS is modifying the notification of the victim. For this reason, DHS consider such removal for each language in paragraph (a) for both believes that the provision will be most allegation of sexual abuse, and to do so § 116.63 and § 115.163 to require effective as currently written and if the seriousness and plausibility of the agencies and facilities that receive declines to adopt the ‘‘facility head’’ allegation make removal appropriate. allegations of abuse at a different facility language. Changes in Final Rule to notify the appropriate office of the Responder Duties (§§ 115.64, 115.164) DHS is adopting the regulation as agency or the administrator of the proposed. facility where the alleged abuse Summary of Proposed Rule occurred. The standards contained in the Comments and Responses proposed rule required that the first Comments and Responses Comment. Some commenters employee or staff member that responds suggested that as with immigration Comment. The former Commissioners to the sexual abuse report separate the detention facilities, holding facilities of NPREC recommended that DHS alleged victim and abuser and preserve that have staff, contractors, or define who specifically in the agency or and protect the crime scene until volunteers that are suspected of sexual facility is required to notify another evidence can be collected. abuse should remove such persons from facility, upon receiving an allegation of Changes in Final Rule all duties requiring detainee contact detainee sexual abuse in another pending the outcome of an facility. The group suggested following DHS is adopting the regulation as investigation. They believe that the DOJ PREA final rule by using the proposed. requiring removal is important for the term ‘‘facility head.’’ Comments and Responses protection of the victim as well as others Response. DHS understands the in the facilities. An advocacy group DHS did not receive any public concern of confusion as to who is commented that leaving § 115.166(a) comments on this provision during the responsible for reporting allegations to unrevised will leave open the public comment period. other confinement facilities and has possibility for a perpetrator to continue subsequently revised § 115.63. With Coordinated Response (§§ 115.65, to have access to the detainees during regard to Subpart A, the SAAPID 115.165) the reporting and investigating requires that when an alleged assault is processes. reported at another facility, the facility Summary of Proposed Rule Response. DHS believes that the receiving the allegation report it to the Sections 115.65 and 115.165 in the language used in § 115.166 is the administrator of the facility where the proposed rule required a appropriate approach to protect alleged sexual abuse or assault occurred. multidisciplinary team approach in the detainees while an investigation is DHS revised § 115.63, which response to an incident of sexual abuse. pending in a holding facility. DHS complements the SAAPID, and also recognizes the desire for consistency Changes in Final Rule revised § 115.163 to now require between Subpart A and Subpart B of the notification to ‘‘the appropriate office of DHS revised each standard to clarify regulation. However, DHS believes that the agency or the administrator of the that notification requirements related to § 115.166, as proposed and in final facility where the alleged abuse the transfer of detainee victims of sexual form, appropriately addresses the occurred.’’ The provision allows abuse will differ depending on whether unique needs associated with holding notification to the appropriate office of or not the receiving facility is covered facilities, including limited staffing the agency because in some cases the by these standards. As in the proposed resources. Furthermore, § 115.166 allegations may concern ICE or CBP rule, when the receiving facility is not requires supervisors to affirmatively holding facilities for which notification covered by these standards, the sending consider removing staff pending the to the JIC would be more appropriate, facility must inform the receiving completion of an investigation, and to for any of a range of reasons. Under the facility of the incident and the victim’s remove them if the seriousness and DHS standard as well as the DOJ potential need for medical or social plausibility of the allegation make such standard, if a covered facility learns of services, unless the victim requests removal appropriate (as opposed to sexual abuse in another facility, the otherwise. Otherwise, DHS is adopting automatically placing employees on covered facility will notify the other the regulation as proposed. administrative duties even where, for facility, and document such notification Comments and Responses example, the allegations are not in writing. DHS believes that as plausible because the subject of the currently written the provision satisfies DHS did not receive any public allegation was not on duty at the time the concern for facility to facility comments on this provision during the of the alleged incident). reporting and does not believe that public comment period. With respect to ICE holding facilities, adding ‘‘facility head’’ will strengthen Protection of Detainees From Contact the SAAPID reinforces the regulation by the provision as currently written. With Alleged Abusers (§§ 115.66, requiring the removal of an ICE For Subpart B facilities, where 115.166) employee, facility employee, contractor, detention is relatively brief, and in order or volunteer suspected of perpetrating to minimize delay, the agency official Summary of Proposed Rule sexual abuse or assault to be removed responsible for notifying another The standard in the proposed rule from all duties requiring detainee confinement facility of an allegation of with respect to immigration detention contact pending the outcome of an sexual abuse will depend on which facilities required the agency or facility investigation. The term ‘‘suspected of’’ office receives the allegation. DHS to remove from all duties requiring is intended to allow the agency or believes that specifying ‘‘facility head’’ detainee contact, pending the outcome facility a modest exercise of discretion within this section will limit which of an investigation, staff, contractors, with respect to whether any suspicion office can either notify or be notified and volunteers suspected of exists. By requiring that the individual and may therefore postpone the perpetrating sexual abuse. The standard be ‘‘suspected of’’ perpetrating sexual communication between facilities with respect to holding facilities abuse and assault, DHS intends to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13139

ensure that staff, contractors, and allegation has any reasonable basis in requires the agency to use multiple volunteers are not removed for plainly fact. DHS believes that the use of the measures to protect detainees who fear implausible or plainly erroneous term ‘‘suspected of perpetrating’’ as reporting sexual abuse or fear allegations (e.g., a detainee may claim opposed to ‘‘alleged to have cooperating with investigations. that a specific staff member assault him perpetrated’’ will adequately ensure the DHS did not incorporate the language when, in fact, that staff member was not safety and security of detainees. used in DOJ’s paragraph (a) because at the facility during the alleged DHS’s language provides greater incident). Agency Protection Against Retaliation protection by prohibiting retaliation DHS believes that by assigning staff, (§§ 115.67, 115.167) immediately, instead of relying on a contractors, and volunteers to duties Summary of Proposed Rule policy to be drafted in the future. Given away from detainees when necessary, ICE’s more direct oversight over its DHS will provide sufficient protection The standards contained in the immigration detention facilities, the to detainees. proposed rule required that agency and agency is in a better position to prohibit Comment. Some commenters facility staff and employees not retaliate and take action against acts of suggested adding the same language that against any person, including a retaliation by detainees or staff. DOJ’s is currently in DOJ’s PREA final rule detainee, who reports, complains about, paragraph (d) was not incorporated for concerning collective bargaining or participates in an investigation into the same reason, and because status agreements. The DOJ standard prevents an allegation of sexual abuse, or for checks are redundant—for 90 days an agency or governmental entity participating in sexual activity as a following a report of sexual abuse, the responsible for collective bargaining on result of force, coercion, threats, or fear agency or facility must monitor to see if the agency’s behalf from entering into or of force. there are facts that may suggest possible renewing any collective bargaining Changes in Final Rule retaliation by detainees or staff, and agreement or other agreement that limits shall act promptly to remedy any such the agency’s ability to remove staff DHS added a new paragraph (b) to retaliation. DHS believes that its final suspected of perpetuating sexual abuse Subpart A of the final rule which rule is tailored effectively to from contact with any inmates pending requires the agency or facility to immigration detention and therefore, the outcome of an investigation. The ‘‘employ multiple protection measures, does not need to mirror the DOJ rule to commenters believe that this adjustment such as housing changes, removal of provide adequate protection to will prevent DHS from entering into alleged staff or detainee abusers from detainees. collective bargaining agreements that contact with victims, and emotional DHS chose not to include proposed frustrate the objective of the standard. support services for detainees or staff language about employing multiple Response. DHS respectfully declines that fear retaliation for reporting sexual protection measures in Subpart B. Given to add the language concerning abuse or for cooperating with the relatively short time of detention in collective bargaining agreements. DHS investigations.’’ holding facilities, housing assignments believes adding the language suggested Comments and Responses are not applicable. Section 115.164, by the commenters is unnecessary. The Responder Duties, includes a DHS rule requires affirmative steps in Comment. Many commenters requirement to separate the alleged response to an allegation of sexual suggested adding language that will victim and abuser. With respect to the abuse. Removal from detainee protect from retaliatory deportation any comment regarding providing emotional interaction during the investigation detainees who report, complain about, support services to staff, note that CBP process is required for staff, contractors, or participate in an investigation into an offers a full range of assistance to agency and volunteers suspected of allegation of sexual abuse, or for employees through the WorkLife4You perpetrating sexual abuse in participating in sexual activity as a Program and the Employee Assistance immigration detention facilities. In result of force. Program. response to an allegation of sexual abuse Response. DHS agrees that removal Comment. One commenter suggested in a holding facility, agency should never be used solely to retaliate the addition of a paragraph in § 115.67 management shall remove any staff, against a detainee who reports sexual that would require the facility’s PSA contractor, or volunteer from duties abuse. To address this concern, Compliance Manager, or assignee, to requiring detainee contact pending the §§ 115.67 and 115.167 explicitly make sure the mandates of § 115.22 are outcome of an investigation, where the prohibit any retaliatory behavior, which fulfilled. seriousness and plausibility of the is a broader form of protection and is Response. Sections 115.11(d) and allegation make removal appropriate. therefore adequate to address this risk. 115.111(d) already serve this function This provides a greater level of Comment. Multiple commenters by ensuring the PSA Compliance protection and requires more significant suggested that the standards in Manager has ‘‘sufficient time and affirmative action than a limitation on §§ 115.67 and 115.167 should be authority to oversee facility efforts to collective bargaining agreements. replaced with the corresponding DOJ comply with facility sexual abuse Comment. Some commenters PREA standards. Some members of prevention and intervention policies suggested changing § 115.66 to apply Congress commented generally that the and procedures.’’ not to staff, contractors, or volunteers retaliation standard should be revisited Comment. One commenter suggested that are ‘‘suspected of perpetrating’’ to be in line with DOJ’s standard. One that this standard explicitly address sexual abuse, but to staff, contractors, or commenter notes that the DOJ PREA transferring victims as a form of volunteers that are ‘‘alleged to have standards detail specific protection retaliation or as a means of protection perpetrated’’ sexual abuse. measures that the agency must take to from alleged perpetrators. Response. PBNDS 2011 uses the term, ensure retaliation does not occur. Response. DHS recognizes the need to ‘‘suspected of perpetrating.’’ The use of Response. In response to comments eliminate unnecessary detainee conflicting terms could pose bargaining about aligning DHS’s § 115.67 standards transfers. Eliminating unwarranted issues. ‘‘Suspected of perpetrating’’ with DOJ’s, DHS again reviewed the DOJ transfers of sexual assault victims for allows for a modest exercise of final rule and added a new paragraph to retaliatory reasons are a high priority for discretion to determine whether an Subpart A of the final rule, which the agency. ICE Policy 11022.11,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13140 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

entitled Detainee Transfers, was hours. ICE notes that it has also chosen held in administrative segregation for 72 developed and implemented to reduce to proceed by policy in this area, as hours. detainee transfers and specifically notes noted above in the discussion relating to Comment. Multiple commenters that transfers should not be conducted § 115.43. suggested that, for alleged victims who unless certain articulated factors are Comment. Some commenters have been placed in post-allegation considered by the FOD or his or her suggested further defining the term protective custody, DHS should designee. DHS believes that the ‘‘unusual circumstances’’ in paragraph incorporate a strong presumption of full protections afforded by ICE’s transfer (b) to include the actual circumstances release from custody, potentially under policy apply to all detainees, not just in which prolonged protective custody programs that provide alternatives to those who have made sexual assault might be warranted. Commenters wrote detention. allegations or those participating in that vulnerable detainees may request Response. Under the regulation, the investigations. Section 115.67 of these protective custody for a prolonged facility shall place detainee victims of standards also includes an explicit period of time because they are unaware sexual abuse in a supportive prohibition against any form of agency of their rights. environment that is the least restrictive retaliation against victims of sexual An advocacy group suggested that the housing option possible. A detainee abuse or assault, including retaliatory agency supervisor be notified when a who is in post-allegation protective housing changes. detainee is placed in administrative custody shall not be returned to the custody for more than five days. Once general population until completion of Post-Allegation Protective Custody the agency supervisor is notified, this a proper re-assessment, taking into (§ 115.68) person should be tasked with consideration any increased Summary of Proposed Rule conducting a review of the segregation vulnerability of the detainee as a result as well as looking for other placements of the sexual abuse. In light of the strong The standard contained in the for the detainee as long as the detainee protections required under this proposed rule required the facility to is not subject to mandatory detention. standard, and because alternatives to place detainee victims of sexual abuse Response. The final standard includes detention programs continue to be in a supportive environment that is the new requirements for agency available under the regulation, DHS least restrictive housing option possible. notification whenever an individual has declines to incorporate a presumption The standard provided that detainee been held in administrative segregation in favor of release. In addition to the victims shall not be returned to the for 72 hours, and agency review of such detainee’s personal vulnerability, DHS general population until proper re- cases to determine whether the will continue to make release decisions assessment is completed. The standard placement is only as a last resort and based upon other generally applicable further required that detainee victims when no other viable housing options factors, including, inter alia, individual are not to be held for longer than five exist. Where a detainee victim has been security considerations, applicable days in any type of administrative held in administrative segregation for statutory detention mandates, and segregation, except in unusual longer than five days, the agency must available custodial options in each case. circumstances or at the request of the also review whether the placement is Criminal and Administrative detainee. justified by extraordinary Investigations (§§ 115.71, 115.171) Changes in Final Rule circumstances, or is at the detainee’s own request. DHS does not believe that Summary of Proposed Rule The final rule adds a requirement for further definition of the term ‘‘unusual The standards contained in the facilities to notify the appropriate ICE circumstances’’ is necessary based on proposed rule required investigations by FOD whenever a detainee victim has any concern that detainees’ lack of the agency or the facility with the been held in administrative segregation awareness of their rights will lead them responsibility for investigating the for 72 hours. to request prolonged protective custody. allegation(s) of sexual abuse be prompt, Upon receipt of such notification, the In ICE’s experience, detainees are not thorough, objective, and conducted by final rule also requires that the ICE FOD likely to affirmatively request continued specially trained, qualified conduct a review of the placement to protective custody unless they desire to investigators. The proposed standard consider whether the placement is only remain segregated. This final rule also required agencies and facilities to as a last resort and when no other viable includes strong provisions on detainee conduct an administrative investigation housing options exist, and whether—in education in this context. of (1) any substantiated allegation and the case of a detainee victim held in Comment. One commenter stated that (2) any unsubstantiated allegation that, administrative segregation for longer protective custody should only be used upon review, the agency deems than five days—whether the placement as a last resort. appropriate for further administrative is justified by extraordinary Response. Section 115.68 has been investigation. circumstances or is at the detainee’s revised to require the FOD to determine request. whether the placement in segregation is Changes in Final Rule Comments and Responses used only as a last resort and when no DHS made minor revisions to the other viable housing options exist. Subpart B provision, to clarify that Comment. One advocacy group Comment. One commenter responsibility for conducting criminal suggested adding a statement in recommended that paragraph (c) have a and administrative investigations or paragraph (b) requiring the facility to defined timeline for reassessments. referring allegations to the appropriate report to the agency within 24 hours the Response. Paragraph (b) of this investigative authorities ultimately lies placement of suspected sexual abuse standard imposes a 5-day limitation on with the agency, and not the facility. victims in protective custody. the continuous segregation of detainee Otherwise, DHS is adopting the Response. As noted above, the final victims in protective custody, inclusive regulation as proposed. rule adds a requirement for facilities to of any time necessary to complete a re- notify the appropriate ICE FOD assessment. The final rule also requires Comments and Responses whenever a detainee victim has been facilities to notify the ICE FOD Comment. Commenters suggested that held in administrative segregation for 72 whenever a detainee victim has been all allegations of sexual abuse be

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13141

investigated, including third party and completion of removal proceedings up Response. DHS notes that DOJ did not anonymous reports. There was a to the moment of physical removal. apply its standards regarding reporting recommendation that DHS cross- Longer term immigration relief may to inmates in the context of lockups, reference this standard with § 115.34 be available, including in the form of U due to the short-term nature of lockup with regard to the requisite nonimmigrant status. U nonimmigrant detention. Similarly, due to the short- qualifications of the investigator. status protects victims of qualifying term nature of detention in holding Response. Section 115.22 requires crimes (including sexual assault and facilities, DHS declines to accept the that all allegations of sexual abuse be felonious assault) who have suffered suggestion to include a provision on investigated. The purpose of § 115.71(a) substantial mental or physical abuse as detainee notification of investigative is to clarify investigative responsibility a result of the crime and are willing to outcomes for allegations made in (e.g., the division of responsibility assist law enforcement authorities in the holding facilities. between the agency/facility/state/local investigation or prosecution of the Comment. Some commenters law enforcement) and to require that criminal activity. U nonimmigrant suggested that DHS’s proposed standard investigators be properly trained and status is self-petitioning and requires a should follow the DOJ standard. The qualified. Allegations may be made law enforcement certification. DOJ standard describes what type of directly by a detainee or by a third party DHS also routinely considers whether notification will be delivered to the such as an attorney, a family member, detainees may be suitable candidates for inmate concerning their abuser and the another detainee, a staff member, or an release on their own recognizance or on investigation, that such notifications anonymous party. The source of the bond, or participation in an alternative will be documented, and that allegation does not affect the to detention program. notifications will no longer be required when the inmate/victim is released from requirement that all allegations of Evidentiary Standard for sexual abuse be investigated. DHS custody. A commenter wrote that failure Administrative Investigations to provide updates on the agency’s clarifies here that specialized training (§§ 115.72, 115.172) for investigators is addressed in response to an allegation of sexual abuse § 115.34. Summary of Proposed Rule increases the survivor’s anxiety about Comment. There were several future abuse and decreases the The standards contained in the survivor’s belief that his or her report is advocacy groups that suggested that proposed rule required that agencies not prosecutorial discretion be exercised being taken seriously. impose a standard higher than a Response. DHS does not believe it is with regard to victims and witnesses of preponderance of the evidence in necessary to adopt the DOJ standard on sexual abuse and assault, especially determining whether allegations of notifications. ICE already has the young survivors of sexual abuse and sexual abuse are substantiated. responsibility to inform detainees of the assault. Other commenters suggested outcome of any investigation as well as that victims be given the option of Changes in Final Rule any responsive action taken. In release on their own recognizance DHS is adopting the regulation as instances in which the detainee has during the investigation process with proposed. been moved to another facility, the understanding that they would Comments and Responses coordination between facilities is remain in the United States lawfully. A required, in part to ensure that the similar suggestion was made by another DHS did not receive any public investigative outcome can be shared commenter in that victims should be comments on this provision during the with the detainee. given the ability to be released on their public comment period. With regard to notifying the detainee own recognizance, on bond, or through Reporting to Detainees (§ 115.73) of actions taken against an employee, an alternative detention program and DHS agrees that agency follow-up can the ability to stay in the United States Summary of Proposed Rule be of great importance to victims, and while the investigation is carried out. The standard found in § 115.73 in the therefore requires the agency to notify Response. Tools for prosecutorial proposed rule required the agency to the detainee as to the result of the discretion already are available for notify the detainee of the result of the investigation and any responsive action 15 victims of sexual abuse and assault. investigation when the detainee is still taken. In the immigration detention Deferred action refers to the decision- in immigration detention, as well as facility context, DHS has also making authority of ICE, among other where otherwise feasible. undertaken to perform this follow-up entities, to allocate resources in the best whenever feasible, even after the possible manner to focus on high Changes in Final Rule detainee has been released from priority cases, potentially deferring DHS is adopting the regulation as custody. As DHS noted in its proposal, action on cases with a lower priority. proposed. DHS believes that its approach strikes Deferred action can be used by ICE for the proper balance between staff Comments and Responses any alien victim, including a victim in members’ privacy and the detainee’s detention, due to the victim’s status as Comment. One advocacy group right to know the outcome of the an important witness in an ongoing suggested that holding facilities have a investigation. investigation or prosecution. comparable provision with what is In light of the breadth of the DHS Administrative Stay of Removal (ASR) currently proposed for immigration provision, DHS notes that in its is another discretionary tool that detention facilities. They further experience, state privacy laws and permits ICE to temporarily delay the suggested that there be an attempt for union guidelines may prohibit sharing removal of an alien. Any alien, or law DHS to forward the outcome of the certain information about disciplinary enforcement agency on behalf of an investigation to the detainee, especially actions taken against employees. alien, who is the subject of a final order when the detainee is still in detention Releasing details about an employee’s of removal may request ASR from ICE. due to their belief that if there is a lack punishment could be in violation of An ASR may be granted after the of incident follow-up there will be a these privacy laws or policies. DHS lack of accountability within the cannot require that specific information 15 See generally id. holding facility. about sanctions taken against an

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13142 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

employee be included in post- investigation may or may not Changes in Final Rule investigation follow-up with the substantiate an allegation. In addition, DHS is adopting the regulation as detainee. However, consistent with the detainee population size must be taken proposed. regulatory text, where the information is into account when assessing the number available to the agency and can be of allegations at a given facility over a Comments and Responses provided in accordance with law, it will period of time. However, when Comment. One commenter suggested be provided. investigations or audits reveal a policy, that entities that have repeat offenses be Disciplinary Sanctions for Staff procedural, or systemic issue at the subject to both criminal and civil (§§ 115.76, 115.176) facility that has contributed to sexual sanctions by the agency. The commenter abuse or assault, DHS will use its further suggested that contracted parties Summary of Proposed Rule authority to ensure that corrective be subject to the same standards as non- The standards contained in the actions are promptly taken. DHS contracted parties and should have proposed rule provided that staff shall emphasizes the importance of working further repercussions for their actions be subject to disciplinary actions up to with the facility to take corrective and other than employee dismissal. The and including termination for violating preventive action as the appropriate commenter suggested that a facility agency sexual abuse policies, and that response. found to have repeat incidents should termination shall be the presumptive DHS recognizes that detainees who be subject to harsher penalties and be disciplinary sanction for staff that are minors have special vulnerabilities. monitored more closely. engaged in or threatened to engage in With the exception of juveniles in the Response. Similar to the response sexual abuse, as defined in the Family Residential Program, and rare regarding §§ 115.76 and 115.176, DHS regulation. The proposed standards cases where minors with criminal believes that a change is not warranted further provided that if a staff member records are held in juvenile detention or appropriate to prescribe both is terminated for violating such policies, facilities, most juveniles are in the care criminal and civil sanctions. DHS does or if a staff member resigns in lieu of and custody of HHS/ORR, other than not have criminal prosecution authority termination, a report must be made to the brief period of time that such and the PREA statute similarly does not law enforcement agencies (unless the unaccompanied juveniles are in ICE provide for civil penalties. Nevertheless, activity was not criminal) and to any custody prior to transfer to ORR. The DHS takes extremely seriously any relevant licensing bodies, to the extent monitoring of those facilities is within allegations or substantiated incidents of known. the purview of HHS and outside the sexual abuse. scope of DHS authority. Contract employees are subject to the Changes in Final Rule same standards as agency employees DHS is adopting the regulation as Comment. One commenter and investigations into allegations made proposed. recommended that any person(s) against contractors are no less thorough regardless of whether they are staff, than those made against agency Comments and Responses contractors, or volunteers, and employees. All facilities will be closely Comment. One commenter suggested regardless of whether they work in a monitored for how they respond to that repeat offenders should be DHS facility or contract facility, should sexual abuse and assault reports; subjected to criminal and civil be removed from their position at a address safety, medical, and victim sanctions, and facilities that have detention facility for violating agency services issues; and coordinate criminal recurrences of sexual abuse and assault sexual abuse or sexual harassment and administrative investigative efforts. claims (paying specific attention to policies. DHS believes that the best approach to juvenile facilities) should be penalized Response. DHS agrees that violation remedy a situation of recurring sexual and closely monitored. Another of agency sexual abuse and assault abuse and assault claims varies with the commenter suggested that if multiple policies merits discipline of employees circumstances, and may include substantiated cases of sexual abuse have and contractors, up to and including disciplining or removing individual been found in a facility, the facility removal. However, DHS does not have employees involved in the abuse, should be closed or lose its contract authority to require contract facilities to working with the facility to take with DHS. remove employees from employment corrective and preventive action, regular Response. DHS declines to make the entirely, but only to require facility monitoring, as well as requested revision to the standard. DHS reassignment to a position where there terminating a contract with a facility in does not have criminal prosecution will not be contact with detainees. As its entirety. authority. Furthermore, the PREA such, the comment cannot be Comment. One commenter statute itself does not provide for civil implemented as recommended. recommended that any person(s) penalties, as suggested by the comment. violating agency sexual abuse or sexual DHS takes extremely seriously any Corrective Action for Contractors and harassment policies be removed from allegations or substantiated incidents of Volunteers (§§ 115.77, 115.177) their position at the detention facility sexual abuse. All facilities will be Summary of Proposed Rule regardless of whether the employee is closely monitored for how they respond staff, a contractor, or a volunteer and to sexual abuse and assault reports; The standards contained in the regardless of whether the person works address safety, medical, and victim proposed rule required that any in a DHS facility or contract facility. services issues; and coordinate criminal contractor or volunteer who has engaged Response. As discussed above in and administrative investigative efforts. in sexual abuse be prohibited from response to the comment received on While monitoring is recognized as a contact with detainees. The proposed §§ 115.76 and 115.176, DHS agrees that crucial element, DHS does not concur rule further required that reasonable violation of agency sexual abuse and with the suggestion that facilities with efforts be made to report to any assault policies merits discipline of recurring allegations or a higher number licensing body, to the extent known, employees and contractors, up to and of allegations should always be incidents of substantiated sexual abuse including removal. However, DHS does penalized, as the subsequent by a contractor or volunteer. not have authority to require contract

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13143

facilities to remove employees from comment. Whereas the purpose of imposed on the detainee. DHS believes employment entirely, but only to incarceration by DOJ includes that these protections are sufficient to require reassignment to a position punishment and rehabilitation—thus ensure that disciplinary sanctions are where there will not be contact with making therapy and counseling more fair and appropriate, and therefore DHS detainees. Accordingly, the comment widely appropriate—the purpose of does not adopt the changes requested by cannot be implemented as immigration detention is to facilitate the commenters on this point. recommended. appearance at immigration proceedings Comments. An advocacy group and removal. Accordingly, mandating suggested that there be a new § 115.178 Disciplinary Sanctions for Detainees therapy or counseling as a condition of (§ 115.78) in Subpart B applicable to holding access to programming or other benefits facilities. This recommended standard Summary of Proposed Rule would not be appropriate in this would include a provision in which The standard contained in the context. when there is probable cause that a proposed rule mandated that detainees DHS notes, however, that § 115.83 of detainee has sexually abused another be subject to disciplinary sanctions after the regulation includes provisions for detainee, the issue shall be referred from they have been found to have engaged voluntary access to ongoing medical and the agency to the proper prosecuting in sexual abuse. The standard mandates mental health care for sexual abuse authority. This provision would further that discipline be commensurate with victims and abusers, when deemed require the agency to inform any third- the severity of the committed prohibited appropriate by mental health party investigating entity of this policy. act and pursuant to a formal process practitioners. With regard to the second The advocacy group believed that it was that considers the detainee’s mental proposal, DHS also rejects the an oversight that DHS did not include disabilities or mental illness, if any, recommendation to prohibit a finding of this section in Subpart B of the when subjecting the detainee to sexual abuse when there is no element proposed rule. disciplinary actions. of coercion in sexual activity between Response. DHS appreciates the detainees. This clarification is comment recommending addition of a Changes in Final Rule unnecessary as the standards define new § 115.178 applicable to holding DHS is adopting the regulation as detainee-on-detainee sexual abuse to facilities only. However, DHS declines proposed. exclude incidents of consensual sexual to make this change because DHS does conduct between detainees. A provision Comments and Responses not discipline detainees in holding explicitly authorizing the agency to facilities. Sections 115.21 and 115.121 Comment. One commenter suggested prohibit all sexual activity between set forth requirements to ensure each that paragraph (a) specify that detainees detainees (including consensual sexual agency and facility establishes a will only face disciplinary action for activity) is similarly unnecessary, as protocol for the investigation of detainee-on-detainee sexual abuse ICE’s detention standards already allegations of sexual abuse, or the because the language in paragraph (e). contain such a prohibition. referral of allegations of sexual abuse to Paragraph (e) prohibits the facility from Comments. A few advocacy groups the appropriate investigative authorities. disciplining a detainee for sexual suggested specifying in paragraph (b) In general, the appropriate investigative contact with staff unless there is a that the circumstances of the prohibited authority is responsible for making finding that the staff member did not act, the detainee’s disciplinary history, referrals for prosecution. Accordingly, and the sanctions imposed for consent to such contact. DHS declines to add a new § 115.178 as comparable offenses by other detainees Response. DHS declines to make the suggested. proposed change to paragraph (a) with similar histories should be taken because this modification would into consideration when determining Medical and Mental Health preclude DHS from disciplining a the appropriate disciplinary action. Assessments; History of Sexual Abuse detainee found to have engaged in These advocacy groups stated that it is (§ 115.81) sexual contact with a non-consenting important that the sanctions against Summary of Proposed Rule staff member (pursuant to paragraph (e) detainees be appropriate and fair for the of this standard). DHS believes it is offense. One commenter stated that The standard contained in the important to retain the authority to adding this additional language will proposed rule required that pursuant to discipline a detainee for engaging in help prevent the misuse of the the assessment for risk of victimization sexual abuse of a staff member. regulations to inappropriately punish and abusiveness in § 115.41, facility Comment. One commenter suggested LGBTI detainees. staff will ensure immediate referral to a that two provisions from the DOJ PREA Response. DHS concurs with the qualified medical or mental health standard be adopted by DHS. One commenters that disciplinary sanctions practitioner, as appropriate, for provision in the DOJ rule allows for the must be fair and appropriate. With this detainees found to have experienced facility to require the abuser to very objective in mind, the regulation prior sexual victimization or perpetrated participate in mental health provides that each facility holding sexual abuse. For medical referrals, the interventions as a condition of access to detainees in custody shall have a medical professional was required to programming or other benefits. The detainee disciplinary system with provide a follow-up health evaluation other provision in the DOJ rule allows progressive levels of reviews, appeals, within two working days from the date for an agency to prohibit, in its procedures, and documentation of the initial assessment. For mental discretion, all sexual activity between procedure, which imposes sanctions in health referrals, the mental health inmates and if such activity occurs, the an objective manner commensurate with professional was required to provide a agency may discipline the inmates for the severity of the disciplinary follow-up mental health evaluation this activity. It further specifies that the infraction. In addition, the regulation within 72 hours from the date of the agency is not able to deem such activity requires the disciplinary process to referral. to be sexual abuse if it determines that consider whether a detainee’s mental Changes in Final Rule the activity is not coerced. disabilities or mental illness contributed Response. DHS declines to accept to his or her behavior when determining The final rule includes minor changes either of the proposed changes from this what type of sanction, if any, should be to paragraph (a). The phrase ‘‘subject to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13144 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

the circumstances surrounding the Comment. An advocacy group specific provisions concerning the types indication’’ was removed and the term recommended adding a statement that is of treatment available to detainees from ‘‘as appropriate’’ was moved within the in the DOJ final rule concerning emergency medical providers. Under paragraph. detainee consent. The DOJ rule states § 115.82, these treatments include that if a detainee confirms prior sexual emergency contraception and sexually Comments and Responses victimization, unless the detainee is less transmitted infections prophylaxis, Comment. One commenter suggested than 18 years of age, the medical and which are particularly time-sensitive. that there should be specific provisions mental health practitioners must obtain One of the legal associations further within the standard concerning the consent from the detainee before suggested that § 115.182 also contain a follow-up mental health services after reporting the information. provision that would allow for referrals the initial evaluation. Response. Again, § 115.61 of the for follow-up services and continued Response. Section 115.81 requires standards requires that information care by the agency or facility for that detainees who have experienced related to a sexual abuse incident be detainees to continue treatment upon prior sexual victimization or perpetrated limited to the information needed to transfer to another facility or release sexual abuse receive referrals for follow- protect the safety of the victim, provide from custody. up medical and/or mental health care as medical treatment, investigate the Response. DHS has considered the appropriate. In addition, ICE’s detention incident, or make other pertinent comments, and has revised § 115.182 to standards provide comprehensive security and management decisions. mirror § 115.82 by adding that detainee requirements for the mental health care DHS believes that this provision victims of sexual abuse in holding of all detainees, including follow-up adequately addresses the concern facilities shall have timely access not mental health evaluations as expressed by these commenters. only to emergency medical treatment, appropriate, and referral to external Comment. A commenter suggested but also to crisis intervention services, specialized providers as necessary. that a provision be added for women including emergency contraception and Because ICE detention standards outline and girls to be screened, assessed, and sexually transmitted infections these requirements, adding a provision provided with treatment during prophylaxis in accordance with specifically targeted to sexual abuse and confinement. The commenter urged for professionally accepted standards of assault victims is not necessary. this provision to be mandated for care. DHS disagrees that detainee Comment. A human rights group minors. victims in holding facilities should suggested that paragraph (a) be written Response. The proposed and final receive referrals for follow-up care more clearly and specifically about what rules clearly require that female because the short-term nature of the the circumstances might be concerning detainees and minors be afforded each detention makes this impracticable. when a staff member would make a of the protections outlined by the Comment. Multiple commenters referral for a detainee to seek a follow- standards, including with regard to suggested that this section be modified up with a medical or mental health screening, assessment, and treatment. to ensure that victimized detainees practitioner. The commenter suggested Access to Emergency Medical and receive expedited access to emergency that if DHS does not choose to clarify Mental Health Services (§§ 115.82, contraception. This access should be this language, DHS should remove the 115.182) provided as quickly as possible after the language altogether. incident. The commenters believe this is Response. DHS agrees with the Summary of Proposed Rule an appropriate provision to include comment. Upon consideration, DHS The standards in the proposed rule because emergency contraception can decided to strike the phrase ‘‘subject to required detainee victims of sexual prevent pregnancy within five days of the circumstances surrounding the abuse to have timely, unimpeded access intercourse but it is more effective if it indication’’ from § 115.81(a). to emergency medical treatment at no is taken within three days. Comment. Multiple commenters financial cost to them. Response. The final rule clearly states suggested adding the confidentiality that victims of sexual abuse ‘‘shall have provision that is currently in the DOJ Changes in Final Rule timely unimpeded access to emergency PREA rule. The statement would ensure DHS made a minor change to the final medical treatment and crisis that the information relating to a sexual rule by deleting the phrase ‘‘where intervention services, including abuse or assault incident will remain appropriate under medical or mental emergency contraception . . . in limited to medical and mental health health professional standards’’ in accordance with professionally accepted practitioners and other staff, as § 115.82(a) because the phrase was standards of care.’’ The medical necessary. Access to information would superfluous. DHS revised § 115.182 to professionals who provide care to be as necessary to inform treatment clarify that for holding facilities as well detainees are in the best position to plans and security and management as immigration detention facilities, administer emergency contraception. decisions, such as housing, bed emergency medical treatment and crisis Mandating a specific timeline is not placement, work, education, and intervention services will be provided appropriate for this regulation. DHS program assignments, or as otherwise in accordance with professionally believes that the final rule, as written, required by Federal, State, or local law. accepted standards of care. The relevant will ensure that victims have timely Response. Section 115.61 of the portion of § 115.182 now mirrors the access to emergency contraception. standards requires that information language in § 115.82. DHS also deleted Comment. Multiple commenters related to a sexual abuse incident be the phrases ‘‘in immigration detention expressed concern about the lack of limited to those needed to protect the facilities’’ and ‘‘in holding facilities’’ correct information and education about safety of the victim, provide medical from § 115.82(a) and § 115.182(a) transmission of sexually transmitted treatment, investigate the incident, or respectively, to clarify the scope of the diseases and infections. Commenters make other pertinent security and provision. suggested expanding relevant provisions management decisions. DHS believes in this section to explicitly refer to all that this provision adequately addresses Comments and Responses forms of sexual abuse. The language the concern expressed by these Comment. Multiple commenters proposed would specifically include commenters. suggested that DHS include in § 115.182 victims of oral, anal, or vaginal sexual

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13145

abuse due to non-consensual oral, anal, about the different ways sexually implication the additional 2011 PBNDS and vaginal touching or penetration. transmitted diseases can be spread. provisions referenced above. One of these commenters also suggested Therefore, the commenter suggests Comment. Commenters also suggested the removal of the phrase ‘‘where revising the language to specify the that DHS clarify that detention facilities appropriate under medical or mental different types of sexual abuse that must provide detainees medically health professional standards,’’ written detainees may encounter. accurate and unbiased information in paragraph (a) of this section. Response. Sexual abuse and assault is about pregnancy-related services, Response. The final rule contains a thoroughly defined in § 115.6. The including abortion. The commenter thorough definition of sexual abuse and specific types of abuse set forth in the stated that this is particularly relevant assault in § 115.6, which includes the Definitions section apply to the final where the detention facility uses specific areas of abuse as noted by the rule in its entirety. religiously affiliated institutions to commenters. DHS declines to add to the Comment. A commenter suggested provide care to inmates. The commenter definition of sexual abuse in this guaranteeing the confidentiality of stated that a woman should always be provision because it would be medical and mental health records able to have accurate information about redundant and could potentially because confidential trauma counseling all of her options; information should conflict with the final rule’s definition and medical and mental health care are never be provided with the intent to of sexual abuse and assault. essential to recovery. coerce, shame, or judge. After considering the comments to Response. Maintaining the Response. DHS clarifies that the § 115.82(a), DHS decided not to include confidentiality of medical records is a standard requires that covered detainee the phrase ‘‘where appropriate under DHS priority for every detainee. As victims receive medically accurate and medical or mental health standards’’ in such, ICE’s detention standards contain unbiased information, including the final rule. explicit requirements for ensuring this information about abortion. This is part confidentiality in all circumstances. of the requirement that facilities provide Ongoing Medical and Mental Health Given the overarching confidentiality ‘‘comprehensive’’ information about all Care for Sexual Abuse Victims and concern, DHS does not believe that lawful pregnancy-related medical Abusers (§ 115.83) revising this section provides greater services. protection to detainees than that which Summary of Proposed Rule Comment. Commenters also suggested is already contained in the proposed adding language clarifying that The standard in the proposed rule and final rules. transportation services would be given required that victims of sexual abuse in Comment. Commenters suggested the to victims needing medical services detention receive access to ongoing provision be edited to explicitly state when the detention facility is unable to medical and mental health care as the full range of services and provide such services in a timely necessary without financial cost to the information that should be made manner. victim. The standard also requires that available to victims of sexual abuse. One Response. Additional guidance on this care be consistent with the commenter suggested that DHS align the transportation is unnecessary given the community level of care for as long as final rule’s provision on pregnancy- requirement that victims be provided such care is needed. related services with PBNDS. The ‘‘timely access’’ to all lawful pregnancy- commenter noted that under ICE PBNDS Changes in Final Rule related medical services—which, when provide that when a detainee decides to necessary, includes transportation. DHS made one minor change to the terminate her pregnancy, ICE must Comment. Commenters suggested that final rule by replacing the word arrange for transportation at no cost to DHS remove the phrase ‘‘vaginal ‘‘incarcerated’’ with ‘‘detained’’ in the detainee. The commenter also noted penetration’’ in paragraph (d) because § 115.83(d). that ICE PBNDS provide that ICE will pregnancy can occur without assume all costs associated with the Comments and Responses penetration. detainee’s abortion when the pregnancy Response. DHS does not believe that Comments. A commenter had results from rape or incest or when § 115.83(d) should be revised to include concerns about the medical and mental continuing the pregnancy will endanger a broader definition of penetration. health care being age appropriate for all the life of the woman. The commenter Paragraph (d) applies to a limited set of detainees, specifically citing children recommended that DHS include those circumstances in which a female victim and adolescents. The commenter provisions in paragraph (d) to build becomes pregnant after sexual abuse. suggested adding the phrase ‘‘age upon best practices and have consistent Some sort of penetration pursuant to the appropriate’’ when referring to the regulatory and sub-regulatory guidance. definition in § 115.6 must occur in order medical and mental health evaluations Response. DHS agrees that women for the victim to become pregnant. The and treatments discussed in paragraph who become pregnant after being phrase ‘‘vaginal penetration’’ provides a (a). sexually abused in detention must clear guideline to the agency or facility Response. DHS recognizes the receive comprehensive information about when it is appropriate to importance of detainees received ‘‘age about and meaningful access to all administer pregnancy tests. appropriate’’ care. However, because lawful pregnancy-related medical Comment. Commenters suggested that medical personnel are expected and services at no financial cost. The final DHS remove the phrase ‘‘by a male obligated to provide age appropriate standard includes language that requires abuser’’ because detainees could also be care as a duty under the medical victims to receive timely and abused by females. The commenters standard of care, adding this language comprehensive information about all expressed concern that if the language is would be superfluous. lawful pregnancy-related medical retained, the victims of female abusers Comment. A commenter expressed services, and that access to pregnancy- will not receive critical health care concern about victims of various forms related medical services must be timely. services. of sexual abuse, which includes oral, Also, facilities are required to provide Response. DHS declines to make the anal, and vaginal abuse, receiving access information about and access to ‘‘all suggested revision, because the phrase to ongoing medical and mental health lawful’’ pregnancy-related medical ‘‘by a male abuser’’ in § 115.83(d) relates care services due to the misinformation services. These requirements include by to the possibility of pregnancy, and in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13146 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

no way mitigates a female victim’s right Sexual Abuse Incident Reviews information in the context of making a to care if the abuser is female. The (§§ 115.86, 115.186) report or otherwise, DHS believes it might be inappropriate to require staff to remaining provisions in § 115.83 apply Summary of Proposed Rule to all incidents of detainee sexual abuse question the detainee about his or her and are not limited by gender. The standards in the proposed rule set sexual orientation and gender identity forth requirements for sexual abuse for these purposes. DHS believes that Comment. A commenter suggested incident reviews, including when this could constitute a breach of that full confidential rape counseling or reviews should take place and who detainees’ privacy, especially detainees mental health care be provided to a should participate. The standards also who prefer to not share this information sexual abuse victim. Another required the facility to forward all openly. commenter suggested that the language reports and responses to the agency PSA DHS agrees, however, that LGBTIGNC be improved to include unmonitored Coordinator. The proposed rule further status can contribute to vulnerability. telephone calls from detainee victims to required an annual review of all sexual DHS is therefore revising the Subpart A non-governmental organizations or rape abuse investigations, in order to assess standard to require facilities to take into crisis organizations as opposed to the and improve sexual abuse intervention, account whether the incident or OIG or other offices affiliated with ICE prevention, and response efforts. allegation was motivated by race, or DHS. This commenter also stated that ethnicity, gender identity, or lesbian, Changes in Final Rule detainees do not always have phone gay, bisexual, transgender, or intersex access to call the JIC because some Section 115.86(a) now includes a identification status (or perceived facilities may have the number blocked requirement that facilities must status); or gang affiliation; or was on their telephone system. conclude incident reviews within 30 motivated or otherwise caused by other Response. While DHS appreciates the days of the completion of the group dynamics at the facility. In commenters’ concern about the benefits investigation. Section 115.186(a) now practice, this requires the facility to of confidential rape counseling, mental includes a requirement that the agency affirmatively consider the possibility health care, and unmonitored phone review shall ordinarily occur within 30 that these factors motivated the incident days of the agency receiving the calls to lodge complaints or seek help, or allegation, and to record this investigation results from the DHS believes that provisions relating to information if known. It does not, investigative authority. The slightly however, require facilities to access to outside confidential support different formulation for Subpart B affirmatively inquire as to the victim’s services set forth in § 115.53 are reflects the fact that frequently the sexual orientation and gender identity. adequate to address these concerns. agency that oversees a holding facility is DHS also is adding a requirement to Comment. Multiple commenters not the investigative authority. §§ 115.87(d)(2) and 115.187(b)(2) that suggested that DHS clarify the Section 115.86(b) now requires the agency PSA Coordinator must regulations to include treatment for facility incident review teams to (1) aggregate information regarding whether sexually transmitted infections, consider whether the incident or the victim or perpetrator has self- including HIV-related post-exposure allegation was motivated by race, identified as gay, lesbian, bisexual, prophylaxis for victims of sexual abuse. ethnicity, gender identity, or lesbian, transgender, intersex, or gender Commenters observed that paragraph (e) gay, bisexual, transgender, or intersex nonconforming. calls for access to testing, but not identification status (or perceived Comment. Multiple commenters treatment. Commenters expressed status); and (2) consider whether the suggested matching DHS’s proposed concern that without treatment, sexually incident or allegation was motivated by §§ 115.86 and 115.186 to DOJ’s transmitted infections can lead to more gang affiliation or other group corresponding sections in their PREA serious and possibly permanent affiliation. rule. The relevant provisions of DOJ’s complications. They suggested that the Section 115.86(c) now requires rule include the following: regulation state explicitly that victims facility incident review teams to prepare 1. The review must be concluded will receive ongoing regular treatment. a report of their findings and any within 30 days of the conclusion of the recommendations for improvement and investigation. Response. DHS recognizes the submit such report to the facility 2. The review team must include importance of providing testing for administrator, the FOD or his or her upper-level management officials, with sexually transmitted infections, and designee, and the agency PSA input from line supervisors, included paragraph (e) in the proposed Coordinator. If no allegations were made investigators, and medical or mental rule which requires facilities to offer at a facility during the annual reporting health practitioners. such tests, as medically appropriate to period, a negative report is required. 3. The review team must consider victims of sexual abuse while detained. whether the incident or allegation was DHS clarifies that paragraph (a) requires Comments and Responses motivated by race; ethnicity; gender that all detainees who have been Comment. One comment suggested identity; lesbian, gay, bisexual, victimized by sexual abuse have access that DHS track whether the victims are transgender, or intersex identification, to treatment. Paragraph (b) requires that LGBTIGNC. A commenter suggested status, or perceived status; or gang the evaluation and treatment include, as that this would be a way to track affiliation; or was motivated or appropriate, follow-up services, whether the regulations are effective. otherwise caused by other group treatment plans, and, when necessary, Response. DHS does not fully concur dynamics at the facility. referrals for continued care following with the commenter’s suggestion to 4. The review team must examine the their transfer to or placement in another track LGBTIGNC status in the incident area in the facility where the incident facility or release from custody. DHS review context. Many detainees choose allegedly occurred to assess whether trusts that medical practitioners to not disclose to staff or others in the physical barriers in the area may enable administering such tests will adhere to detention setting that they identify as abuse. professionally accepted standards for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or 5. The review team must assess the pre- and post-test counseling and intersex. In the event that a detainee adequacy of staffing levels in that area treatment. does not affirmatively disclose this during different shifts.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13147

6. The review team must assess there has been no report of sexual abuse contact to aggregate relevant data whether monitoring technology should or assault then the report should reflect pursuant to this regulation. be deployed or augmented to that information. Another commenter Comments and Responses supplement supervision by staff. suggested that each facility’s annual 7. The review team must submit its reviews be available to the public on Comment. One commenter suggested report to both the facility head and the their Web site as well as the agency’s that the data collected be kept in a agency PREA compliance manager. Web site. secure area to which unauthorized The commenters stated that the Response. DHS agrees with the individuals would not have access. Response. DHS concurs with this additional language would better protect suggestion to require that facilities that concern and accepts the change detainees and encourage the overall goal do not have any sexual abuse or assault suggested by the commenter. of eliminating sexual abuse in facilities allegations in the reporting period still be required to submit a negative report. Comment. One commenter suggested by helping facilities identify and fill that paragraph (a) take effect gaps in current policies and procedures. Facilities are required to provide results and findings of the annual review to the immediately and require all facilities to Response. DHS has considered each begin acquiring and maintaining the of these recommendations carefully, and agency PSA coordinator. The PSA coordinator will use these reviews to necessary data. has revised its proposal to incorporate Response. Currently facilities report provisions implementing items 1 and 3, develop the agency’s annual report, which will be made available to the all allegations through the agency Field as noted above. DHS understands the Office, which is responsible for issuing importance of reviewing reported public through the agency’s Web site. DHS does not believe, however, it is a Significant Incident Report. The PSA incidents to better protect detainees and Coordinator has access to all Significant help facilities identify and fill gaps in appropriate or necessary to mandate individual facilities post the annual Incident Reports as well as the current policies and procedures. To electronic investigative case files of achieve this, §§ 115.87 and 115.187 review on their Web site, as the reviews can be accessed more easily through the ICE’s OPR. Therefore, it is not necessary require the collection of all case records to make the provision applicable associated with claims of sexual abuse, single portal of the agency Web site. Comment. A commenter suggested immediately as a process is already in including incident reports. The data place. In any case, DHS does not concur collected is required to be shared with that DHS require all immigration detention facilities to comply with this with the suggestion to add a different the PSA Compliance Manager and DHS implementation timeline for data entities, including ICE leadership and, standard immediately. Response. DHS does not concur with collection than the rest of the standards. upon request, CRCL. Comment. A few commenters the suggestion to add a different Under § 115.88, after this data is suggested that data be collected, implementation timeline for incident reviewed by agency leadership, the analyzed, and maintained for all reviews than the rest of the standards. agency will issue a report that will facilities, including contract facilities. identify problem areas and patterns to Data Collection (§§ 115.87, 115.187) Response. The standard applies to all be improved upon, potentially facilities, including contract facilities. Summary of Proposed Rule including items 4–6 in the list above. In Therefore the requirements in these short, DHS believes that the final The standards contained in the sections regarding data collection also regulation sufficiently accounts for the proposed rule required the facility (in apply to all facilities. considerations raised by the Subpart A) or agency (in Subpart B) to commenters. maintain case records associated with Data Review for Corrective Action Comment. One commenter suggested claims of sexual abuse. The standards (§§ 115.88, 118.188) that DHS require that the PSA required the agency to aggregate the Summary of Proposed Rule Compliance Manager be an upper-level incident-based data at least annually. The standards contained in the facility official. The standards further mandated that proposed rule described how the Response. DHS rejects the suggestion upon request the agency would be collected data would be analyzed and to require that the PSA Compliance required to provide all such data from reported. The standards mandated that Manager be an upper-level facility the previous calendar year to CRCL. agencies use the data to identify official, as facilities should have some problem areas, take ongoing corrective discretion about whom they choose for Changes in Final Rule action, and prepare an annual report for this role. Smaller facilities may not Sections 115.87(a) and 115.187(a) each facility as well as the agency as a always have an upper-level official now include a requirement that whole, including a comparison with available to fulfill the role of PSA facilities keep data collected on sexual data from previous years. The standards Compliance Manager. abuse and assault incidents in a secure mandated that this report be made Comment. Commenters suggested that location. Sections 115.87(d)(2) and public through the agency’s Web site or DHS require that all incident reviews be 115.187(b)(2) have been revised to also other means to help promote agency conducted by a team of upper-level require the PSA Coordinator to accountability. management officials. aggregate information about whether the Response. DHS does not concur with victim or perpetrator has self-identified Changes in Final Rule the suggestion to require that all as LGBTIGNC. The requirement under DHS is adopting the regulation as incident reviews be conducted by a Subpart B for the agency to provide all proposed. team of upper-level officials as smaller data collected under § 115.187 to the facilities may not have the staffing PSA Coordinator was removed in order Comments and Responses resources and may elect to have an to ensure that the requirements in both Comment. An advocacy group individual, the PSA Compliance subparts were consistent. Such a suggested that data be reviewed from all Manager, conduct the review. requirement is not necessary and was facilities in which immigration Comment. One commenter suggested not originally included under Subpart A detainees are confined. that a paragraph be added stating that if because the PSA Coordinator has been Response. The standard, including a facility’s annual review finds that designated as the agency point of data review, applies to all facilities.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13148 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Comment. An advocacy group be made available to the public through including facilities run by non-DHS suggested that the reports that are the agency’s Web site. private or public entities, and that they published on the public Web site be Comment. One commenter suggested all be audited on the same timeframe. updated at least annually. replacing the Subpart B provision with One advocacy group suggested adding Response. Annual reports will materially identical language, except clarifying language that describes include assessments and information that the commenter removed part of an auditing of ‘‘each facility operated by about progress and corrective actions internal cross-reference. the agency, or by a private organization from prior years. Response. DHS declines to on behalf of the agency.’’ It was also incorporate this revision, in the interest recommended that the standards clarify Data Storage, Publication, and of ensuring clarity and consistency the point at which the audit Destruction (§§ 115.89, 115.189) purposes with the parallel provision in requirement is triggered based upon the Summary of Proposed Rule Subpart A. standards, particularly with regard to contract facilities. Former NPREC The standards in the proposed rule Audits of Standards (§§ 115.93, Commissioners also recommended the described how to store, publish, and 115.193) standards clarify that it is prohibited to retain data collected pursuant to Summary of Proposed Rule hold detainees in any custodial setting §§ 115.87 and 115.187. The standard where external audits are not required that the agency make the The proposed rule mandated that applicable. aggregated data publicly available at audits under these sections shall be Response. Under the standards as least annually on its Web site and shall conducted pursuant to §§ 115.201 proposed and in final form, DHS must remove all personal identifiers. through 115.205 of Subpart C. In ensure that each covered immigration Subpart A, the standard required audits Changes in Final Rule detention facility and holding facility, of each immigration detention facility at as defined in §§ 115.5, 115.12, and The final rule adds a requirement in least once every three years. The 115.112, undergoes an audit. DHS has both subparts that the agency maintain proposed rule allowed for expedited revised § 115.93(a) as indicated above sexual abuse data collected pursuant to audits if the agency has reason to for clarity. the above-described standard on data believe that a particular facility is Regarding the timeframe for collection (§§ 115.87 and 115.187) for at experiencing problems related to sexual implementation of audits, both subparts least 10 years after the date of the initial abuse. The Subpart B standard required, include a clear standard that for covered collection unless Federal, State, or local within three years, an initial round of facilities established prior to July 6, law requires otherwise. audits of each holding facility that 2015, ICE and CBP coordinate audits Comments and Responses houses detainees overnight. Following within the timeframe specified. the initial audit, the Subpart B standard Additionally, under § 115.193, CBP will Comment. Multiple commenters required follow-up audits every five ensure holding facilities that hold suggested that data be securely retained years for low-risk facilities and every detainees overnight and established under agency record retention policies three years for facilities not identified as after July 6, 2015 are audited within and procedures, including a low risk. All audits were required to be three years. requirement to retain the collected data coordinated by the agency with CRCL. DHS clarifies that in the immigration for a minimum period of time, detention facility context, a facility will Changes in Final Rule preferably 10 years as contained in the not be audited until it has adopted the DOJ standard. Section 115.93 previously required PREA standards. However, DHS notes Response. DHS has considered this the agency to ensure that ‘‘each of its that immigration detention facilities are comment and concurs that data immigration detention facilities’’ is subject to regular inspections under collected must be retained for an audited at least once during the initial current contracts and detention adequate length of time. Given the three-year period. Due to confusion standards regardless of whether they are interests involved and the possibility for expressed by some commenters, DHS considered a covered facility pursuant legal action based on an incident, a now requires the agency to ensure that to this regulation or whether they have longer period—such as 10 years—would ‘‘each immigration detention facility’’ is adopted the PREA standards. DHS, more appropriately account for such audited at least once during the initial through ICE, is committed to interests. DHS agrees with the three-year period. In the interest of endeavoring to ensure that SPCs, CDFs, commenters, and the final rule adds a clarity, DHS modified § 115.93(b) to and dedicated IGSAs adopt the paragraph requiring the agency to allow the agency to ‘‘require’’ rather standards set forth in this final rule maintain the collected data for a than ‘‘request’’ an expedited audit and within 18 months of the effective date. minimum of 10 years after the date of allows the agency to provide resource Additionally, DHS, through ICE, will initial collection, unless otherwise referrals to facilities to assist with make serious efforts to initiate the prohibited by law. PREA-related issues. DHS also revised renegotiation process so the remaining Comment. A commenter suggested §§ 115.93 and 115.193 to allow CRCL to covered facilities adopt the standards that data from state and local public request expedited audits if it has reason and become subject to auditing as facilities in which immigration to believe that such an audit is quickly as operational and budgetary detainees are confined should also be appropriate. constraints will allow. As noted made publicly available. previously, ICE can remove detainees Comments and Responses Response. The data retention from facilities that do not uphold requirement applies to all data collected Comment. Some commenters, adopted sexual abuse and assault by facilities covered by the standards or including advocacy groups, expressed practices. by the agency. All facilities are required concern regarding whether contract Comment. Commenters suggested that to provide sexual abuse and assault data facilities would be subject to auditing. a paragraph be added to the Subpart A to the agency PSA coordinator. The PSA Commenters advised clarifying that standard requiring CRCL to create a coordinator will use this data to develop audit standards in their entirety would process by which a member of the the agency’s annual report, which will be a requirement for all facilities, public is able to recommend an

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13149

expedited audit of any facility if he or Response. ICE has 149 holding Commissioners. Upon consideration, she believes that the facility may be facilities and CBP has 768 holding however, DHS has determined that experiencing sexual abuse problems. facilities, for a total of 917 holding rather than leading to the conclusion The collection of groups also facilities. In considering the appropriate that all facilities must be audited every recommended allowing the agency to audit cycle for holding facilities, DHS three years, these factors lead to the order such an expedited audit of a DHS- took into account the extremely high conclusion that DHS ought to run facility and to request the expedited number of facilities, as well as the implement robust standards across the audit of a contract facility for such unique elements of holding facilities board. problems. These groups believe that this and the variances between holding Upon consideration, DHS believes its modification to the section is necessary facilities. For example, some holding audit program is comprehensive, robust, for clarification purposes. facilities are used for detention on a and cost-efficient. DHS therefore Response. DHS has considered these handful of occasions per year, or less, maintains this program in the final rule. comments, but does not believe that any and some holding facilities are in public benefit of standing up such a formal view (for example, in the airport Additional Provisions in Agency process justifies the potential resource context). Requiring more frequent audits Policies (§ 115.95, 115.195) and logistical difficulties involved, in those situations is neither Summary of Proposed Rule especially given the many ways in operationally practical nor the most The standards in the proposed rule which the public can already raise such efficient use of resources. issues with DHS. Members of the public With this in mind, DHS proposed that provided that the regulations in both always have the ability to reach out to all holding facilities that house Subparts A and B establish minimum CRCL regarding any matter of interest or detainees overnight would be audited requirements for agencies and facilities. potentially problematic aspect with within three years of the final rule’s Additional requirements from the regard to DHS’s programs and mission, effective date. Thereafter, holding agencies and facilities may be included. through CRCL’s complaint form or facilities would be placed into two Changes in Final Rule simply in writing. Additionally, as categories: (1) Facilities that an DHS is adopting the regulation as noted previously regarding immigration independent auditor has designated as proposed. detention facilities, detainees low risk, based on its physical themselves are able to report sexual characteristics and passing its most Comments and Responses abuse or assault problems in several recent audit; and (2) facilities that an DHS did not receive any public ways, including by calling the JIC or the independent auditor has not designated comments on this provision during the point of contact listed on the sexual as low risk. Facilities that are not public comment period. abuse and assault posters. Detainees or determined to be low risk will adhere to members of the public may also call the the three year audit cycle recommended Scope of Audits (§ 115.201) JIC and the OIG or report incidents to by commenters. Facilities that are Summary of Proposed Rule CRCL. The Detainee Handbook and determined to be low risk will follow a posters provide contact information to five year audit cycle. The standard contained in the detainees and also note that detainee In making its proposal and proposed rule mandated the reports are confidential. considering the comments received, coordination with CRCL on the conduct Regarding agency ability to request DHS carefully considered the and contents of the audit as well as how audits, § 115.93(b) was revised in order appropriate allocation of resources to the audits are to be conducted. to clarify that the agency can require an ensure an appropriate audit strategy that Changes in Final Rule expedited audit if the agency has reason allocates the greatest portion of limited to believe that a particular facility may resources to areas that are potentially DHS is adopting the regulation as be experiencing problems relating to higher risk. DHS also took into account proposed. sexual abuse. Section 115.193 instructs the variety of holding facilities. For Comments and Responses the agency to prioritize audits based on example, not all holding facilities are whether a facility has previously failed consistently used; some may be used to Comment. A commenter suggested to meet the standards. house detainees overnight only a that an audit committee make Comment. Some commenters handful of times per year, and some appropriate recommendations to suggested that holding facilities have an may generally be used to house only one Congress, which the commenter audit cycle of three years as opposed to detainee at a time. believed would ensure PREA its proposed audit cycle of five years. With respect to the concerns raised by compliance. Commenters wrote that five years is an the former Commissioners of NPREC, Response. DHS has considered this inadequate period of time as compared DHS agrees that size, physical structure, comment but believes sufficient to the DOJ standards. The former and past audit history should not protections are in place under the NPREC Commissioners wrote that in all eliminate the need for oversight of a auditing standards and other standards of its research on the issue of prison facility or agency. Accordingly, DHS is to reasonably ensure sexual abuse rape, NPREC did not find that that size, requiring regular, independent, rigorous prevention is maximized. physical structure or passing an audit oversight of all immigration detention Recommendations from audits are best eliminated the need for oversight of a facilities and immigration holding addressed by the agency and the facility facility or agency. NPREC wrote that facilities, regardless of each facility’s in coordination. Furthermore, because many facilities that were classified as size, physical structure, and past audit DHS is accountable to Congress and the having ‘‘low’’ incidents of sexual abuse history. DHS also agrees with the former public, the agency will provide by the data collected by BJS were often Commissioners that facilities with information about audits as required by facilities where there were leadership apparently ‘‘low’’ incidence of sexual Congressional and/or FOIA requests, as and culture issues, lack of reporting, abuse still require careful scrutiny, not well as pursuant to the proactive lack of access to medical and mental least because of the possibility of under- disclosure requirement of 115.203(f). health, and notoriously poor reporting, poor investigative structures, Comment. A commenter investigative structures. and other factors cited by the former recommended that facility audit

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13150 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

mechanisms currently in place reasons previously enumerated. ICE’s Audit Corrective Action Plan incorporate questions and checklists transfer policy is designed to limit (§ 115.204) relating to compliance with the PREA transfers for all aliens and provides Summary of Proposed Rule standards. Some examples of current adequate protection for aliens who have mechanisms that the commenter sexual abuse complaints or grievances. The standard contained in the provided were detention service Providing regulatory authority for proposed rule required that when a facility ‘‘Does Not Meet Standard’’ after monitors, external facility audits, and outside auditors lacking direct an audit, a 180-day corrective action CRCL investigations. accountability to the ICE policy in place Response. Due to implementation of plan is to be developed and to protect detainees would not be implemented. these PREA standards, external auditing appropriate. All auditors will have the will be required for all covered ability, however, to make such Changes in Final Rule confinement settings, to be carried out recommendations to the FOD or his or in the manner in which the auditing The final rule revises paragraph (b)’s her designee. requirements are most effectively and description of the roles of the various functionally implemented. DHS Comment. A commenter suggested entities regarding development of the declines to prescribe in regulations a that the auditor’s standards and contact corrective action plan in order to more specific form or process for this information be provided to every clearly delineate responsibilities and to independent oversight. detainee and for the detainee to have the ensure the independence of the auditor Comment. A commenter suggested ability to confidentially contact the is not compromised. that ICE and contract employee auditor for free. Comments and Responses ‘‘whistleblowers’’ should be protected, Response. DHS agrees that detainees Comment. An advocacy group encouraged, and should have direct must have access to multiple ways to suggested the removal of the phrase ‘‘if access to auditors. report abuse. This regulation includes practicable’’ written in paragraph (b). Response. DHS agrees that reporting multiple standards that ensure such This change would require that in all any information concerning a sexual access. In this case, however, DHS has cases the auditor, agency, and the abuse or assault incident occurring in a determined that it is more appropriate facility jointly develop a corrective detention or holding facility is vital in to provide an auditor with discretion to action plan to achieve compliance. the fight against sexual abuse and Response. DHS has considered the assault in DHS confinement facilities. conduct each investigation as it best sees fit, within the bounds of the PREA comment and agrees with the concerns This reporting includes whistleblowing expressed. By removing the notion that on any corruption or wrongdoing in an standards and consistent with other DHS policies. Additionally, paragraphs the facility need not be involved in agency or facility setting. DHS believes development of the corrective action (i) and (j) of § 115.201 should provide that this concern is addressed through plan if impracticable, DHS clarifies in reasonably sufficient avenues for the ICE Sexual Assault training and by the final rule that the agency and the detainee-auditor interaction by, the publication of this regulation in that facility must develop the plan jointly. both of these mechanisms will respectively, requiring the agency and Additionally, DHS has determined that encourage whistleblowing by anyone facilities to allow the auditor to conduct including the auditor as a party with sexual abuse or assault incident private interviews with detainees, and responsible for jointly developing the information. allowing detainees to send confidential plan with the agency and the facility is information or correspondence to the Auditor Qualifications (§ 115.202) not appropriate. Because of the auditor’s auditor. unique role as an outside, independent Summary of Proposed Rule Audit Contents and Findings (§ 115.203) analyst, and because the auditor may The standard in the proposed rule have further involvement in ensuring required an auditor to attain specific Summary of Proposed Rule the agency and facility meets the qualifications before being eligible for standards in the future, removing the The standard contained in the employment by the agency to perform auditor from development of the proposed rule mandated specific the required audits. corrective action plan ensures that the information that the auditor is required auditor’s independent judgment is not Changes in Final Rule to include in its report to DHS. compromised at any point. Under the DHS revised the auditor certification Changes in Final Rule final rule, the agency and the facility (if provision in paragraph (b), to make the facility is not operated by the explicit agencies’ responsibility to DHS is adopting the regulation as agency) will develop the plan. The certify auditors in coordination with proposed. auditor can then effectively and DHS. Otherwise, DHS is adopting the independently make the determination regulation as proposed. Comments and Responses as to whether the agency and facility have achieved compliance after the plan Comments and Responses Comment. A commenter suggested that the facility bear the burden of is implemented. Comment. A commenter demonstrating compliance with the Comment. Several commenters recommended that the auditor be given suggested stating specific criteria that a PREA standards. It was recommended authority to transfer an alleged facility must meet following a finding of that this requirement be added to victimized detainee during the ‘‘Does Not Meet Standard.’’ One group paragraph (b). investigation process. suggested creating a remediation plan Response. The ICE policy on Detainee Response. Under the regulation, for these facilities and another advocacy Transfers, referred to previously as covered facilities bear the burden of group suggested providing a specified governing the transfer of all aliens in compliance with all relevant provisions period of time (suggested 180 days) for ICE custody, discourages transfers of the regulations; the audit will be facilities to meet the requirements in the unless a FOD or his or her designee directed to determining the facility’s plan. One commenter suggested a deems the transfer necessary for the success or failure in that regard. similar 6-month probationary period. If

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13151

after this given period of time the Question 1: Would external audits of Question 2: Once a holding facility is facility does not meet the requirements immigration detention facilities and/or designated as low risk, would it be a given in the remediation plan, the holding facilities conducted through more cost effective yet still sufficient facility would be terminated for an random sampling be sufficient to assess approach to furthering compliance with extended period of time (one the scope of compliance with the the standards to externally audit a commenter suggested three years) from standards of the proposed rule? random selection of such facilities housing any DHS detainees. One instead of re-auditing each such facility commenter suggested that this Commenters were nearly unanimous once every five years? termination clause should also be listed that auditing through random sampling DHS received conflicting comments in the agency/facility contract. An would not be sufficient. A collective in response to this question. A advocacy group generally suggested that comment of advocacy groups stated that collection of various advocacy groups DHS adopt a standard to prevent the random sampling requires some responded negatively to the idea of housing of detainees in facilities that do consistency among facilities in the auditing a random selection of low-risk not comply with the majority of the broader sample; because of the variety holding facilities instead of re-auditing PREA standards and that fail to of facilities at issue, sampling could not each periodically. The groups, rejecting successfully implement a corrective be conducted accurately. Commenters any use of random sampling, stated that action plan for those standards. also pointed out that the degree of any designation of a facility as low risk Response. The standards in the final discretion vested in individual facility would be a mistake that does not rule and other DHS policies have been heads, the differences among the account for the scope of the culture of developed to ensure that populations being held, and the change necessary to end the crisis of noncompliance is not tolerated. Even differences in physical layout make use sexual abuse in confinement facilities. prior to establishing these standards, of random sampling insufficient for Response. DHS agrees with the ICE could withhold paying a contract measuring compliance across facilities. commenters that audits of immigration facility’s invoice or could remove detention facilities and holding facilities Former NPREC Commissioners stated detainees from a noncomplying facility. should not be conducted through that no rational basis for random Facility contracts have already included random sampling. Audits selected by and will continue to include the option sampling existed, as the only way to random sampling would not sufficiently to terminate or discontinue holding ensure detainees’ safety from abuse is assess the scope of compliance with detainees if the facility does not meet regular audits of all facilities without PREA standards. Therefore, the agency standards after periods of remediation. exception, citing DOJ final rule findings maintains the final rule language in With respect to the specific proposals in support of a triennial cycle. §§ 115.93 and 115.193 setting forth the at issue, DHS has concerns that the One human rights advocacy group definitive audit schedule for suggested 180-day period of time to found audits for cause acceptable, but immigration detention facilities and meet the requirements of a corrective only if in addition to regular, periodic holding facilities. action plan and similar 6-month audits, with auditing every three years probationary period may not be Question 3: Would the potential being sufficient. The group stated that sufficiently long for many corrective benefits associated with requiring actions, including, for example, actions random audits or audits only for cause external audits outweigh the potential that require construction or other would not meet objectives such as costs? providing oversight, transparency, physical renovation. Corrective action A commenter agreed that the benefits accountability, and feedback in every plans themselves are intended to create would outweigh the costs, stating that a facility. The group agreed with requiring a process that will lead to full realistic, cost-effective monitoring compliance. Therefore, DHS does not every agency to have a full audit within system is critical to the standards’ believe it is necessary to make changes the first three years after PREA’s overall effectiveness and impact. to this standard. implementation, and if a facility Commenters suggested that the external receives an extremely high audit score, Audit Appeals (§ 115.205) scrutiny, oversight, transparency, such as 90%, then the standard could accountability, and credible assessment Summary of Proposed Rule allow a subsequent audit three years of safety that a qualified independent The standard contained in the later to be a more streamlined version. entity would bring are vitally important proposed rule allowed facilities to The group expressed concerns with for confinement facilities, could identify appeal the findings from an audit. audits based on cause only, because it systemic problems and could offer was unclear who would determine solutions. Commenters believed that Changes in Final Rule whether cause existed and when and on thorough audits will help prevent abuse, DHS is adopting the regulation as what basis that decision would be made. improve facility safety, lead to more proposed. Response. DHS agrees with the effective management, and, ultimately, lower fiscal and human costs to the Comments and Responses commenters that external audits of immigration detention facilities and community. The groups also noted that it seemed DHS did not receive any public holding facilities should not be DHS cost projections did not account for comments on this provision during the conducted through random sampling. public comment period. contract facilities already auditing Audits selected by random sampling under DOJ PREA standards, but that— Additional Comments and Responses would not sufficiently assess the scope as a cost-related measure—the two The proposed rule posed several of compliance with PREA standards. audits could be conducted questions specifically regarding audits. Therefore, the agency maintains the simultaneously if the auditor were The following contains a summary of final rule language in §§ 115.93 and properly trained in differences between comments received regarding the 115.193 setting forth the definitive audit the standards and wrote separate, but questions addressing these standards schedule for immigration detention related, reports for each set of standards. and the DHS response. facilities and holding facilities. The group suggested that DHS consider

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13152 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

offering an abbreviated auditor training less-frequent basis; the data from the consist of members of non-governmental and certification process for auditors two cycles could also allow advocates to organizations, attorneys, community already certified by DOJ, focusing on the have concrete data to comment on such members, media, and former detainees. differences between the two sets of a revised plan. Another organization stated that standards, the principles of civil Response. DHS appreciates the auditors should simply not be confinement, and the unique features of constructive comments provided by employees of DHS or the detention DHS detainees. advocacy groups regarding the audit center, seemingly meaning the facility Response. After reviewing the process. DHS is not substantively being audited; yet another set of groups comments regarding Question 3, DHS revising the audit provision in the final stated that prior corrections or detention decided to maintain the audit rule because the agency believes that the official experience alone would not provisions set forth in Subpart C despite final rule provides an effective and suffice. Another commenter suggested the fact that external auditing does incur efficient framework for external audits. that auditing requires a well-founded financial costs to the agency. DHS In response to the specific comments, individual or team with prior expertise agrees that external audits will be a DHS notes that unannounced audits and/or training in both sexual violence valuable tool in assessing the standards’ would be overly burdensome for the dynamics and detention environments, overall effectiveness and impact as well facility and for agency personnel. with state certification in rape crisis as help to prevent abuse, improve Section 115.204 requires facilities with counseling being a strongly-preferred facility safety, and lead to more effective a finding of ‘‘Does Not Meet Standards’’ qualification. Commenters wrote that detention and custody management. with one or more standards have 180 requirements must include While DHS appreciates that some days to develop a corrective action plan. demonstrable skills in gathering commenters acknowledged that external After the 180-day corrective action information from traumatized audits are required by both DOJ and period, the auditor will issue a final individuals and ability to ascertain DHS and that the agencies could be seen determination as to whether the facility clues of possible concerns that detainees as conducting and financing redundant has achieved compliance. The agency and others may not feel comfortable external audits, DHS believes that the will use this assessment to determine sharing. unique detention missions of each what steps are necessary to bring the Response. The agency in conjunction agency warrant a separate audit process. facility into compliance or to determine with CRCL is required by this rule to If in the future DHS finds that an that the facility is not safe for detainees develop and issue guidance on the expedited certification process is and therefore, whether detainees must conduct of and contents of the audit. preferable, DHS can implement such a be transferred to other facilities. This The agency must also certify all auditors process under § 115.202(b). process is an effective safeguard and and develop and issue procedures therefore, an automatic 18-month Question 4: Is there a better approach regarding the certification process, follow-up audit is not necessary. DHS to external audits other than the which must include training does not mandate the exact composition approaches discussed in the proposed requirements. of the audit team, but rather requires rule? Finally, DHS received a number of that the audit be conducted by entities generalized comments relevant to the A commenter stated affirmatively that or individuals outside of the agency that rulemaking but which did not a better approach may exist, have relevant audit experience. specifically fall within any particular acknowledging it may include Paragraph (g) of § 115.201 already standard as embodied in the proposed additional but reasonable costs. The requires that the auditor interview a rule. groups expressed the following various representative sample of detainees and Comment. Numerous comments were changes that they believe would be staff. Finally, the agency does not improvements: (1) Audits could be believe that the agency’s resources supportive of the standards, stating it is conducted on an unannounced basis to would be maximized if CRCL could a good idea to promulgate a rule to ensure they are reviewing typical automatically trigger expedited audits. prevent such assault and abuse. conditions; (2) facilities which have CRCL already has the authority to Response. DHS agrees that this rule is been required to take corrective action conduct reviews related to civil rights an important tool for the agency to after an initial audit could be required and civil liberties issues at any facility prevent, detect, and respond to sexual to undergo a follow-up audit 18 months that houses detainees. However, DHS abuse and assault in confinement later to assess improvement; (3) auditors acknowledges that CRCL will play an facilities. could be required to work in teams that important role in developing audit Comment. Former Commissioners of include advocates and/or former procedures and guidelines. In light of NPREC suggested that DHS engage BJS detainees to increase this, §§ 115.93 and 115.193 have been to work to collect data on the prevalence comprehensiveness of inspection; (4) revised to allow CRCL to request of sexual abuse in DHS facilities, with such teams could be required to meet expedited audits if it has reason to the results of such surveys being with a certain percentage of current and believe that such an audit is available to the public. The former former detainees and employees, appropriate. Commissioners believed the data to be contractors, and volunteers to accrue necessary both for DHS and for the information; and (5) DHS could require Question 5: In an external auditing public to be able to understand the that all facilities submit to expedited process, what types of entities or scope of abuse and to monitor the audits when requested by CRCL. individuals should qualify as external impact and success of the standards. The collection of groups expressed auditors? Response. DHS has considered the that they believed DHS could amend its Some commenters described specific suggested approach in this comment; PREA auditing standards at a later date types of individuals who would or however, given the current budgetary if, for example, after two complete would not qualify as external auditors, environment, DHS does not have the three-year audit cycles under the while one set of advocates described resources to expend personnel and/or groups’ suggested standard, DHS could typical characteristics contributing to a funds to develop and execute a separate then better determine which facilities quality auditor. One commenter stated additional survey and accompanying could appropriately be audited on a that such external auditors should interagency agreement at this time. DHS

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13153

notes that BJS recently conducted a comments, as the standards are mental and physical suffering. As the survey that included ICE facilities.16 intended to be flexible enough to fit National Prison Rape Elimination In addition, the need for such a many situations. Commission (NPREC) explained in its survey is negated by the fact that DHS 2009 report: V. Regulatory Analysis itself, through ICE, has conducted Until recently . . . the public viewed surveys of the detainee population. The We developed this rule after sexual abuse as an inevitable feature of surveys have focused on conditions of considering numerous statues and confinement. Even as courts and human detention, including the grievance executive orders related to rulemaking. rights standards increasingly confirmed that process, staff retaliation, intake Below we summarize our analyses prisoners have the same fundamental rights education—including regarding how to based on a number of these statues or to safety, dignity, and justice as individuals contact ICE personnel—posting of legal executive orders. living at liberty in the community, vulnerable assistance information, and the Detainee men, women, and children continued to be A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 Handbook, with space to add other sexually victimized by other prisoners and Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 corrections staff. Tolerance of sexual abuse of information that the detainee may wish prisoners in the government’s custody is to share. DHS may consider conducting direct agencies to assess the costs and totally incompatible with American values.17 similar surveys in the future for benefits of available regulatory comparison purposes. alternatives and, if regulation is As discussed in the accompanying Several commenters generally necessary, to select regulatory RIA, ICE keeps records of any sexual suggested that various standards should approaches that maximize net benefits abuse allegation made by detainees at include ‘‘critical protections’’ for LGBTI (including potential economic, all facilities in which it holds detainees detainees, in addition to the specific environmental, public health and safety in its Joint Integrity Case Management areas where LGBTI-related comments effects, distributive impacts, and System (JICMS). In estimating the are listed above. Areas where equity). Executive Order 13563 current level of sexual abuse for commenters believed these protections emphasizes the importance of purposes of this analysis, DHS relies on are needed include in §§ 115.15, quantifying both the costs and benefits facility-reported data in ICE’s JICMS 115.115, Limits to cross-gender viewing of reducing costs of harmonizing rules, database. In 2010, ICE had four and searches; § 115.42, Use of and of promoting flexibility. This rule is substantiated sexual abuse allegations in assessment information; § 115.43, a ‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ immigration detention facilities, two in Protective custody; §§ 115.62, 115.162, although not an economically 2011, and one in 2012. There were no (Agency) Protection duties; § 115.53, significant regulatory action, under substantiated allegations by individuals Detainee access to outside confidential § 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. detained in a DHS holding facility.18 In support services; and § 115.78, Accordingly, the Office of Management the RIA, DHS extrapolates the number Disciplinary sanctions for detainees. and Budget (OMB) has reviewed this of substantiated and unsubstantiated Response. As noted elsewhere that the regulation. allegations at immigration detention issue has specifically arisen, DHS facilities based on the premise that there generally provides safety and security 1. Synopsis may be additional detainees who may measures for all populations, including Sexual violence against any victim is have experienced sexual abuse but did all those that may be vulnerable; DHS an assault on human dignity and an not report it. Table 1 below summarizes declines to make specific changes for affront to American values. Many the estimated number of sexual abuse the standards referred to in these victims report persistent, even lifelong allegations at ICE confinement facilities.

TABLE 1—ESTIMATED BENCHMARK LEVEL OF ADULT SEXUAL ABUSE AT ICE CONFINEMENT FACILITIES, BY APPROACH AND TYPE OF ALLEGATION

Lower bound Adjusted Class code Subject approach Primary approach

1: Nonconsensual Acts—High ...... Detainee-on-Detainee ...... 0.0 4.9 9.9 Staff-on Detainee ...... 0.0 3.8 7.7 Unknown ...... 0.0 0.0 0.0

Subtotal ...... 0.0 8.8 17.6

2: Nonconsensual Acts—Low ...... Detainee-on-Detainee ...... 0.0 4.9 9.9 Staff-on-Detainee ...... 1.8 5.7 9.6 Unknown ...... 0.0 0.8 1.6

Subtotal ...... 1.8 10.6 19.5

3: ‘‘Willing’’ Sex with Staff ...... Detainee-on-Detainee ...... 0.0 0.0 0.0 Staff-on-Detainee ...... 0.0 1.0 1.9 Unknown ...... 0.0 0.0 0.0

Subtotal ...... 0.0 1.0 1.9

16 BJS, Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails 17 National Prison Rape Elimination Commission 18 This does not include allegations involved in Reported by Inmates, 2011–12: Nat’l Inmate Survey, Report 1 (2009), http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ still-open investigations or allegations outside the 2011–12 (May 2013), http://www.bjs.gov/content/ 226680.pdf. scope of these regulations. pub/pdf/svpjri1112.pdf.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13154 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 1—ESTIMATED BENCHMARK LEVEL OF ADULT SEXUAL ABUSE AT ICE CONFINEMENT FACILITIES, BY APPROACH AND TYPE OF ALLEGATION—Continued

Lower bound Adjusted Class code Subject approach Primary approach

4: Abusive Sexual Contacts—High ...... Detainee-on-Detainee ...... 2.6 5.5 8.4 Staff-on-Detainee ...... 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unknown ...... 0.0 0.0 0.0

Subtotal ...... 2.6 5.5 8.4

5: Abusive Sexual Contacts—Low ...... Detainee-on-Detainee ...... 2.6 18.2 33.8 Staff-on-Detainee ...... 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unknown ...... 0.0 0.0 0.0

Subtotal ...... 2.6 18.2 33.8

6: Staff Sexual Misconduct Touching Only .... Detainee-on-Detainee ...... 0.0 0.0 0.0 Staff-on-Detainee ...... 0.0 20.2 40.4 Unknown ...... 0.0 0.0 0.0

Subtotal ...... 0.0 20.2 40.4

Sexual Harassment Not Involving Touching .. Detainee-on-Detainee ...... 0.0 5.6 11.3 Staff-on-Detainee ...... 3.5 13.3 23.1 Unknown ...... 0.0 0.0 0.0

Subtotal ...... 3.5 18.9 34.4

Total ...... 10.4 83.2 156.0 Note: Details may not sum to total due to rounding for shown values.

In order to address the allegations of even analysis,’’ by first estimating the society as a whole. As noted by sexual abuse at DHS immigration monetary value of preventing various Congress, sexual abuse increases the detention and holding facilities, the types of sexual abuse (incidents levels of violence within facilities. Both final rule sets minimum requirements involving violence, inappropriate staff and other detainees will benefit for the prevention, detection, and touching, or a range of other behaviors) from a potential reduction in levels of response to sexual abuse. Specifically, and then, using those values, calculating violence and other negative factors. 42 the rule establishes standards for the reduction in the annual number of U.S.C. 15601(14). This will improve the prevention planning; prompt and victims that would need to occur for the safety of the environment for other coordinated response and intervention; benefits of the rule to equal the cost of detainees and workplace for facility training and education of staff, compliance. When all facilities and staff. In addition, long-term trauma from contractors, volunteers and detainees; costs are phased into the rulemaking, sexual abuse in confinement may proper treatment for victims; procedures the break even point would be reached for investigation, discipline and if the standards reduced the annual diminish a victim’s ability to reenter prosecution of perpetrators; data number of incidents of sexual abuse by society resulting in unstable collection and review for corrective 122 from the estimated benchmark employment. Preventing these incidents action; and audits for compliance with levels, which is 147 percent of the total will decrease the cost of health care, the standards. DHS estimates that the number of assumed incidents in ICE spread of disease, and the amount of full cost of compliance with these confinement facilities, including an public assistance benefits required for standards at all covered DHS estimated number of those who may not victims upon reentry into society, confinement facilities will be have reported an incident.19 whether such reentry is in the United approximately $57.4 million over the There are additional benefits of the States or a detainee’s home country. period 2013–2022, discounted at 7 rule that DHS is unable to monetize or Table 2, below, presents a summary of percent, or $8.2 million per year when quantify. Not only will victims benefit the benefits and costs of the final rule. annualized at a 7 percent discount rate. from a potential reduction in sexual The costs are discounted at seven With respect to benefits, DHS abuse in facilities, so too will DHS percent. conducts what is known as a ‘‘break agencies and staff, other detainees, and

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED COSTS AND BENEFITS OF FINAL RULE [$millions]

Immigration Total DHS detention Holding PREA facilities facilities rulemaking

10-Year Cost Annualized at 7% Discount Rate ...... $4.9 $3.3 $8.2

19 As discussed in Chapter 1, and shown in Table of sexual assaults includes all types of sexual 17, of the accompanying RIA, the benchmark level assaults.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13155

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED COSTS AND BENEFITS OF FINAL RULE—Continued [$millions]

Immigration Total DHS detention Holding PREA facilities facilities rulemaking

% Reduction of Sexual Abuse Victims to Break Even with Monetized Costs ...... N/A N/A 147%*

Non-monetized Benefits ...... An increase in the general wellbeing and morale of detainees and staff, the value of equity, human dignity, and fairness for detainees in DHS custody. Net Benefits ...... As explained above, we did not estimate the number of incidents or victims of sexual abuse this rule would prevent. Instead, we conducted a breakeven analysis. Therefore, we did not estimate the net benefits of this rule. * For ICE confinement facilities.

2. Summary of Affected Population of authorized ICE immigration detention CDFs, 9 dedicated IGSA facilities, and facilities are as follows: 136 non-dedicated IGSA facilities. Sixty This rule covers two types of • Service Processing Center (SPC)— four of the non-dedicated IGSA facilities confinement facilities: (1) Immigration full service immigration facilities owned are covered by the DOJ PREA, not this detention facilities, and (2) holding by the government and staffed by a rule, because they are USMS IGA facilities. Immigration detention combination of Federal and contract facilities. As the USMS IGA facilities are facilities, which are operated or staff; not within the scope of this rulemaking, supervised by ICE, routinely hold • Contract Detention Facility (CDF)— this analysis covers the 94 authorized persons for over 24 hours pending owned by a private company and SPC, CDF, dedicated IGSA, and non- resolution or completion of immigration contracted directly with the dedicated IGSA immigration detention removal or processing. Holding government; and facilities that hold detainees for more facilities, used and maintained by DHS • Intergovernmental Service than 72 hours. components including ICE and CBP, Agreement Facility (IGSA)—facilities at tend to be short-term. The analysis ICE additionally has 91 authorized which detention services are provided immigration detention facilities that are below presents immigration detention to ICE by State or local government(s) contracted to hold detainees for less facilities and holding facilities through agreements with ICE and which than 72 hours.21 All 91 facilities are separately. may fall under public or private non-dedicated IGSA facilities, but 55 of This rule directly regulates the ownership and may be fully dedicated them are covered by the DOJ PREA rule, Federal Government, notably any DHS immigration facilities (housing detained not this rule, because they are USMS agency with immigration detention aliens only) or non-dedicated facilities IGA facilities. Again, ICE excludes the facilities or holding facilities. This rule (housing various detainees). USMS IGA facilities from the scope of also affects private and public entities ICE enters into IGSAs with States and this rulemaking and analysis; the that operate confinement facilities counties across the country to use space analysis covers the 36 authorized non- under contracts or agreements with in jails and prisons for civil immigration dedicated IGSA immigration detention DHS. The sections below describe and detention purposes. Some of these facilities that hold detainees for under quantify, where possible, the number of facilities are governed by IGSAs that 72 hours. Facilities that are labeled by affected immigration detention facilities limit the length of an immigration and holding facilities. detainee’s stay to less than 72 hours. ICE as ‘‘under 72-hour’’ still meet the Some of these facilities have limited bed definition of immigration detention a. Subpart A—Immigration Detention facilities, because they process Facilities space that precludes longer stays by detainees. Others are used primarily detainees for detention intake. Detainees ICE is the only DHS component with under special circumstances such as housed in these facilities are processed immigration detention facilities. ICE housing a detainee temporarily to into the facility just as they would be in holds detainees during proceedings to facilitate detainee transfers or to hold a a long-term detention facility. determine whether they will be detainee for court appearances in a Furthermore, ICE also has two removed from the United States, and different jurisdiction. In some authorized family residential centers. pending their removal, in ICE-owned circumstances the under-72-hour These are IGSA facilities that house facilities or in facilities contracting with facilities house immigration detainees only ICE detainees. One of the facilities ICE. Therefore, though this rule directly only occasionally. accommodates families subject to regulates the Federal Government, it ICE owns or has contracts with mandatory detention and the other is a requires that its standards ultimately approximately 158 authorized dedicated female facility. ICE family apply to some State and local immigration detention facilities that residential centers are subject to the governments as well as private entities hold detainees for more than 72 hours.20 immigration detention facility standards through contracts with DHS. The types The 158 facilities consist of 6 SPCs, 7 proposed in Subpart A. The table below

20 As noted above, facilities ICE used as of spring as the baseline for the cost estimates for this to which facilities were held accountable or 2012, and the sexual abuse and assault standards rulemaking. planned to be held accountable at that time, serve to which facilities were held accountable or 21 As noted above, facilities ICE used as of spring as the baseline for the cost estimates for this planned to be held accountable at that time, serve 2012, and the sexual abuse and assault standards rulemaking.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13156 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

summarizes the facilities included in this analysis.

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF ICE AUTHORIZED IMMIGRATION DETENTION FACILITIES

Under 72 Family Facility Over 72 hours hours residential

Non-Dedicated IGSA ...... 74 36 0 SPC ...... 6 0 0 CDF ...... 7 0 0 Dedicated IGSA ...... 7 0 2

Total Covered by Rule ...... 94 36 2

USMS IGA a ...... 64 55 0

Total Authorized Facilities ...... 158 91 2 a Not within the scope of the rulemaking. USMS confinement facilities are covered by DOJ’s PREA regulations.

b. Subpart B—Holding Facilities Subpart A of this rule. ICE has 149 entered into approximately 14 contracts holding facilities that are covered under with State, local, and/or private entity A holding facility may contain Subpart B of the rule. facilities on a rider to a USMS contract holding cells, cell blocks, or other that provides for a consistent secure locations that are: (1) under the ii. U.S. Customs and Border Protection arrangement with particular facilities to control of the agency and (2) primarily There is a wide range of facilities cover instances in which CBP has used for the confinement of individuals where CBP detains individuals. Some insufficient space to detain individuals. who have recently been detained, or are individuals are detained in secured being transferred to another agency. Because CBP entered into these detention areas, while others are contracts via a rider to a USMS contract, i. U.S. Immigration and Customs detained in open seating areas where the impacts to these facilities have been agents or officers interact with the Enforcement accounted for in the DOJ’s PREA rule detainee. Hold rooms in CBP facilities and to consider them again here would Most ICE holding rooms are in ICE where case processing occurs are used double count any costs and/or benefits field offices and satellite offices. These to search, detain, or interview persons associated with these facilities. As such, rooms are rooms or areas that are who are being processed. CBP operates specifically designed and built for 768 holding facilities at ports of entry these facilities are excluded from this temporarily housing detainees in ICE and Border Patrol stations, checkpoints, analysis. ERO offices. It may also include staging and processing facilities across the 3. Costs of Rule facilities. ICE holding facilities as country. presented in this analysis are exclusive The number of detainees in CBP This rule covers DHS immigration of hold rooms or staging areas at custody fluctuates. Consequently, at detention facilities and holding immigration detention facilities, which times CBP is unable to accommodate its facilities. Table 3 summarizes the are covered by the standards of the short-term detention needs through its number of facilities covered by the immigration detention facility under facilities. Similar to ICE, CBP has rulemaking over 10 years.

TABLE 3—ESTIMATED POPULATION SUMMARY FOR RULE

Immigration Holding facilities detention Year facilities Total ICE CBP ICE

1 ...... 132 149 768 1,049 2 ...... 134 149 768 1,051 3 ...... 136 149 768 1,053 4 ...... 138 149 768 1,055 5 ...... 140 149 768 1,057 6 ...... 142 149 768 1,059 7 ...... 144 149 768 1,061 8 ...... 146 149 768 1,063 9 ...... 148 149 768 1,065 10 ...... 150 149 768 1,067

The cost estimates set forth in this scope of the rulemaking.22 This final rule implements many of the proposed analysis represent the costs of compliance with, and implementation 22 The baseline for these cost estimates is the implementing sexual abuse and assault standards in of, the standards in facilities within the sexual abuse and assault standards to which facilities. As a result, the baseline of the rule from facilities were held accountable or planned to be which the costs and benefits of the rulemaking were held accountable at the time of writing the NPRM. estimated, differ from the current sexual abuse and Since the NPRM, ICE has made great strides in assault standards at some facilities.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13157

standards in the NPRM. In addition, than a de minimis impact results from estimates that compliance with the DHS made a number of changes to expanding the scope of training standards, in the aggregate, will be provisions set forth in the NPRM based requirements for personnel that have approximately $57.4 million, on public comments. These changes are contact with detainees under § 115.32. discounted at 7 percent, over the period discussed previously in the preamble. This change resulted in an increase in 2013–2022, or $8.2 million per year DHS received no public comments on estimated cost of approximately $16,000 when annualized at a 7 percent discount the estimates in the economic analysis. per year. DHS also fixed a mistake in rate. Table 4 below, presents a 10-year After analyzing the changes made in estimating the year audits would begin summary of the estimated benefits and this final rule, DHS concludes the only for facilities. Thus, this analysis costs of the final rule. cost change from the NPRM with more

TABLE 4—TOTAL COST OF FINAL RULE [$millions]

Immigration detention facilities Holding facilities subpart A subpart B Year Total Under 72 Over 72 hours hours ICE CBP

1 ...... $3.9 $1.2 $0.0 $5.6 $10.7 2 ...... 3.6 1.1 0.0 5.5 10.1 3 ...... 3.6 1.1 0.0 3.6 8.3 4 ...... 3.7 1.1 0.0 2.4 7.1 5 ...... 3.7 1.1 0.0 2.4 7.2 6 ...... 3.7 1.1 0.0 2.3 7.2 7 ...... 3.8 1.1 0.0 2.3 7.2 8 ...... 3.8 1.1 0.0 2.3 7.2 9 ...... 3.8 1.1 0.0 2.3 7.2 10 ...... 3.8 1.2 0.0 2.3 7.2

Total ...... 37.4 11.3 0.0 31.0 79.6

Total (7%) ...... 26.2 7.9 0.0 23.2 57.4

Total (3%) ...... 31.9 9.6 0.0 27.2 68.7

Annualized (7%) ...... 3.7 1.1 0.0 3.3 8.2

Annualized (3%) ...... 3.7 1.1 0.0 3.2 8.0

The total cost, discounted at 7 various types of sexual abuse (from that when all facilities and costs are percent, consists of $34.1 million for incidents involving violence to phased into the rulemaking, the immigration detention facilities under inappropriate touching) and then, using breakeven point will be reached if the Subpart A, and $23.2 million for those values, calculating the reduction standards reduced the annual number of holding facilities under Subpart B. The in the annual number of victims that incidents of sexual abuse by 122 from largest costs for immigration detention would need to occur for the benefits of the estimated benchmark level, which is facilities are for staff training, the rule to equal the cost of compliance. 147 percent of the total number of documentation of cross-gender pat The NPRM estimated the benefits based assumed incidents in ICE confinement downs, duties for the PSA Compliance on sexual abuse data from 2011, the facilities, including those who may not Manager, and audit requirements. DHS most recent full year of data at that time. have reported an incident. estimates zero compliance costs for ICE DHS has included sexual abuse data There are additional benefits of the holding facilities under this rule as the from 2010, 2011, and 2012 in this final rule that DHS is unable to monetize or requirements of ICE’s SAAPID and other analysis. In addition, since the quantify. Not only will victims benefit ICE policies are commensurate with the publication of the NPRM, ICE’s PSA from a potential reduction in sexual requirements of the rule. The largest Coordinator has reviewed the individual abuse in facilities, so too will DHS costs for CBP holding facilities are staff reports and data from these years and agencies and staff, other detainees, and training, audits, and facility design assigned a level of sexual victimization society as a whole. As noted by modifications and monitoring to each based on the levels used in the Congress, sexual abuse increases the 23 technology upgrades. DOJ PREA RIA. This has allowed DHS levels of violence within facilities. Both to provide a more comprehensive 4. Benefits of the Rule staff and other detainees will benefit assessment of sexual abuse in ICE from a potential reduction in levels of DHS has not estimated the anticipated confinement facilities, and the violence and other negative factors. 42 monetized benefits of this rule or how estimated avoidance value of preventing U.S.C. 15601(14). This will improve the many incidents or victims of sexual such abuse. The DHS RIA concludes safety of the environment for other abuse DHS anticipates will be avoided detainees and workplace for facility by this rule. Instead, DHS conducts 23 Department of Justice, Regulatory Impact staff. In addition, long-term trauma from Analysis for the National Standards to Prevent, what is known as a ‘‘break even Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape under PREA, sexual abuse in confinement may analysis,’’ by first estimating the Table 1.1 on page 24 of 168, available at http:// diminish a victim’s ability to reenter monetary value of preventing victims of www.ojp.usdoj.gov/programs/pdfs/prea_ria.pdf. society resulting in unstable

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13158 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

employment. Preventing these incidents under 72-hour immigration detention 115.193. Immigration detention will decrease the cost of health care, facilities and DHS’s holding facilities facilities currently undergo several spread of disease, and the amount of would remain largely the same. layers of inspections for compliance public assistance benefits required for DHS also considered requiring the ICE with ICE’s detention standards. This victims upon reentry into society, immigration detention facilities that are alternative would allow ICE to whether such reentry is in the United only authorized to hold detainees for incorporate the audit requirements for States or a detainee’s home country. under 72 hours to meet the standards for the standards into current inspection 5. Alternatives holding facilities under Subpart B, procedures. However, it would require As alternatives to the regulatory rather than the standards for outside auditors for all immigration regime discussed in this rule, DHS immigration detention in Subpart A, as detention facilities. For holding examined three other options. The first discussed in the final rule. The facilities that hold detainees overnight, is taking no regulatory action. For over standards in Subpart B are somewhat it would require 10 internal audits, 10 72-hour immigration detention less stringent than those for immigration external audits, and three audits by facilities, the 2011 PBNDS sexual abuse detention facilities, as appropriate for CRCL be conducted annually. The standards might reach all facilities over facilities holding detainees for a much following table presents the 10-year time as the new version of the standards shorter time and with an augmented costs of the alternatives compared to the are implemented at facilities as planned. level of direct supervision. costs of the final rule. These costs of However, in the absence of regulatory Finally, DHS considered changing the these alternatives are discussed in detail action, sexual abuse standards for ICE’s audit requirements under §§ 115.93 and in Chapter 2 of the Final RIA.

TABLE 5—COST COMPARISON OF REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES TO THE FINAL RULE [$millions]

Total Total 10-Year total costs by alternative Total (7%) (3%)

Alternative 1—No Action ...... $0 $0 $0 Alternative 2—Under 72-Hour ...... 77.4 55.7 66.7 Alternative 3—Final Rule ...... 79.6 57.4 68.7 Alternative 4—Audit Requirements ...... 70.1 50.5 60.4

B. Executive Order 13132—Federalism entities, that own and operate these community corrections programs, and This final rule does not have facilities across the country, the lockups—among other individuals and substantial direct effects on the States, Presidential Memorandum provides groups—during the course of this on the relationship between the national DHS with no direct authority to rulemaking. mandate binding standards for their government and the States, or on C. Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice facilities. However, in line with distribution of power and Reform responsibilities among the various Congress’s and the President’s statutory levels of government. This rule direction in the VAWA Reauthorization This regulation meets the applicable implements the Presidential that the standards are to apply to DHS- standards set forth in §§ 3(a) and 3(b)(2) Memorandum of May 17, 2012 operated detention facilities and to of Executive Order 12988. detention facilities operated under ‘‘Implementing the Prison Rape D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of contract with DHS, including CDFs and Elimination Act’’ and the requirements 1995 found in the recently enacted VAWA detention facilities operated through an Reauthorization (Mar. 7, 2013) by IGSA with DHS, these standards impact Section 202 of the Unfunded setting forth national DHS standards for State, local, and private entities to the Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) the detection, prevention, reduction, extent that such entities make voluntary (Pub. L. 104–4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. and punishment of sexual abuse in DHS decisions to contract with DHS for the 1532) generally requires agencies to immigration detention and holding confinement of immigration detainees prepare a statement before submitting facilities. In drafting the standards, DHS or that such entities and DHS agree to any rule that may result in an annual was mindful of its obligation to meet the enter into a modification or renewal of expenditure of $100 million or more President’s objectives and Congress’s such contracts. This approach is fully (adjusted annually for inflation) by intent while also minimizing conflicts consistent with DHS’s historical State, local, or tribal governments, or by between State law and Federal interests. relationship to State and local agencies the private sector. DHS has assessed the Insofar, however, as the rule sets forth in this context. Therefore, in accordance probable impact of these regulations and standards that might apply to with Executive Order 13132, DHS has believes these regulations may result in immigration detention facilities and determined that this final rule does not an aggregate expenditure by State and holding facilities operated by State and have sufficient federalism implications local governments of approximately local governments and private entities, to warrant the preparation of a $4.3 million in the first year. this rule has the potential to affect the Federalism Assessment. However, DHS believes the States, the relationship between the Notwithstanding the determination requirements of the UMRA do not apply Federal government and the States, and that the formal consultation process to these regulations because UMRA the distribution of power and described in Executive Order 13132 is excludes from its definition of ‘‘Federal responsibilities among the various not required for this rule, DHS intergovernmental mandate’’ those levels of government and private welcomed consultation with regulations imposing an enforceable entities. With respect to the State and representatives of State and local duty on other levels of government local agencies, as well as the private prisons and jails, juvenile facilities, which are ‘‘a condition of Federal

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13159

assistance.’’ 2 U.S.C. 658(5)(A)(i)(I). section above. DHS will not retaliate prevention, reduction, and punishment Compliance with these standards would against small entities that question or of rape and sexual assault in be a condition of ongoing Federal complain about this rule or about any immigration confinement settings. See assistance through implementation of policy or action by DHS related to this Public Law 113–4 (Mar. 7, 2013). This the standards in new contracts and rule. regulation responds to and fulfills the contract renewals. While DHS does not F. Regulatory Flexibility Act President’s direction and the VAWA believe that a formal statement pursuant Reauthorization statutory mandate by to the UMRA is required, it has, for the DHS drafted this final rule so as to creating comprehensive, national convenience of the public, summarized minimize its impact on small entities, in regulations for the detection, as follows various matters discussed at accordance with the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601– prevention, and reduction of prison rape greater length elsewhere in this 612, while meeting its intended at DHS confinement facilities. rulemaking which would have been objectives. The term ‘‘small entities’’ DHS uses a variety of legal included in a UMRA statement should comprises small business, not-for-profit authorities, which are listed below in that have been required: organizations that are independently the ‘‘Authority’’ provision preceding the • These standards are being issued owned and operated and are not regulatory text, to detain individuals in pursuant to the Presidential dominant in their fields, and confinement facilities. Most individuals Memorandum of May 17, 2012, section governmental jurisdictions with detained by DHS are detained in the 1101 of the VAWA Reauthorization, and populations of less than 50,000. Based immigration removal process, and DHS detention authorities. on presently available information, DHS normally DHS derives its detention • is unable to state with certainty that the A qualitative and quantitative authority for these actions from § 236(a) rule will not have any effect on small assessment of the anticipated costs and of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1226(a), which entities of the type described in 5 U.S.C. benefits of these standards appears provides the authority to arrest and 601(3). Accordingly, DHS has prepared below in the Regulatory Flexibility Act detain an alien pending a decision on a Final Regulatory Flexibility Impact (RFA) section; whether the alien is to be removed from • Analysis in accordance with 5 U.S.C. DHS does not believe that these the United States, and § 241(a)(2) of the 604. standards will have an effect on the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1231(a)(2), which national economy, such as an effect on 1. A Statement of the Need for, and provides the authority to detain an alien productivity, economic growth, full Objectives of, the Rule during the period following the issuance employment, creation of productive of an order of removal. DHS jobs, or international competitiveness of In 2003 Congress enacted PREA, Public Law 108–79 (Sept. 4, 2003). components, however, use many other United States goods and services; legal authorities to meet their statutory • Before it issued these final PREA directs the Attorney General to promulgate national standards for mandates and to detain individuals regulations DHS: during the course of executing DHS (1) Provided notice of these enhancing the prevention, detection, missions. requirements to potentially affected reduction, and punishment of prison small governments by publishing the rape. On May 17, 2012, DOJ released a The objective of the rule is to create NPRM, and by other activities; final rule setting national standards to minimum requirements for DHS (2) Enabled officials of affected small prevent, detect, and respond to prison immigration detention and holding governments to provide meaningful and rape for facilities operated by BOP and facilities for the prevention, detection, timely input, via the methods listed USMS. The final rule was published in and response to sexual abuse. The rule above; and the Federal Register on June 20, 2012. will ensure prompt and coordinated (3) Worked to inform, educate, and 77 FR 37106 (June 20, 2012). In its final response and intervention, proper advise small governments on rule, DOJ concluded that PREA treatment for victims, discipline and compliance with the requirements. ‘‘encompass[es] any Federal prosecution of perpetrators, and • As discussed above in the RIA confinement facility ‘whether effective oversight and monitoring to summary, DHS has identified and administered by [the] government or by prevent and deter sexual abuse. a private organization on behalf of such considered a reasonable number of 2. A Statement of the Significant Issues government.’ ’’ Id. at 37113 (quoting 42 regulatory alternatives and from those Raised by the Public Comments in U.S.C. 15609(7)). DOJ recognized, alternatives has attempted to select the Response to the Initial Regulatory however, that, in general, each Federal least costly, most cost effective, or least Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a Statement agency is accountable for, and has burdensome alternative that achieves of the Assessment of the Agency of Such statutory authority to regulate the DHS’s objectives. Issues, and a Statement of Any Changes operations of its own facilities and is Made in the Proposed Rule as a Result E. Small Business Regulatory best positioned to determine how to of Such Comments Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 implement Federal laws and rules that Under section 213(a) of the Small govern its own operations, staff, and DHS did not receive any public Business Regulatory Enforcement persons in custody. Id. The same day comments in response to the initial Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104– that DOJ released its final rule, regulatory flexibility analysis. 121, DHS wants to assist small entities President Obama issued a Presidential 3. The Response of the Agency to Any in understanding this rule so that they Memorandum directing Federal Comments Filed by the Chief Counsel can better evaluate its effects on them agencies with confinement facilities to for Advocacy of the Small Business and participate in the rulemaking. If the issue regulations or procedures within Administration (SBA) in Response to rule would affect your small business, 120 days of his Memorandum to satisfy the Proposed Rule, and a Detailed organization, or governmental the requirements of PREA. On March 7, Statement of Any Change Made to the jurisdiction and you have questions 2013, Congress enacted a statutory Proposed Rule in the Final Rule as a concerning its provisions or options for mandate in the VAWA Reauthorization Result of the Comments compliance, please contact DHS via the directing DHS to publish, within 180 address or phone number provided in days of enactment, a final rule adopting DHS did not receive comments from the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT national standards for the detection, the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13160 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Small Business Administration in facilities and staffed by a combination of databases such as Manta.com and data response to the proposed rule. Federal and contract staff. CDFs are from the U.S. Census Bureau 24 to search owned by a private company and for entity type (public, private, parent, 4. A Description of and an Estimate of contracted directly with ICE. Detention subsidiary, etc.), primary line of the Number of Small Entities To Which services at IGSA facilities are provided business, employee size, revenue, the Rule Will Apply or an Explanation to ICE by State or local governments(s) population, and any other necessary of Why No Such Estimate Is Available through agreements with ICE and may information. This information is used to This rule will affect owners of DHS be owned by the State or local determine if an entity is considered confinement facilities, including private government, or by a private entity. small by the SBA size standards, within owners, State and local governments, Finally, there are two types of IGSA its primary line of business. and the Federal government. DHS has facilities: dedicated and non-dedicated. Of the 79 entities owning immigration two types of confinement facilities: (1) Dedicated IGSA facilities hold only detention facilities and subject to the Immigration detention facilities, and (2) detained aliens whereas non-dedicated RFA, the search returned 75 entities for holding facilities. Holding facilities tend facilities hold a mixture of detained which sufficient data are available to to be short-term in nature. ICE, in aliens and inmates. ICE does not determine if they are small entities, as particular, is charged with include USMS IGA facilities used by defined by the RFA. The table below administration of the immigration ICE under intergovernmental shows the North American Industry detention facilities while CBP and ICE agreements in the scope of this Classification System (NAICS) codes each have many holding facilities under rulemaking. Those facilities would be corresponding with the number of their detention authority. The analysis covered by the DOJ PREA standards. facilities for which data are available. below addresses immigration detention Any references to authorized There are 27 small governmental facilities and holding facilities immigration detention facilities are jurisdictions, one small business, and separately. exclusive of these 119 USMS IGA one small not-for-profit. In order to facilities. ensure that the interests of small entities i. Immigration Detention Facilities Of the current 158 ICE detention are adequately considered, DHS ICE divides its detention facilities into facilities that are for use over 72 hours, assumes that all entities without two groups: There are 158 for use over 6 are owned by the Federal government available ownership, NAICS, revenue, 72 hours, and 91 that typically hold and are not subject to the RFA. An or employment data are small entities. detainees for more than 24 hours and additional 64 are covered not by this Therefore, DHS estimates there are a less than 72 hours. These are treated rule but by the DOJ PREA rule, as USMS total of 33 small entities to which this separately, below. Further, there are IGA facilities. Of the 88 facilities subject rule applies. The table below shows the several types of immigration detention to the RFA, there are 79 distinct entities. number of small entities by type for facilities. SPC facilities are ICE-owned DHS uses ICE information and public which data are available.

TABLE 5—SMALL ENTITIES BY TYPE—IMMIGRATION DETENTION FACILITIES

Type Entities found SBA Size standard

Small Governmental Jurisdiction ...... 27 Population less than 50,000. Small Business ...... 1 $7 million (NAICS 488999); $30 million (NAICS 488119). Small Organization ...... 1 Independently owned and operated not-for-profit not dominant in its field.

Subtotal ...... 29

Entities without Available Information ...... 4

Total Small Entities ...... 33

ICE also has shorter-term immigration rural areas that only occasionally have revenue, population, and any other detention facilities, for several reasons: immigration detainees. necessary information needed to Some of ICE’s immigration detention At the time of writing, ICE has 91 determine if an entity is considered facilities are governed by IGSAs that immigration detention facilities which small by SBA size standards. limit the length of an immigration are used to detain individuals for less Of the 33 entities owning immigration detainee’s stay to less than 72 hours for than 72 hours. Of those, three are owned detention facilities and subject to the various reasons. Some of these facilities by the Federal or State government and RFA, all have sufficient data available to have limited bed space that precludes are not subject to the RFA. An determine if they are small entities as longer stays by detainees. Others are additional 55 are covered not by this defined by the RFA. The table below used primarily under special rule but by the DOJ PREA rule, as USMS circumstances such as housing a IGA facilities. Of the 33 facilities subject shows the NAICS codes corresponding detainee temporarily to facilitate to the RFA, all are owned by distinct with the number of facilities for which detainee transfers or to hold a detainee entities. Again, DHS uses public data are available. DHS determines there for court appearances in a different databases such as Manta.com and U.S. are 10 small governmental jurisdictions, jurisdiction. In some circumstances the Census Bureau to search for entity type, 0 small businesses, and 0 small under 72-hour facilities are located in primary line of business, employee size, organizations. The table below shows

24 U.S. Census Bureau, State and County QuickFacts, 2010 Population Data, available at http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13161

the number of small entities by type for which data are available.

TABLE 6—SMALL ENTITIES BY TYPE—OTHER DHS CONFINEMENT FACILITIES

Type Entities found SBA Size standard

Small Governmental Jurisdiction ...... 10 Population less than 50,000. Small Business ...... 0 Small Organization ...... 0

Total Small Entities ...... 10

At the time of writing, ICE has two Federal Government, and to contract ii. Zero Tolerance of Sexual Abuse; immigration detention facilities that are renewals. To the extent this rule Prevention of Sexual Assault considered family residential facilities. increases costs to any detainment Coordinator, § 115.11 Both are owned by counties. Again, facilities, which may be small entities, The rule requires immigration DHS uses public databases such as it may be reflected in the cost paid by detention facilities to have a written Manta.com and U.S. Census Bureau to the Federal Government for the contract. zero-tolerance policy for sexual abuse search for entity type, primary line of Costs associated with implementing the and establish a PSA Compliance business, employee size, revenue, rule paid by the Federal Government to Manager at each facility. ICE is not population, and any other necessary small entities are transfer payments requiring facilities to hire any new staff information needed to determine if an ultimately born by the Federal for these responsibilities; rather ICE entity is considered small by SBA size Government. However, DHS cannot say believes the necessary PSA Compliance standards. DHS was able to obtain with certainty how much, if any, of Manager duties can be collateral duties sufficient data to determine if they are these costs will be paid in the form of for a current staff member. small entities. Based on the size of the increased bed rates for facilities. For some of the standards in this counties, DHS determines neither are Therefore, for the purposes of this rulemaking, the actual effort required to considered small governmental analysis, DHS assumes all costs comply with the standard will jurisdictions as defined by the RFA. associated with the rule will be borne by presumably be undertaken by the PSA In summary, DHS estimates the the facility. Of the 45 small entities, 37 Compliance Manager. The costs of number of small entities covered by this operate under the NDS. The following compliance with those standards are rulemaking is 33 over 72-hour discussion addresses the standards that thus essentially subsumed within the immigration detention facilities, 10 may create implementation costs for cost of this standard. For this reason, under 72-hour facilities, and 2 family facilities that are currently operating and to avoid double counting, many residential facilities, for a total of 45 under the ICE NDS. standards are assessed as having small entities. i. Contracting With Other Non-DHS minimal to zero cost even though they ii. Holding Facilities Entities for the Confinement of will require some resources to ensure Detainees, § 115.12 compliance; this is because the cost of U.S. Customs and Border Protection. those resources is assigned to this CBP operates 768 facilities with holding The rule requires that any new standard to the extent DHS assumes the facilities. Of the 768, 364 are owned by contracts or contract renewals comply primary responsibility for complying private sector entities. CBP is with the rule and provide for agency with the standard will lie with the PSA responsible for funding any facility contract monitoring to ensure that the Compliance Manager. The table below modifications once CBP has begun contractor is complying with these presents the standards and requirements operations at the location. As such, any standards. Therefore, DHS adds a 20- DHS assumes are the responsibility of modifications at these facilities as a hour opportunity cost of time for the the PSA Compliance Manager, and are result of this rule will have no direct contractor to read and process the included in the costs estimated for this impact on the facilities. modification, determine if a request for standard. U.S. Immigration and Customs a rate increase is necessary, and have Enforcement. Most ICE hold rooms are discussions with the government if TABLE 7—ASSUMED PSA COMPLIANCE needed. DHS estimates this standard in ICE field offices and satellite offices. MANAGER DUTIES—IMMIGRATION ICE estimates it has 149 holding may cost a facility approximately $1,488 DETENTION FACILITIES facilities that are covered under the rule. (20 hours × $74.41) in the first year.25 None of these facilities are considered Standard small entities under the RFA. 25 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics (OES), May 2011, NAICS 115.11 Zero tolerance of sexual abuse. 5. A Description of the Projected 999300, SOC 11–1021 General and Operations Manager Median Hourly Wage, retrieved on June 115.21 Evidence protocols and forensic Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other medical examinations. Compliance Requirements of the Rule, 29, 2012 from http://www.bls.gov/oes/2011/may/ naics4_999300.htm. Loaded for benefits. Bureau of 115.31 Staff training. Including an Estimate of the Classes of Labor Statistics, Employer Cost for Employee 115.32 Volunteer and contractor training. Small Entities Which Will Be Subject to Compensation, June 2011, Table 3: Employer Costs 115.34 Specialized training: Investigations. the Requirement and the Types of per hour worked for employee compensation and 115.63 * Reporting to other confinement fa- Professional Skills Necessary for costs as a percent of total compensation: State and cilities. local government workers, by major occupational 115.65 Coordinated response. Preparation of the Report or Record and industry group, Service Occupations, Salary and Compensation Percent of Total Compensation, 115.67 Agency protection against retalia- With regard to non-DHS facilities, the retrieved on June 29, 2012 from http://www.bls.gov/ tion. requirements of the rule are applicable news.release/archives/ecec_09082011.pdf. $74.41 = 115.86 Sexual abuse incident reviews. only to new detention contracts with the $44.42/0.597. 115.87 Data collection.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13162 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 7—ASSUMED PSA COMPLIANCE facilities 28 and 28 percent at jails are allows them in exigent circumstances MANAGER DUTIES—IMMIGRATION female.29 Though there may be only. However, cross-gender pat-down DETENTION FACILITIES—Continued disproportionate gender ratios of staff to searches of male detainees may happen detainees at some individual facilities, more frequently. DHS believes this Standard the overall national statistics do not requirement may be a notable burden on indicate that there will be a significant facilities both for the process of 115.93 * Audits. problem with compliance. Facilities are documenting the pat-down, but also * Indicates new requirement for facilities allowed to conduct cross-gender pat- keeping these records administratively. under 2011 PBNDS or Family Residential down searches on male detainees when, Therefore, as we discuss below, DHS Standards. after reasonable diligence by the facility, estimates an opportunity cost for this DHS spoke with some SPCs and CDFs a member of the same gender is not provision. ICE does not currently track who had Sexual Abuse and Assault available at the time. The pat-down the number of cross-gender pat-down Prevention Intervention Coordinators restrictions for female detainees are searches, or any pat-down searches required under the 2008 PBNDS. Based more stringent. Female detainees only conducted. In the IRFA DHS requested on these discussions, DHS estimates a comprise 10 percent of the overall comment from facilities on the number PSA Compliance Manager will spend, population, and one to five percent are of cross-gender pat-down searches on average, 114 hours in the first year held at ICE’s dedicated female facility. conducted. No comments were received and 78 hours thereafter, which includes The Family Residential Standards, in response to this request. Because DHS believes this may be a writing/revising policies related to under which the dedicated female noticeable burden on facilities, DHS sexual abuse and working with auditors. facility operates, already prohibit cross- includes a rough estimate using DHS estimates this standard may cost a gender pat-downs. assumptions. DHS also requested facility approximately $5,330 (114 hours DHS does not expect any facilities to comment on these assumptions in the × $46.75) in the first year.26 hire new staff or lay off any staff specifically to meet the requirement. IRFA. No comments were received in iii. Limits to Cross-Gender Viewing and Instead, DHS expects that facilities response to this request. Detainees may Searches, § 115.15 which may have an unbalanced gender receive a pat-down for a number of The requirement prohibits cross- ratio take this requirement into reasons. All detainees receive a pat- gender pat-down searches unless, after consideration during hiring decisions down upon intake at the facility, reasonable diligence, staff of the same resulting from normal attrition and staff detainees may receive a pat-down after gender is not available at the time the turnover. In the IRFA, DHS requested visitation, before visiting the attorney pat-down search is required (for male comments from facilities on this room, if visiting medical, if in detainees), or in exigent circumstances conclusion. No comments were received segregation, etc. Therefore, DHS (for female and male detainees alike). In in response to this request. assumes that in any given day, addition, it bans cross-gender strip or DHS includes a cost for facilities to approximately 50 percent of detainees body cavity searches except in exigent examine their staff rosters, gender ratios, may receive a pat-down. DHS uses the circumstances; requires documentation and staffing plans for all shifts for ratio of male guards to male detainees of all strip and body cavity searches and maximum compliance with cross- and female guards to female detainees cross-gender pat-down searches; gender pat downs. The length of time it as a proxy for the percentage of these prohibits physical examinations for the takes for facilities to adjust staffing pat-downs that will be cross-gender, sole purpose of determining genital plans, strategies, and schedules for realizing that this may not be characteristics; requires training of law gender balance while ensuring there is representative of every facility, the enforcement staff on proper procedures adequate detainee supervision and circumstances at the time a pat-down is for conducting pat-down searches, monitoring pursuant to § 115.13 will required, nor the results after the staff including transgender and intersex vary with the size of the facility. DHS realignment previously discussed. As detainees; and, implements policies on estimates this may take a supervisor 12 referenced previously, between 72 and staff viewing of showering, performing hours initially. DHS anticipates 87 percent of guards are male and 90 bodily functions, and changing clothes. facilities will be able to incorporate percent of detainees are male. Therefore, The restrictions placed on cross- these considerations into regular staffing to estimate a rough order of magnitude, gender pat-down searches will be a new decisions in the future. DHS estimates DHS assumes between 3 and 18 percent requirement for facilities operating the restrictions on cross-gender pat- of pat-downs of male detainees may be under the NDS or 2008 PBNDS, and a downs may cost a facility approximately cross-gender, with a primary estimate of modified requirement for facilities $561 (12 hours × $46.75) in the first 10 percent. 27 DHS finds the total average daily operating under the 2011 PBNDS. year. ICE’s detention population is 10 percent The requirement for documentation of population of male detainees at the 43 female, and 90 percent male. In cross-gender pat-down searches is new facilities classified as small entities and comparison, 13 percent of correctional for all facilities, regardless of the version takes the average to determine an average daily population of 93 for a officers at Federal confinement of the detention standards under which facility classified as a small entity (4,457 the facility operates. Presumably, cross- 26 × 90% ÷ 43). Then DHS applies the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational gender pat-down searches of female methodology described above to Employment Statistics (OES), May 2011, NAICS detainees will occur rarely, as the rule 999300, SOC 33–1011 First Line Supervisors of estimate that approximately 2,000 cross Correctional Officers Median Hourly Wage, gender pat-downs may be conducted at retrieved on June 29, 2012 from http://www.bls.gov/ 28 Bureau of Justice Statistics, Census of State and oes/2011/may/oes331011.htm. Loaded for benefits. Federal Correctional Facilities, 2005, page 4, an average small entity annually (93 $46.75 = $27.91/0.597 retrieved on August 13, 2012 from http:// male ADP × 50% receive pat-down daily 27 Specifically, the 2011 PBNDS permits cross- www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csfcf05.pdf. × 365 days × 10% cross-gender), which gender pat-down searches of women when staff of 29 Department of Justice, Final Regulatory Impact is rounded to the nearest thousand due the same gender is not available at the time the pat- Analysis, section 5.6.15.1 Analysis and down search is required. Under the proposed Methodology for Adult Facilities of standards to uncertainty. DHS estimates it will standard, cross-gender searches of females would be 115.15, retrieved May 24 from www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ require an average of five minutes of allowed only in exigent circumstances. programs/pdfs/prea_ria.pdf. staff for documentation. DHS estimates

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13163

this standard may cost a facility have contact with immigration § 115.32. This expands the training approximately $5,435 (5 minutes × detention facilities also receive training requirements to a population that was $32.61 per hour), annually. on specific items related to prevention, not previously covered under the The total estimate per small entity for detection, and response to sexual abuse. NPRM. DHS estimates this standard for § 115.15 is $5,996 ($561 for staff In the final rule this was changed to other contractors may cost realignment + $5,435 for cross-gender volunteers and other contractors. Other approximately $121 per facility (15 pat-down documentation). contractors are those that do not have minutes × 20 other contractors × 34 iv. Evidence Protocols and Forensic training requirements under § 115.31, $24.24). Medical Examinations, § 115.21 but who have contact with detainees The total estimated cost per facility and provide services on a non-recurring for volunteer and other contractor The rule requires ICE and any of its basis to the facility pursuant to a training is $2,129 ($2,008 for volunteers immigration detention facilities to contractual agreement. The standard + $121 for other contractors). establish a protocol for the investigation also requires the agency or facility to of allegations of sexual abuse or the maintain documentation that all vii. Specialized Training: Investigations, referral of allegations to investigators. In volunteers and other contractors have §§ 115.34, 115.134 addition, where appropriate, at no cost completed the training requirements. The rule requires the agency or to the detainee, a forensic medical exam The provisions in this standard allow facility to provide specialized training should be offered and an outside victim the level and type of training required on sexual abuse and effective cross- advocate shall be made available for of volunteers and other contractors to be agency coordination to agency or facility support if requested. based upon the services they provide investigators, respectively, who conduct DHS includes a cost for facilities to and the level of contact they have with investigations into alleged sexual abuse enter into a memorandum of detainees, but sets a minimum level at immigration detention facilities. understanding (MOU) with entities that requiring notification of the zero- DHS conducts investigations of all provide victim advocate services, such tolerance policy and reporting allegations of detainee sexual abuse in as rape crisis centers. DHS estimates it responsibilities and procedures. will require approximately 20 hours of detention facilities. The 2012 ICE Because of the regular nature of SAAPID mandates that ICE’s OPR staff time to negotiate and settle on each volunteers and the types of duties they MOU. DHS estimates this standard may provide specialized training to OPR perform, DHS uses the same investigators and other ICE staff. cost a facility approximately $1,488 (20 assumptions as staff for the frequency hours × $74.41). Facilities may also conduct their own and hours of training required of investigations. However, because ICE v. Staff Training, § 115.31 volunteers. DHS estimates this standard conducts investigations into the for volunteers may cost approximately Under § 115.31 the rule requires that × allegations, training for facility $2,008 per facility (2 hours 30 investigators will likely be less any facility staff who may have contact × 32 33 volunteers $33.47). specialized than required of ICE with immigration detention facilities To provide flexibility to facilities to investigators. DHS includes a cost for have training on specific items related determine the appropriate level of the time required for training to prevention, detection, and response training necessary, the NPRM included investigators. DHS estimates the training to sexual abuse. It also requires facilities training for contractors under § 115.31 may take approximately one hour. DHS to maintain documentation that all staff and § 115.32 recognizing there are estimates this standard may cost a have completed the training different types of contractors ranging facility approximately $468 (1 hour × 10 requirements. Staff includes any from guards to those that come weekly investigators × $46.75).35 36 employees or contractors of the agency to service vending machines. In this or facility, including any entity that final rule, DHS proposes to address this operates within the facility. Contractor flexibility in a different manner. DHS 34 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational means a person who or entity that Employment Statistics (OES), May 2011, National, has removed from § 115.32 contractors, Weighted Average Median Wage Rate for SOC 37– provides services on a recurring basis as defined under § 115.5 as a ‘‘person or 0000 Building Grounds Cleaning and Maintenance pursuant to a contractual agreement entity that provides services on a Occupations; 47–0000 Construction and Extraction with the agency or facility. recurring basis pursuant to a contractual Occupations; and 49–0000 Installation, DHS uses the National Institute of Maintenance, and Repair Occupations, retrieved on agreement with the agency or facility.’’ June 13 2012 from http://www.bls.gov/oes/2011/ Corrections Information Center 2-hour The final rule includes these types of may/oes_nat.htm. Loaded for benefits. training timeframe as an approximation recurring contractors solely under the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employer Cost for for the length of the training course to training requirements of § 115.31. In Employee Compensation, June 2011, Table 1: fulfill the proposed requirements. DHS recognition that there may be other non- Employer Costs per hour worked for employee estimates this standard may cost a compensation and costs as a percent of total recurring contractors with access to compensation: Civilian workers, by major facility approximately $18,914 (2 hours detainees, DHS has included a occupational and industry group, Management, × 290 staff × $32.61), annually.30 31 requirement for these other contractors professional, and related, Salary and Compensation to also undergo training appropriate for Percent of Total Compensation, retrieved on vi. Other Training, § 115.32 October 15, 2012 from http://www.bls.gov/ the services they provide and level of _ In the NPRM, § 115.32 required that news.release/archives/ecec 09082011.pdf. $24.24 = contact they have with detainees, under $16.86/0.694. any volunteers and contractors who may 35 ICE does not keep record of the number of 32 ICE does not keep record of the number of investigators at contract facilities. The estimates 30 ICE does not keep record of the number of staff volunteers at contract facilities. The estimates represent the results from a small sample, stratified at contract facilities. The estimates represent the represent the results from a small sample, stratified by facility type. ICE estimates 10 investigators per results from a small sample, stratified by facility by facility type. ICE estimates approximately 30 facility. type. ICE estimates approximately 290 staff per volunteers per facility. 36 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational facility. 33 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics (OES), May 2011, NAICS 31 Though there may be other types of staff that Employment Statistics (OES), May 2011, SOC 00– 99300, Median Wage Rate for SOC 33–1011 First- will require this training, such as medical 0000 All Occupations Median Hourly Wage, Line Supervisors of Correctional Officers, retrieved practitioners or administrative staff, DHS assumes retrieved on August 16, 2012 from http:// on August 16, 2012 from http://www.bls.gov/oes/ correctional officers and their supervisors comprise www.bls.gov/oes/2011/may/naics4_999300.htm. 2011/may/naics4_999300.htm. Loaded for benefits. the majority of staff with detainee contact. Loaded for benefits. $33.47 = $19.98/0.597. $46.75 = $27.91/0.597.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13164 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

viii. Specialized Training: Medical and provided by a rape crisis center. DHS PSA Compliance Manager under Mental Health Care, § 115.35 estimates it will require approximately § 115.11. The rule requires specialized training 20 hours of staff time to negotiate and To account for these costs, DHS adds to DHS medical and mental health care settle on each MOU. DHS estimates this an additional category of staff. In addition, it requires all facilities standard may cost a facility × implementation costs for immigration to have policies and procedures to approximately $1,488 (20 hours detention facilities. Implementation ensure that the facility trains or certifies $74.41). costs will vary by the size of the facility, all full- or part-time facility medical and x. Audits, § 115.93 a facility’s current practices, and other mental health care staff in procedures facility-specific factors. DHS assumes Facilities may also incur costs for re- for treating victims of sexual abuse, in the costs any additional implementation audits. Re-audits can be requested in the facilities where medical or mental costs might occur as a result of the event that the facility does not achieve health staff may be assigned these standards with start-up costs, such as compliance with each standard or if the activities.37 entering into MOUs, rather than facility files an appeal with the agency DHS searched for continuing medical standards with action or on-going costs, regarding any specific finding that it education courses that focused on the such as training. DHS estimates believes to be incorrect. Costs for these evaluation and treatment for victims of additional implementation costs as 10 audits will be borne by the facility; sexual assault. Based on the results, percent of the total costs of standards however, the request for these re-audits DHS estimates an average course will be with a start-up cost. DHS requests is at the discretion of the facility. one hour in length and cost between $10 comment on this assumption. The tables and $15, and can be completed online. xi. Additional Implementation Costs below present the estimates for DHS estimates this standard may cost a Facilities contracting with DHS additional implementation costs. DHS facility approximately $1,957 (30 estimates this standard may cost a medical and mental health care agencies may incur organizational costs related to proper planning and overall facility approximately $1,579 in the first practitioners × ($50.23 × 1 hr + $15)).38 × execution of the rulemaking, in addition year (10% ($1,488 for § 115.12 + ix. Detainee Access to Outside to the specific implementation costs $5,330 for § 115.11 + $5,996 for § 115.15 Confidential Support Services, § 115.53 facilities are estimated to incur for each + $1,488 for § 115.21 + $1,488 for The rule requires facilities to maintain of the requirements. The burden § 115.53)). or attempt to enter into MOUs with resulting from the time required to read xii. Total Cost per Facility organizations that provide legal the rulemaking, research how it might advocacy and confidential emotional impact facility operations, procedures, DHS estimates the total cost per support services for victims of sexual and budget, as well as consideration of immigration detention facility under the abuse. It also requires notices of these how best to execute the rulemaking NDS for compliance with the standards services be made available to detainees, requirements or other costs of overall is approximately $40,837 for the first as appropriate. execution. This is exclusive of the time year. In subsequent years, DHS DHS includes a cost for facilities to required under § 115.12 to determine estimates the costs drop to enter into a MOU with entities that and agree upon the new terms of the approximately $31,033. The following provide legal advocacy and confidential contract and the specific requirements table summarizes the preceding support services, such as services expected to be performed by the facility discussion.

TABLE 8—ESTIMATED COST PER SMALL ENTITY UNDER NDS—IMMIGRATION DETENTION FACILITIES

Standard Cost in year 1 On-going cost

115.12 Consulting with non-DHS entities for the confinement of detainees ...... $1,488 $0 115.11 Zero tolerance of sexual abuse; PSA Coordinator * ...... 5,330 3,647 115.15 Limits to cross-gender viewing and searches * ...... 5,996 5,435 115.21 Evidence protocols and forensic medical examinations ...... 1,488 0 115.31 Staff training * ...... 18,914 18,914 115.327 Other training * ...... 2,129 2,129 115.34 Specialized training: Investigations ...... 468 0 115.35 Specialized training: Medical and mental health care ...... 1,957 0 115.53 Detainee access to outside confidential support Services ...... 1,488 0 Additional Implementation Costs* ...... 1,579 908

Total ...... 40,837 31,033 * Standards for which DHS estimates there may be on-going costs.

37 ICE does not keep record of the number of 38 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Technicians; and 29–2061 Licensed Practical and medical and mental health care providers at Employment Statistics (OES), May 2011, NAICS Licensed Vocational Nurses, retrieved on August contract facilities. The estimates represent the 99300, Weighted Average Median Wage Rate for 16, 2012 from http://www.bls.gov/oes/2011/may/ results from a small sample, stratified by facility SOC 29–1062 Family and General Practitioners; 29– naics4_999300.htm. Loaded for benefits. $50.23 = type. ICE estimates 30 medical and mental health 1066 Psychiatrists; 29–1071 Physician Assistants; $29.99/0.597 care providers per new facility. 29–1111 Registered Nurses; 29–2053 Psychiatric

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13165

6. A Description of the Steps the Agency (PRA), so as to ensure clarity of 115.32 Other training. Has Taken to Minimize Any Significant requirements associated with this 115.33 Detainee education. Economic Impact on Small Entities rulemaking. 115.34 Specialized training: Investigations. Consistent With the Stated Objectives of This final rule contains a new 115.35 Specialized training: Medical and Applicable Statutes, Including A collection of information covered by the mental health care. Statement of the Factual, Policy, and PRA. The information collection Assessment for Risk of Sexual Victimization Legal Reasons for Selecting the described by DHS in the proposed rule and Abusiveness Alternative Adopted in the Final Rule, garnered no comments from the public, 115.41 Assessment for risk of victimization and Why Each One of the Other and thus no changes were necessitated and abusiveness. Significant Alternatives to the Rule based upon any comments pertaining to 115.42 Use of assessment information. Considered by the Agency Which the PRA aspects of the rule. However, 115.43 Protective custody. Affected the Impact on Small Entities changes to the PREA standards made in Reporting Was Rejected response to substantive comments on 115.51 Detainee reporting. DHS considered a longer phase-in the NPRM and due to additional analysis resulted in the total PRA 115.52 Grievances. period for small entities subject to the 115.53 Detainee access to outside rulemaking. A longer period would burden hours being greater than those estimated in DHS’s initial information confidential support services. reduce immediate burden on small 115.54 Third-party reporting. entities with current contracts. The collection request. DHS has submitted a revised current requirements require that Official Response Following a Detainee information collection request to OMB Report facilities comply with the standards for review and clearance in accordance upon renewal of a contract or exercising 115.61 Staff reporting duties. with the review procedures of the PRA. a contract option. Essentially, this 115.62 Protection duties. would phase-in all authorized List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 115 115.63 Reporting to other confinement immigration detention facilities within a facilities. Administrative practice and 115.64 Responder duties. year of the effective date of the final procedure, Aliens, Immigration, 115.65 Coordinated response. rule. DHS is willing to work with small Reporting and recordkeeping 115.66 Protection of detainees from contact facilities upon contract renewal in requirements. with alleged abusers. implementing these standards. Accordingly, Part 115 of Title 6 of the 115.67 Agency protection against DHS also considered requiring lesser Code of Federal Regulations is added to retaliation. standards, such as those under the NDS read as follows: 115.68 Post-allegation protective custody. or the 2008 PBNDS for small entities. Investigations However, DHS rejected this alternative PART 115—SEXUAL ABUSE AND because DHS believes in the importance ASSAULT PREVENTION STANDARDS 115.71 Criminal and administrative of protecting detainees from, and investigations. providing treatment after, instances of Sec. 115.72 Evidentiary standard for sexual abuse, regardless of a facility’s 115.5 General definitions. administrative investigations. size. In the IRFA DHS requested 115.6 Definitions related to sexual abuse 115.73 Reporting to detainees. and assault. comment on additional alternatives that Discipline might help reduce the impact on small Subpart A—Standards for Immigration 115.76 Disciplinary sanctions for staff. Detention Facilities entities. No comments were received in 115.77 Corrective action for contractors and response to this request. Coverage volunteers. 115.78 Disciplinary sanctions for detainees. G. Paperwork Reduction Act 115.10 Coverage of DHS immigration detention facilities. DHS is setting standards for the Medical and Mental Care prevention, detection, and response to Prevention Planning 115.81 Medical and mental health sexual abuse in its confinement 115.11 Zero tolerance of sexual abuse; assessments; history of sexual abuse. facilities. For DHS facilities and as Prevention of Sexual Assault 115.82 Access to emergency medical and incorporated in DHS contracts, these Coordinator. mental health services. 115.83 Ongoing medical and mental health standards require covered facilities to 115.12 Contracting with non-DHS entities for the confinement of detainees. care for sexual abuse victims and retain and report to the agency certain 115.13 Detainee supervision and abusers. specified information relating to sexual monitoring. abuse prevention planning, responsive 115.14 Juvenile and family detainees. Data Collection and Review planning, education and training, and 115.15 Limits to cross-gender viewing and 115.86 Sexual abuse incident reviews. investigations, as well as to collect, searches. 115.87 Data collection. retain, and report to the agency certain 115.16 Accommodating detainees with 115.88 Data review for corrective action. specified information relating to disabilities and detainees who are 115.89 Data storage, publication, and allegations of sexual abuse within the limited English proficient. destruction. 115.17 Hiring and promotion decisions. covered facility. As stated in the NPRM, 115.18 Upgrades to facilities and Audits and Compliance DHS believes that most of the technologies. 115.93 Audits of standards. information collection requirements placed on facilities are already Responsive Planning Additional Provisions in Agency Policies requirements derived from existing 115.21 Evidence protocols and forensic 115.95 Additional provisions in agency contracts with immigration detention medical examinations. policies. facilities. However, DHS included these 115.22 Policies to ensure investigation of allegations and appropriate agency Subpart B—Standards for DHS Holding requirements as part of an information oversight. Facilities collection request associated with the proposed rule, pursuant to the Training and Education Coverage Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 115.31 Staff training. 115.110 Coverage of DHS holding facilities.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13166 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Prevention Planning 115.189 Data storage, publication, and conform to traditional societal gender 115.111 Zero tolerance of sexual abuse; destruction. expectations. Prevention of Sexual Assault Audits and Compliance Holding facility means a facility that Coordinator. contains holding cells, cell blocks, or 115.193 Audits of standards. 115.112 Contracting with non-DHS entities other secure enclosures that are: for the confinement of detainees. Additional Provisions in Agency Policies (1) Under the control of the agency; 115.113 Detainee supervision and 115.195 Additional provisions in agency and monitoring. policies. (2) Primarily used for the short-term 115.114 Juvenile and family detainees. confinement of individuals who have 115.115 Limits to cross-gender viewing and Subpart C—External Auditing and searches. Corrective Action recently been detained, or are being transferred to or from a court, jail, 115.116 Accommodating detainees with 115.201 Scope of audits. disabilities and detainees who are prison, other agency, or other unit of the 115.202 Auditor qualifications. limited English proficient. 115.203 Audit contents and findings. facility or agency. 115.117 Hiring and promotion decisions. 115.204 Audit corrective action plan. Immigration detention facility means 115.118 Upgrades to facilities and 115.205 Audit appeals. a confinement facility operated by or technologies. pursuant to contract with U.S. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a; 8 Immigration and Customs Enforcement Responsive Planning U.S.C. 1103, 1182, 1223, 1224, 1225, 1226, 115.121 Evidence protocols and forensic 1227, 1228, 1231, 1251, 1253, 1255, 1330, (ICE) that routinely holds persons for medical examinations. 1362; 18 U.S.C. 4002, 4013(c)(4); Pub. L. 107– over 24 hours pending resolution or 115.122 Policies to ensure investigation of 296, 116 Stat. 2135 (6 U.S.C. 101, et seq.); 8 completion of immigration removal allegations and appropriate agency CFR part 2. operations or processes, including oversight. facilities that are operated by ICE, § 115.5 General definitions. Training and Education facilities that provide detention services For purposes of this part, the term— under a contract awarded by ICE, and 115.131 Employee, contractor, and Agency means the unit or component volunteer training. facilities used by ICE pursuant to an 115.132 Notification to detainees of the of DHS responsible for operating or Intergovernmental Service Agreement. agency’s zero-tolerance policy. supervising any facility, or part of a Intersex means having sexual or 115.133 [Reserved] facility, that confines detainees. reproductive anatomy or chromosomal 115.134 Specialized training: Agency head means the principal pattern that does not seem to fit typical Investigations. official of an agency. definitions of male or female. Intersex Contractor means a person who or Assessment for Risk of Sexual Victimization medical conditions are sometimes and Abusiveness entity that provides services on a referred to as disorders of sex recurring basis pursuant to a contractual 115.141 Assessment for risk of development. victimization and abusiveness. agreement with the agency or facility. Juvenile means any person under the Detainee means any person detained age of 18. Reporting in an immigration detention facility or Law enforcement staff means officers 115.151 Detainee reporting. holding facility. or agents of the agency or facility that 115.152–115.153 [Reserved] Employee means a person who works are responsible for the supervision and 115.154 Third-party reporting. directly for the agency. control of detainees in a holding facility. Official Response Following a Detainee Exigent circumstances means any set Medical practitioner means a health Report of temporary and unforeseen professional who, by virtue of 115.161 Staff reporting duties. circumstances that require immediate education, credentials, and experience, 115.162 Agency protection duties. action in order to combat a threat to the is permitted by law to evaluate and care 115.163 Reporting to other confinement security or institutional order of a for patients within the scope of his or facilities. facility or a threat to the safety or her professional practice. A ‘‘qualified 115.164 Responder duties. security of any person. medical practitioner’’ refers to such a 115.165 Coordinated response. Facility means a place, building (or professional who has also successfully 115.166 Protection of detainees from part thereof), set of buildings, structure, completed specialized training for contact with alleged abusers. or area (whether or not enclosing a 115.167 Agency protection against treating sexual abuse victims. retaliation. building or set of buildings) that was Mental health practitioner means a built or retrofitted for the purpose of mental health professional who, by Investigations detaining individuals and is routinely virtue of education, credentials, and 115.171 Criminal and administrative used by the agency to detain individuals experience, is permitted by law to investigations. in its custody. References to evaluate and care for patients within the 115.172 Evidentiary standard for requirements placed on facilities extend scope of his or her professional practice. administrative investigations. to the entity responsible for the direct A ‘‘qualified mental health practitioner’’ Discipline operation of the facility. refers to such a professional who has 115.176 Disciplinary sanctions for staff. Facility head means the principal also successfully completed specialized 115.177 Corrective action for contractors official responsible for a facility. training for treating sexual abuse and volunteers. Family unit means a group of victims. detainees that includes one or more Pat-down search means a sliding or Medical and Mental Care non-United States citizen juvenile(s) patting of the hands over the clothed 115.181 [Reserved] accompanied by his/her/their parent(s) body of a detainee by staff to determine 115.182 Access to emergency medical or legal guardian(s), whom the agency whether the individual possesses services. will evaluate for safety purposes to contraband. Data Collection and Review protect juveniles from sexual abuse and Security staff means employees 115.186 Sexual abuse incident reviews. violence. primarily responsible for the 115.187 Data collection. Gender nonconforming means having supervision and control of detainees in 115.188 Data review for corrective action. an appearance or manner that does not housing units, recreational areas, dining

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13167

areas, and other program areas of an Sexual abuse of a detainee by a staff Prevention Planning immigration detention facility. member, contractor, or volunteer Staff means employees or contractors § 115.11 Zero tolerance of sexual abuse; includes any of the following acts, if Prevention of Sexual Assault Coordinator. of the agency or facility, including any engaged in by one or more staff (a) The agency shall have a written entity that operates within the facility. members, volunteers, or contract policy mandating zero tolerance toward Strip search means a search that personnel who, with or without the requires a person to remove or arrange all forms of sexual abuse and outlining consent of the detainee, engages in or the agency’s approach to preventing, some or all clothing so as to permit a attempts to engage in: visual inspection of the person’s breasts, detecting, and responding to such (1) Contact between the penis and the buttocks, or genitalia. conduct. (b) The agency shall employ or Substantiated allegation means an vulva or anus and, for purposes of this designate an upper-level, agency-wide allegation that was investigated and paragraph (1), contact involving the Prevention of Sexual Assault determined to have occurred. penis upon penetration, however slight; Coordinator (PSA Coordinator) with Transgender means a person whose (2) Contact between the mouth and sufficient time and authority to develop, gender identity (i.e., internal sense of the penis, vulva, or anus; implement, and oversee agency efforts feeling male or female) is different from (3) Penetration, however slight, of the to comply with these standards in all of the person’s assigned sex at birth. anal or genital opening of another its immigration detention facilities. Unfounded allegation means an person by a hand or finger or by any (c) Each facility shall have a written allegation that was investigated and object that is unrelated to official duties policy mandating zero tolerance toward determined not to have occurred. or where the staff member, contractor, all forms of sexual abuse and outlining Unsubstantiated allegation means an or volunteer has the intent to abuse, the facility’s approach to preventing, allegation that was investigated and the arouse, or gratify sexual desire; detecting, and responding to such investigation produced insufficient (4) Intentional touching of the conduct. The agency shall review and evidence to make a final determination approve each facility’s written policy. as to whether or not the event occurred. genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thighs or buttocks, either directly or (d) Each facility shall employ or Volunteer means an individual who designate a Prevention of Sexual Assault through the clothing, that is unrelated to donates time and effort on a recurring Compliance Manager (PSA Compliance official duties or where the staff basis to enhance the activities and Manager) who shall serve as the facility member, contractor, or volunteer has the programs of the agency or facility. point of contact for the agency PSA intent to abuse, arouse, or gratify sexual Coordinator and who has sufficient time § 115.6 Definitions related to sexual abuse desire; and assault. and authority to oversee facility efforts (5) Threats, intimidation, harassment, For purposes of this part, the term— to comply with facility sexual abuse Sexual abuse includes— indecent, profane or abusive language, prevention and intervention policies (1) Sexual abuse and assault of a or other actions or communications, and procedures. detainee by another detainee; and aimed at coercing or pressuring a detainee to engage in a sexual act; § 115.12 Contracting with non-DHS entities (2) Sexual abuse and assault of a for the confinement of detainees. detainee by a staff member, contractor, (6) Repeated verbal statements or (a) When contracting for the or volunteer. comments of a sexual nature to a confinement of detainees in Sexual abuse of a detainee by another detainee; immigration detention facilities detainee includes any of the following (7) Any display of his or her operated by non-DHS private or public acts by one or more detainees, prisoners, uncovered genitalia, buttocks, or breast agencies or other entities, including inmates, or residents of the facility in in the presence of an inmate, detainee, other government agencies, the agency which the detainee is housed who, by or resident, or shall include in any new contracts, force, coercion, or intimidation, or if the (8) Voyeurism, which is defined as contract renewals, or substantive victim did not consent or was unable to contract modifications the entity’s consent or refuse, engages in or attempts the inappropriate visual surveillance of a detainee for reasons unrelated to obligation to adopt and comply with to engage in: these standards. (1) Contact between the penis and the official duties. Where not conducted for reasons relating to official duties, the (b) Any new contracts, contract vulva or anus and, for purposes of this renewals, or substantive contract paragraph (1), contact involving the following are examples of voyeurism: staring at a detainee who is using a modifications shall provide for agency penis upon penetration, however slight; contract monitoring to ensure that the (2) Contact between the mouth and toilet in his or her cell to perform bodily functions; requiring an inmate detainee contractor is complying with these the penis, vulva, or anus; standards. (3) Penetration, however slight, of the to expose his or her buttocks, genitals, anal or genital opening of another or breasts; or taking images of all or part § 115.13 Detainee supervision and person by a hand or finger or by any of a detainee’s naked body or of a monitoring. object; detainee performing bodily functions. (a) Each facility shall ensure that it (4) Touching of the genitalia, anus, maintains sufficient supervision of groin, breast, inner thighs or buttocks, Subpart A—Standards for Immigration detainees, including through either directly or through the clothing, Detention Facilities Coverage appropriate staffing levels and, where with an intent to abuse, humiliate, § 115.10 Coverage of DHS immigration applicable, video monitoring, to protect harass, degrade or arouse or gratify the detention facilities. detainees against sexual abuse. sexual desire of any person; or (b) Each facility shall develop and (5) Threats, intimidation, or other This subpart covers ICE immigration document comprehensive detainee actions or communications by one or detention facilities. Standards set forth supervision guidelines to determine and more detainees aimed at coercing or in this subpart A are not applicable to meet the facility’s detainee supervision pressuring another detainee to engage in Department of Homeland Security needs, and shall review those guidelines a sexual act. (DHS) holding facilities. at least annually.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13168 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(c) In determining adequate levels of of Health and Human Services Office of records, or, if necessary, learning that detainee supervision and determining Refugee Resettlement facility. information as part of a standard the need for video monitoring, the medical examination that all detainees facility shall take into consideration § 115.15 Limits to cross-gender viewing must undergo as part of intake or other and searches. generally accepted detention and processing procedure conducted in correctional practices, any judicial (a) Searches may be necessary to private, by a medical practitioner. findings of inadequacy, the physical ensure the safety of officers, civilians (j) The agency shall train security staff layout of each facility, the composition and detainees; to detect and secure in proper procedures for conducting of the detainee population, the evidence of criminal activity; and to pat-down searches, including cross- prevalence of substantiated and promote security, safety, and related gender pat-down searches and searches unsubstantiated incidents of sexual interests at immigration detention of transgender and intersex detainees. abuse, the findings and facilities. All pat-down searches shall be recommendations of sexual abuse (b) Cross-gender pat-down searches of conducted in a professional and incident review reports, and any other male detainees shall not be conducted respectful manner, and in the least relevant factors, including but not unless, after reasonable diligence, staff intrusive manner possible, consistent limited to the length of time detainees of the same gender is not available at the with security needs and agency policy, spend in agency custody. time the pat-down search is required or including consideration of officer safety. in exigent circumstances. (d) Each facility shall conduct (c) Cross-gender pat-down searches of § 115.16 Accommodating detainees with frequent unannounced security female detainees shall not be conducted disabilities and detainees who are limited inspections to identify and deter sexual unless in exigent circumstances. English proficient. abuse of detainees. Such inspections (d) All cross-gender pat-down (a) The agency and each facility shall shall be implemented for night as well searches shall be documented. take appropriate steps to ensure that as day shifts. Each facility shall prohibit (e) Cross-gender strip searches or detainees with disabilities (including, staff from alerting others that these cross-gender visual body cavity searches for example, detainees who are deaf or security inspections are occurring, shall not be conducted except in exigent hard of hearing, those who are blind or unless such announcement is related to circumstances, including consideration have low vision, or those who have the legitimate operational functions of of officer safety, or when performed by intellectual, psychiatric, or speech the facility. medical practitioners. Facility staff shall disabilities) have an equal opportunity § 115.14 Juvenile and family detainees. not conduct visual body cavity searches to participate in or benefit from all of juveniles and, instead, shall refer all aspects of the agency’s and facility’s (a) Juveniles shall be detained in the such body cavity searches of juveniles efforts to prevent, detect, and respond to least restrictive setting appropriate to to a medical practitioner. sexual abuse. Such steps shall include, the juvenile’s age and special needs, (f) All strip searches and visual body when necessary to ensure effective provided that such setting is consistent cavity searches shall be documented. communication with detainees who are with the need to protect the juvenile’s (g) Each facility shall implement deaf or hard of hearing, providing access well-being and that of others, as well as policies and procedures that enable to in-person, telephonic, or video with any other laws, regulations, or detainees to shower, perform bodily interpretive services that enable legal requirements. functions, and change clothing without effective, accurate, and impartial (b) The facility shall hold juveniles being viewed by staff of the opposite interpretation, both receptively and apart from adult detainees, minimizing gender, except in exigent circumstances expressively, using any necessary sight, sound, and physical contact, or when such viewing is incidental to specialized vocabulary. In addition, the unless the juvenile is in the presence of routine cell checks or is otherwise agency and facility shall ensure that any an adult member of the family unit, and appropriate in connection with a written materials related to sexual abuse provided there are no safety or security medical examination or monitored are provided in formats or through concerns with the arrangement. bowel movement. Such policies and methods that ensure effective (c) In determining the existence of a procedures shall require staff of the communication with detainees with family unit for detention purposes, the opposite gender to announce their disabilities, including detainees who agency shall seek to obtain reliable presence when entering an area where have intellectual disabilities, limited evidence of a family relationship. detainees are likely to be showering, reading skills, or who are blind or have (d) The agency and facility shall performing bodily functions, or low vision. An agency or facility is not provide priority attention to changing clothing. required to take actions that it can unaccompanied alien children as (h) The facility shall permit detainees demonstrate would result in a defined by 6 U.S.C. 279(g)(2), including in Family Residential Facilities to fundamental alteration in the nature of transfer to a Department of Health and shower, perform bodily functions, and a service, program, or activity, or in Human Services Office of Refugee change clothing without being viewed undue financial and administrative Resettlement facility within 72 hours, by staff, except in exigent circumstances burdens, as those terms are used in except in exceptional circumstances, in or when such viewing is incidental to regulations promulgated under title II of accordance with 8 U.S.C. 1232(b)(3). routine cell checks or is otherwise the Americans with Disabilities Act, 28 (e) If a juvenile who is an appropriate in connection with a CFR 35.164. unaccompanied alien child has been medical examination or monitored (b) The agency and each facility shall convicted as an adult of a crime related bowel movement. take steps to ensure meaningful access to sexual abuse, the agency shall (i) The facility shall not search or to all aspects of the agency’s and provide the facility and the Department physically examine a detainee for the facility’s efforts to prevent, detect, and of Health and Human Services Office of sole purpose of determining the respond to sexual abuse to detainees Refugee Resettlement with the detainee’s genital characteristics. If the who are limited English proficient, releasable information regarding the detainee’s gender is unknown, it may be including steps to provide in-person or conviction(s) to ensure the appropriate determined during conversations with telephonic interpretive services that placement of the alien in a Department the detainee, by reviewing medical enable effective, accurate, and impartial

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13169

interpretation, both receptively and including a criminal background Responsive Planning expressively, using any necessary records check. Upon request by the specialized vocabulary. § 115.21 Evidence protocols and forensic agency, the facility shall submit for the medical examinations. (c) In matters relating to allegations of agency’s approval written sexual abuse, the agency and each documentation showing the detailed (a) To the extent that the agency or facility shall provide in-person or elements of the facility’s background facility is responsible for investigating telephonic interpretation services that check for each staff member and the allegations of sexual abuse involving enable effective, accurate, and impartial facility’s conclusions. The agency shall detainees, it shall follow a uniform interpretation, by someone other than conduct an updated background evidence protocol that maximizes the another detainee, unless the detainee investigation every five years for agency potential for obtaining usable physical expresses a preference for another evidence for administrative proceedings employees who may have contact with detainee to provide interpretation and and criminal prosecutions. The protocol detainees. The facility shall require an the agency determines that such shall be developed in coordination with updated background investigation every interpretation is appropriate and DHS and shall be developmentally consistent with DHS policy. The five years for those facility staff who appropriate for juveniles, where provision of interpreter services by may have contact with detainees and applicable. who work in immigration-only minors, alleged abusers, detainees who (b) The agency and each facility detention facilities. witnessed the alleged abuse, and developing an evidence protocol detainees who have a significant (d) The agency or facility shall also referred to in paragraph (a) of this relationship with the alleged abuser is perform a background investigation section, shall consider how best to not appropriate in matters relating to before enlisting the services of any utilize available community resources allegations of sexual abuse. contractor who may have contact with and services to provide valuable § 115.17 Hiring and promotion decisions. detainees. Upon request by the agency, expertise and support in the areas of the facility shall submit for the agency’s crisis intervention and counseling to (a) An agency or facility shall not hire most appropriately address victims’ or promote anyone who may have approval written documentation contact with detainees, and shall not showing the detailed elements of the needs. Each facility shall establish enlist the services of any contractor or facility’s background check for each procedures to make available, to the full volunteer who may have contact with contractor and the facility’s conclusions. extent possible, outside victim services detainees, who has engaged in sexual (e) Material omissions regarding such following incidents of sexual abuse; the abuse in a prison, jail, holding facility, misconduct, or the provision of facility shall attempt to make available to the victim a victim advocate from a community confinement facility, materially false information, shall be rape crisis center. If a rape crisis center juvenile facility, or other institution (as grounds for termination or withdrawal is not available to provide victim defined in 42 U.S.C. 1997); who has of an offer of employment, as advocate services, the agency shall been convicted of engaging or appropriate. attempting to engage in sexual activity provide these services by making (f) Unless prohibited by law, the facilitated by force, overt or implied available a qualified staff member from agency shall provide information on threats of force, or coercion, or if the a community-based organization, or a substantiated allegations of sexual abuse victim did not consent or was unable to qualified agency staff member. A consent or refuse; or who has been involving a former employee upon qualified agency staff member or a civilly or administratively adjudicated receiving a request from an institutional qualified community-based staff to have engaged in such activity. employer for whom such employee has member means an individual who has (b) An agency or facility considering applied to work. received education concerning sexual hiring or promoting staff shall ask all (g) In the event the agency contracts assault and forensic examination issues applicants who may have contact with with a facility for the confinement of in general. The outside or internal detainees directly about previous detainees, the requirements of this victim advocate shall provide emotional support, crisis intervention, misconduct described in paragraph (a) section otherwise applicable to the information, and referrals. of this section, in written applications agency also apply to the facility and its or interviews for hiring or promotions staff. (c) Where evidentiarily or medically and in any interviews or written self- appropriate, at no cost to the detainee, evaluations conducted as part of § 115.18 Upgrades to facilities and and only with the detainee’s consent, reviews of current employees. Agencies technologies. the facility shall arrange for an alleged victim detainee to undergo a forensic and facilities shall also impose upon (a) When designing or acquiring any medical examination by qualified health employees a continuing affirmative duty new facility and in planning any care personnel, including a Sexual to disclose any such misconduct. The substantial expansion or modification of agency, consistent with law, shall make Assault Forensic Examiner (SAFE) or existing facilities, the facility or agency, Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) its best efforts to contact all prior as appropriate, shall consider the effect institutional employers of an applicant where practicable. If SAFEs or SANEs of the design, acquisition, expansion, or cannot be made available, the for employment, to obtain information modification upon their ability to on substantiated allegations of sexual examination can be performed by other protect detainees from sexual abuse. abuse or any resignation during a qualified health care personnel. pending investigation of alleged sexual (b) When installing or updating a (d) As requested by a victim, the abuse. video monitoring system, electronic presence of his or her outside or internal (c) Before hiring new staff who may surveillance system, or other monitoring victim advocate, including any available have contact with detainees, the agency technology in an immigration detention victim advocacy services offered by a or facility shall conduct a background facility, the facility or agency, as hospital conducting a forensic exam, investigation to determine whether the appropriate, shall consider how such shall be allowed for support during a candidate for hire is suitable for technology may enhance their ability to forensic exam and investigatory employment with the facility or agency, protect detainees from sexual abuse. interviews.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13170 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(e) To the extent that the agency is not Inspector General, as well as to the (c) The agency and each facility shall responsible for investigating allegations appropriate ICE Field Office Director, document that staff that may have of sexual abuse, the agency or the and to the local government entity or contact with immigration facility facility shall request that the contractor that owns or operates the detainees have completed the training. investigating agency follow the facility. If the incident is potentially requirements of paragraphs (a) through criminal, the facility shall ensure that it § 115.32 Other training. (d) of this section. is promptly referred to an appropriate (a) The facility shall ensure that all law enforcement agency having volunteers and other contractors (as § 115.22 Policies to ensure investigation of jurisdiction for investigation. defined in paragraph (d) of this section) allegations and appropriate agency who have contact with detainees have oversight. (g) The agency shall ensure that all allegations of detainee sexual abuse are been trained on their responsibilities (a) The agency shall establish an promptly reported to the PSA under the agency’s and the facility’s agency protocol, and shall require each Coordinator and to the appropriate sexual abuse prevention, detection, facility to establish a facility protocol, to offices within the agency and within intervention and response policies and ensure that each allegation of sexual DHS to ensure appropriate oversight of procedures. abuse is investigated by the agency or the investigation. (b) The level and type of training facility, or referred to an appropriate (h) The agency shall ensure that any provided to volunteers and other investigative authority. The agency shall alleged detainee victim of sexual abuse contractors shall be based on the ensure that an administrative or that is criminal in nature is provided services they provide and level of criminal investigation is completed for timely access to U nonimmigrant status contact they have with detainees, but all all allegations of sexual abuse. information. volunteers and other contractors who (b) The agency shall ensure that the have contact with detainees shall be agency and facility protocols required Training and Education notified of the agency’s and the facility’s by paragraph (a) of this section, include § 115.31 Staff training. zero-tolerance policies regarding sexual a description of responsibilities of the abuse and informed how to report such agency, the facility, and any other (a) The agency shall train, or require incidents. investigating entities; and require the the training of, all employees who may (c) Each facility shall receive and documentation and maintenance, for at have contact with immigration maintain written confirmation that least five years, of all reports and detainees, and all facility staff, to be volunteers and other contractors who referrals of allegations of sexual abuse. able to fulfill their responsibilities have contact with immigration facility (c) The agency shall post its protocols under this part, including training on: detainees have completed the training. on its Web site; each facility shall also (1) The agency’s and the facility’s (d) In this section, the term other post its protocols on its Web site, if it zero-tolerance policies for all forms of contractor means a person who provides has one, or otherwise make the protocol sexual abuse; services on a non-recurring basis to the available to the public. (2) The right of detainees and staff to facility pursuant to a contractual (d) Each facility protocol shall ensure be free from sexual abuse, and from agreement with the agency or facility. that all allegations are promptly retaliation for reporting sexual abuse; reported to the agency as described in (3) Definitions and examples of § 115.33 Detainee education. paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section, prohibited and illegal sexual behavior; (a) During the intake process, each and, unless the allegation does not (4) Recognition of situations where facility shall ensure that the detainee involve potentially criminal behavior, sexual abuse may occur; orientation program notifies and are promptly referred for investigation (5) Recognition of physical, informs detainees about the agency’s to an appropriate law enforcement behavioral, and emotional signs of and the facility’s zero-tolerance policies agency with the legal authority to sexual abuse, and methods of for all forms of sexual abuse and conduct criminal investigations. A preventing and responding to such includes (at a minimum) instruction on: facility may separately, and in addition occurrences; (1) Prevention and intervention to the above reports and referrals, (6) How to avoid inappropriate strategies; conduct its own investigation. relationships with detainees; (2) Definitions and examples of (e) When a detainee, prisoner, inmate, (7) How to communicate effectively detainee-on-detainee sexual abuse, staff- or resident of the facility in which an and professionally with detainees, on-detainee sexual abuse and coercive alleged detainee victim is housed is including lesbian, gay, bisexual, sexual activity; alleged to be the perpetrator of detainee transgender, intersex, or gender (3) Explanation of methods for sexual abuse, the facility shall ensure nonconforming detainees; reporting sexual abuse, including to any that the incident is promptly reported to (8) Procedures for reporting staff member, including a staff member the Joint Intake Center, the ICE Office of knowledge or suspicion of sexual abuse; other than an immediate point-of- Professional Responsibility or the DHS and contact line officer (e.g., the compliance Office of Inspector General, as well as (9) The requirement to limit reporting manager or a mental health specialist), the appropriate ICE Field Office of sexual abuse to personnel with a the DHS Office of Inspector General, Director, and, if it is potentially need-to-know in order to make and the Joint Intake Center; criminal, referred to an appropriate law decisions concerning the victim’s (4) Information about self-protection enforcement agency having jurisdiction welfare and for law enforcement or and indicators of sexual abuse; for investigation. investigative purposes. (5) Prohibition against retaliation, (f) When a staff member, contractor, (b) All current facility staff, and all including an explanation that reporting or volunteer is alleged to be the agency employees who may have sexual abuse shall not negatively impact perpetrator of detainee sexual abuse, the contact with immigration detention the detainee’s immigration proceedings; facility shall ensure that the incident is facility detainees, shall be trained and promptly reported to the Joint Intake within one year of May 6, 2014, and the (6) The right of a detainee who has Center, the ICE Office of Professional agency or facility shall provide refresher been subjected to sexual abuse to Responsibility or the DHS Office of information every two years. receive treatment and counseling.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13171

(b) Each facility shall provide the (3) How and to whom to report (e) The facility shall reassess each detainee notification, orientation, and allegations or suspicions of sexual detainee’s risk of victimization or instruction in formats accessible to all abuse, and abusiveness between 60 and 90 days detainees, including those who are (4) How to preserve physical evidence from the date of initial assessment, and limited English proficient, deaf, visually of sexual abuse. If medical staff at any other time when warranted based impaired or otherwise disabled, as well employed by the agency conduct upon the receipt of additional, relevant as to detainees who have limited forensic examinations, such medical information or following an incident of reading skills. staff shall receive the appropriate abuse or victimization. (c) The facility shall maintain training to conduct such examinations. (f) Detainees shall not be disciplined documentation of detainee participation (c) The agency shall review and for refusing to answer, or for not in the intake process orientation. approve the facility’s policy and disclosing complete information in (d) Each facility shall post on all procedures to ensure that facility response to, questions asked pursuant to housing unit bulletin boards the medical staff is trained in procedures for paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(7), (c)(8), or (c)(9) following notices: examining and treating victims of sexual of this section. (1) The DHS-prescribed sexual assault abuse, in facilities where medical staff (g) The facility shall implement awareness notice; may be assigned these activities. appropriate controls on the dissemination within the facility of (2) The name of the Prevention of Assessment for Risk of Sexual responses to questions asked pursuant Sexual Abuse Compliance Manager; and Victimization and Abusiveness (3) The name of local organizations to this standard in order to ensure that that can assist detainees who have been § 115.41 Assessment for risk of sensitive information is not exploited to victims of sexual abuse. victimization and abusiveness. the detainee’s detriment by staff or other (e) The facility shall make available (a) The facility shall assess all detainees or inmates. and distribute the DHS-prescribed detainees on intake to identify those § 115.42 Use of assessment information. ‘‘Sexual Assault Awareness likely to be sexual aggressors or sexual Information’’ pamphlet. abuse victims and shall house detainees (a) The facility shall use the (f) Information about reporting sexual to prevent sexual abuse, taking information from the risk assessment abuse shall be included in the agency necessary steps to mitigate any such under § 115.41 of this part to inform Detainee Handbook made available to danger. Each new arrival shall be kept assignment of detainees to housing, all immigration detention facility separate from the general population recreation and other activities, and detainees. until he/she is classified and may be voluntary work. The agency shall make housed accordingly. individualized determinations about § 115.34 Specialized training: how to ensure the safety of each Investigations. (b) The initial classification process and initial housing assignment should detainee. (a) In addition to the general training be completed within twelve hours of (b) When making assessment and provided to all facility staff and admission to the facility. housing decisions for a transgender or employees pursuant to § 115.31, the (c) The facility shall also consider, to intersex detainee, the facility shall agency or facility shall provide the extent that the information is consider the detainee’s gender self- specialized training on sexual abuse and available, the following criteria to assess identification and an assessment of the effective cross-agency coordination to detainees for risk of sexual effects of placement on the detainee’s agency or facility investigators, victimization: health and safety. The facility shall respectively, who conduct (1) Whether the detainee has a mental, consult a medical or mental health investigations into allegations of sexual physical, or developmental disability; professional as soon as practicable on abuse at immigration detention (2) The age of the detainee; this assessment. The facility should not facilities. All investigations into alleged (3) The physical build and appearance base placement decisions of transgender sexual abuse must be conducted by of the detainee; or intersex detainees solely on the qualified investigators. (4) Whether the detainee has identity documents or physical anatomy (b) The agency and facility must previously been incarcerated or of the detainee; a detainee’s self- maintain written documentation detained; identification of his/her gender and self- verifying specialized training provided (5) The nature of the detainee’s assessment of safety needs shall always to investigators pursuant to this section. criminal history; be taken into consideration as well. The (6) Whether the detainee has any facility’s placement of a transgender or § 115.35 Specialized training: Medical and convictions for sex offenses against an intersex detainee shall be consistent mental health care. adult or child; with the safety and security (a) The agency shall provide (7) Whether the detainee has self- considerations of the facility, and specialized training to DHS or agency identified as gay, lesbian, bisexual, placement and programming employees who serve as full- and part- transgender, intersex, or gender assignments for each transgender or time medical practitioners or full- and nonconforming; intersex detainee shall be reassessed at part-time mental health practitioners in (8) Whether the detainee has self- least twice each year to review any immigration detention facilities where identified as having previously threats to safety experienced by the medical and mental health care is experienced sexual victimization; and detainee. provided. (9) The detainee’s own concerns about (c) When operationally feasible, (b) The training required by this his or her physical safety. transgender and intersex detainees shall section shall cover, at a minimum, the (d) The initial screening shall be given the opportunity to shower following topics: consider prior acts of sexual abuse, prior separately from other detainees. (1) How to detect and assess signs of convictions for violent offenses, and sexual abuse; history of prior institutional violence or § 115.43 Protective custody. (2) How to respond effectively and sexual abuse, as known to the facility, (a) The facility shall develop and professionally to victims of sexual in assessing detainees for risk of being follow written procedures consistent abuse, sexually abusive. with the standards in this subpart for

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13172 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

each facility governing the management housing option at another facility or Office Director at the end of the of its administrative segregation unit. other appropriate custodial options; and grievance process. These procedures, which should be (3) Whether the placement is only as (f) To prepare a grievance, a detainee developed in consultation with the ICE a last resort and when no other viable may obtain assistance from another Enforcement and Removal Operations housing options exist. detainee, the housing officer or other Field Office Director having jurisdiction facility staff, family members, or legal for the facility, must document detailed Reporting representatives. Staff shall take reasons for placement of an individual § 115.51 Detainee reporting. in administrative segregation on the reasonable steps to expedite requests for (a) The agency and each facility shall assistance from these other parties. basis of a vulnerability to sexual abuse develop policies and procedures to or assault. ensure that detainees have multiple § 115.53 Detainee access to outside (b) Use of administrative segregation ways to privately report sexual abuse, confidential support services. by facilities to protect detainees retaliation for reporting sexual abuse, or vulnerable to sexual abuse or assault (a) Each facility shall utilize available staff neglect or violations of shall be restricted to those instances community resources and services to responsibilities that may have where reasonable efforts have been provide valuable expertise and support contributed to such incidents. The made to provide appropriate housing in the areas of crisis intervention, agency and each facility shall also and shall be made for the least amount counseling, investigation and the provide instructions on how detainees of time practicable, and when no other prosecution of sexual abuse perpetrators may contact their consular official, the viable housing options exist, as a last to most appropriately address victims’ DHS Office of the Inspector General or, resort. The facility should assign needs. The facility shall maintain or as appropriate, another designated detainees vulnerable to sexual abuse or office, to confidentially and, if desired, attempt to enter into memoranda of assault to administrative segregation for anonymously, report these incidents. understanding or other agreements with their protection until an alternative (b) The agency shall also provide, and community service providers or, if local means of separation from likely abusers the facility shall inform the detainees of, providers are not available, with can be arranged, and such an at least one way for detainees to report national organizations that provide legal assignment shall not ordinarily exceed a sexual abuse to a public or private entity advocacy and confidential emotional period of 30 days. or office that is not part of the agency, support services for immigrant victims (c) Facilities that place vulnerable of crime. detainees in administrative segregation and that is able to receive and for protective custody shall provide immediately forward detainee reports of (b) Each facility’s written policies those detainees access to programs, sexual abuse to agency officials, shall establish procedures to include visitation, counsel and other services allowing the detainee to remain outside agencies in the facility’s sexual available to the general population to anonymous upon request. abuse prevention and intervention the maximum extent practicable. (c) Facility policies and procedures protocols, if such resources are (d) Facilities shall implement written shall include provisions for staff to available. accept reports made verbally, in writing, procedures for the regular review of all (c) Each facility shall make available anonymously, and from third parties vulnerable detainees placed in to detainees information about local administrative segregation for their and to promptly document any verbal reports. organizations that can assist detainees protection, as follows: who have been victims of sexual abuse, (1) A supervisory staff member shall § 115.52 Grievances. including mailing addresses and conduct a review within 72 hours of the telephone numbers (including toll-free detainee’s placement in administrative (a) The facility shall permit a detainee hotline numbers where available). If no segregation to determine whether to file a formal grievance related to such local organizations exist, the segregation is still warranted; and sexual abuse at any time during, after, (2) A supervisory staff member shall or in lieu of lodging an informal facility shall make available the same conduct, at a minimum, an identical grievance or complaint. information about national review after the detainee has spent (b) The facility shall not impose a organizations. The facility shall enable seven days in administrative time limit on when a detainee may reasonable communication between segregation, and every week thereafter submit a grievance regarding an detainees and these organizations and for the first 30 days, and every 10 days allegation of sexual abuse. agencies, in as confidential a manner as thereafter. (c) The facility shall implement possible. (e) Facilities shall notify the written procedures for identifying and (d) Each facility shall inform handling time-sensitive grievances that appropriate ICE Field Office Director no detainees, prior to giving them access to involve an immediate threat to detainee later than 72 hours after the initial outside resources, of the extent to which health, safety, or welfare related to placement into segregation, whenever a such communications will be monitored detainee has been placed in sexual abuse. (d) Facility staff shall bring medical and the extent to which reports of abuse administrative segregation on the basis will be forwarded to authorities in of a vulnerability to sexual abuse or emergencies to the immediate attention of proper medical personnel for further accordance with mandatory reporting assault. laws. (f) Upon receiving notification assessment. pursuant to paragraph (e) of this section, (e) The facility shall issue a decision § 115.54 Third-party reporting. the ICE Field Office Director shall on the grievance within five days of review the placement and consider: receipt and shall respond to an appeal Each facility shall establish a method (1) Whether continued placement in of the grievance decision within 30 to receive third-party reports of sexual administrative segregation is warranted; days. Facilities shall send all grievances abuse in its immigration detention (2) Whether any alternatives are related to sexual abuse and the facility’s facilities and shall make available to the available and appropriate, such as decisions with respect to such public information on how to report placing the detainee in a less restrictive grievances to the appropriate ICE Field sexual abuse on behalf of a detainee.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13173

Official Response Following a Detainee (c) The agency or facility shall facility of the incident and the victim’s Report document that it has provided such potential need for medical or social notification. services, unless the victim requests § 115.61 Staff reporting duties. (d) The agency or facility office that otherwise. (a) The agency and each facility shall receives such notification, to the extent require all staff to report immediately the facility is covered by this subpart, § 115.66 Protection of detainees from contact with alleged abusers. and according to agency policy any shall ensure that the allegation is knowledge, suspicion, or information referred for investigation in accordance Staff, contractors, and volunteers regarding an incident of sexual abuse with these standards and reported to the suspected of perpetrating sexual abuse that occurred in a facility; retaliation appropriate ICE Field Office Director. shall be removed from all duties against detainees or staff who reported requiring detainee contact pending the or participated in an investigation about § 115.64 Responder duties. outcome of an investigation. such an incident; and any staff neglect (a) Upon learning of an allegation that § 115.67 Agency protection against or violation of responsibilities that may a detainee was sexually abused, the first retaliation. have contributed to an incident or security staff member to respond to the (a) Staff, contractors, and volunteers, retaliation. The agency shall review and report, or his or her supervisor, shall be and immigration detention facility approve facility policies and procedures required to: detainees, shall not retaliate against any and shall ensure that the facility (1) Separate the alleged victim and person, including a detainee, who specifies appropriate reporting abuser; reports, complains about, or participates procedures, including a method by (2) Preserve and protect, to the in an investigation into an allegation of which staff can report outside of the greatest extent possible, any crime scene sexual abuse, or for participating in chain of command. until appropriate steps can be taken to sexual activity as a result of force, (b) Staff members who become aware collect any evidence; coercion, threats, or fear of force. of alleged sexual abuse shall (3) If the abuse occurred within a time (b) The agency shall employ multiple immediately follow the reporting period that still allows for the collection protection measures, such as housing requirements set forth in the agency’s of physical evidence, request the alleged changes, removal of alleged staff or and facility’s written policies and victim not to take any actions that could detainee abusers from contact with procedures. destroy physical evidence, including, as victims, and emotional support services (c) Apart from such reporting, staff appropriate, washing, brushing teeth, for detainees or staff who fear retaliation shall not reveal any information related changing clothes, urinating, defecating, for reporting sexual abuse or for to a sexual abuse report to anyone other smoking, drinking, or eating; and cooperating with investigations. than to the extent necessary to help (4) If the sexual abuse occurred within (c) For at least 90 days following a protect the safety of the victim or a time period that still allows for the report of sexual abuse, the agency and prevent further victimization of other collection of physical evidence, ensure facility shall monitor to see if there are detainees or staff in the facility, or to that the alleged abuser does not take any facts that may suggest possible make medical treatment, investigation, actions that could destroy physical retaliation by detainees or staff, and law enforcement, or other security and evidence, including, as appropriate, shall act promptly to remedy any such management decisions. washing, brushing teeth, changing retaliation. Items the agency should (d) If the alleged victim is under the clothes, urinating, defecating, smoking, monitor include any detainee age of 18 or considered a vulnerable drinking, or eating. disciplinary reports, housing or program adult under a State or local vulnerable (b) If the first staff responder is not a changes, or negative performance persons statute, the agency shall report security staff member, the responder reviews or reassignments of staff. DHS the allegation to the designated State or shall be required to request that the shall continue such monitoring beyond local services agency under applicable alleged victim not take any actions that 90 days if the initial monitoring mandatory reporting laws. could destroy physical evidence and indicates a continuing need. then notify security staff. § 115.62 Protection duties. § 115.68 Post-allegation protective If an agency employee or facility staff § 115.65 Coordinated response. custody. member has a reasonable belief that a (a) Each facility shall develop a (a) The facility shall take care to place detainee is subject to a substantial risk written institutional plan to coordinate detainee victims of sexual abuse in a of imminent sexual abuse, he or she actions taken by staff first responders, supportive environment that represents shall take immediate action to protect medical and mental health practitioners, the least restrictive housing option the detainee. investigators, and facility leadership in possible (e.g., protective custody), response to an incident of sexual abuse. subject to the requirements of § 115.43. § 115.63 Reporting to other confinement (b) Each facility shall use a (b) Detainee victims shall not be held facilities. coordinated, multidisciplinary team for longer than five days in any type of (a) Upon receiving an allegation that approach to responding to sexual abuse. administrative segregation, except in a detainee was sexually abused while (c) If a victim of sexual abuse is highly unusual circumstances or at the confined at another facility, the agency transferred between facilities covered by request of the detainee. or facility whose staff received the subpart A or B of this part, the sending (c) A detainee victim who is in allegation shall notify the appropriate facility shall, as permitted by law, protective custody after having been office of the agency or the administrator inform the receiving facility of the subjected to sexual abuse shall not be of the facility where the alleged abuse incident and the victim’s potential need returned to the general population until occurred. for medical or social services. completion of a proper re-assessment, (b) The notification provided in (d) If a victim is transferred from a taking into consideration any increased paragraph (a) of this section shall be DHS immigration detention facility to a vulnerability of the detainee as a result provided as soon as possible, but no facility not covered by paragraph (c) of of the sexual abuse. later than 72 hours after receiving the this section, the sending facility shall, as (d) Facilities shall notify the allegation. permitted by law, inform the receiving appropriate ICE Field Office Director

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13174 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

whenever a detainee victim has been shall include a description of the position and from the Federal service, held in administrative segregation for 72 physical and testimonial evidence, the when there is a substantiated allegation hours. reasoning behind credibility of sexual abuse, or when there has been (e) Upon receiving notification that a assessments, and investigative facts and a violation of agency sexual abuse rules, detainee victim has been held in findings; and policies, or standards. Removal from administrative segregation, the ICE Field (vii) Retention of such reports for as their position and from the Federal Office Director shall review the long as the alleged abuser is detained or service is the presumptive disciplinary placement and consider: employed by the agency or facility, plus sanction for staff who have engaged in (1) Whether the placement is only as five years. or attempted or threatened to engage in a last resort and when no other viable (2) Such procedures shall govern the sexual abuse, as defined under the housing options exist; and coordination and sequencing of the two definition of sexual abuse of a detainee (2) In cases where the detainee has types of investigations, in accordance by a staff member, contractor, or been held in administrative segregation with paragraph (b) of this section, to volunteer, paragraphs (1)–(4) and (7)–(8) for longer than 5 days, whether the ensure that the criminal investigation is of the definition of ‘‘sexual abuse of a placement is justified by highly unusual not compromised by an internal detainee by a staff member, contractor, circumstances or at the detainee’s administrative investigation. or volunteer’’ in § 115.6. request. (d) The agency shall review and (c) Each facility shall report all approve the facility policy and Investigations removals or resignations in lieu of procedures for coordination and removal for violations of agency or § 115.71 Criminal and administrative conduct of internal administrative facility sexual abuse policies to investigations. investigations with the assigned appropriate law enforcement agencies, (a) If the facility has responsibility for criminal investigative entity to ensure unless the activity was clearly not investigating allegations of sexual abuse, non-interference with criminal criminal. all investigations into alleged sexual investigations. (d) Each facility shall make reasonable abuse must be prompt, thorough, (e) The departure of the alleged abuser efforts to report removals or resignations objective, and conducted by specially or victim from the employment or in lieu of removal for violations of trained, qualified investigators. control of the facility or agency shall not agency or facility sexual abuse policies (b) Upon conclusion of a criminal provide a basis for terminating an to any relevant licensing bodies, to the investigation where the allegation was investigation. extent known. substantiated, an administrative (f) When outside agencies investigate investigation shall be conducted. Upon sexual abuse, the facility shall cooperate § 115.77 Corrective action for contractors conclusion of a criminal investigation with outside investigators and shall and volunteers. where the allegation was endeavor to remain informed about the (a) Any contractor or volunteer who unsubstantiated, the facility shall progress of the investigation. has engaged in sexual abuse shall be review any available completed prohibited from contact with detainees. § 115.72 Evidentiary standard for Each facility shall make reasonable criminal investigation reports to administrative investigations. determine whether an administrative efforts to report to any relevant licensing When an administrative investigation investigation is necessary or body, to the extent known, incidents of is undertaken, the agency shall impose appropriate. Administrative substantiated sexual abuse by a no standard higher than a investigations shall be conducted after contractor or volunteer. Such incidents preponderance of the evidence in consultation with the appropriate shall also be reported to law determining whether allegations of investigative office within DHS, and the enforcement agencies, unless the sexual abuse are substantiated. assigned criminal investigative entity. activity was clearly not criminal. (c)(1) The facility shall develop § 115.73 Reporting to detainees. (b) Contractors and volunteers written procedures for administrative The agency shall, when the detainee suspected of perpetrating sexual abuse investigations, including provisions is still in immigration detention, or shall be removed from all duties requiring: where otherwise feasible, following an requiring detainee contact pending the (i) Preservation of direct and investigation into a detainee’s allegation outcome of an investigation. (c) The facility shall take appropriate circumstantial evidence, including any of sexual abuse, notify the detainee as remedial measures, and shall consider available physical and DNA evidence to the result of the investigation and any whether to prohibit further contact with and any available electronic monitoring responsive action taken. data; detainees by contractors or volunteers (ii) Interviewing alleged victims, Discipline who have not engaged in sexual abuse, suspected perpetrators, and witnesses; but have violated other provisions (iii) Reviewing prior complaints and § 115.76 Disciplinary sanctions for staff. within these standards. reports of sexual abuse involving the (a) Staff shall be subject to suspected perpetrator; disciplinary or adverse action up to and § 115.78 Disciplinary sanctions for (iv) Assessment of the credibility of including removal from their position detainees. an alleged victim, suspect, or witness, and the Federal service for substantiated (a) Each facility shall subject a without regard to the individual’s status allegations of sexual abuse or for detainee to disciplinary sanctions as detainee, staff, or employee, and violating agency or facility sexual abuse pursuant to a formal disciplinary without requiring any detainee who policies. process following an administrative or alleges sexual abuse to submit to a (b) The agency shall review and criminal finding that the detainee polygraph; approve facility policies and procedures engaged in sexual abuse. (v) An effort to determine whether regarding disciplinary or adverse (b) At all steps in the disciplinary actions or failures to act at the facility actions for staff and shall ensure that the process provided in paragraph (a), any contributed to the abuse; and facility policy and procedures specify sanctions imposed shall be (vi) Documentation of each disciplinary or adverse actions for staff, commensurate with the severity of the investigation by written report, which up to and including removal from their committed prohibited act and intended

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13175

to encourage the detainee to conform § 115.83 Ongoing medical and mental motivated by race; ethnicity; gender with rules and regulations in the future. health care for sexual abuse victims and identity; lesbian, gay, bisexual, abusers. (c) Each facility holding detainees in transgender, or intersex identification, custody shall have a detainee (a) Each facility shall offer medical status, or perceived status; or gang disciplinary system with progressive and mental health evaluation and, as affiliation; or was motivated or appropriate, treatment to all detainees levels of reviews, appeals, procedures, otherwise caused by other group who have been victimized by sexual and documentation procedure. dynamics at the facility. abuse while in immigration detention. (c) Each facility shall conduct an (d) The disciplinary process shall (b) The evaluation and treatment of annual review of all sexual abuse consider whether a detainee’s mental such victims shall include, as investigations and resulting incident disabilities or mental illness contributed appropriate, follow-up services, reviews to assess and improve sexual to his or her behavior when determining treatment plans, and, when necessary, abuse intervention, prevention and what type of sanction, if any, should be referrals for continued care following response efforts. If the facility has not imposed. their transfer to, or placement in, other had any reports of sexual abuse during (e) The facility shall not discipline a facilities, or their release from custody. the annual reporting period, then the detainee for sexual contact with staff (c) The facility shall provide such facility shall prepare a negative report. unless there is a finding that the staff victims with medical and mental health The results and findings of the annual member did not consent to such contact. services consistent with the community review shall be provided to the facility level of care. administrator, Field Office Director or (f) For the purpose of disciplinary (d) Detainee victims of sexually his or her designee, and the agency PSA action, a report of sexual abuse made in abusive vaginal penetration by a male Coordinator. good faith based upon a reasonable abuser while incarcerated shall be belief that the alleged conduct occurred § 115.87 Data collection. offered pregnancy tests. If pregnancy shall not constitute falsely reporting an results from an instance of sexual abuse, (a) Each facility shall maintain in a incident or lying, even if an the victim shall receive timely and secure area all case records associated investigation does not establish comprehensive information about with claims of sexual abuse, including evidence sufficient to substantiate the lawful pregnancy-related medical incident reports, investigative reports, allegation. services and timely access to all lawful offender information, case disposition, medical and counseling evaluation Medical and Mental Care pregnancy-related medical services. (e) Detainee victims of sexual abuse findings, and recommendations for post- § 115.81 Medical and mental health while detained shall be offered tests for release treatment, if necessary, and/or assessments; history of sexual abuse. sexually transmitted infections as counseling in accordance with these medically appropriate. standards and applicable agency (a) If the assessment pursuant to policies, and in accordance with § 115.41 indicates that a detainee has (f) Treatment services shall be provided to the victim without financial established schedules. The DHS Office experienced prior sexual victimization of Inspector General shall maintain the or perpetrated sexual abuse, staff shall, cost and regardless of whether the victim names the abuser or cooperates official investigative file related to as appropriate, ensure that the detainee claims of sexual abuse investigated by is immediately referred to a qualified with any investigation arising out of the incident. the DHS Office of Inspector General. medical or mental health practitioner (b) On an ongoing basis, the PSA (g) The facility shall attempt to for medical and/or mental health Coordinator shall work with relevant conduct a mental health evaluation of follow-up as appropriate. facility PSA Compliance Managers and all known detainee-on-detainee abusers DHS entities to share data regarding (b) When a referral for medical follow- within 60 days of learning of such abuse effective agency response methods to up is initiated, the detainee shall receive history and offer treatment when sexual abuse. a health evaluation no later than two deemed appropriate by mental health (c) On a regular basis, the PSA working days from the date of practitioners. assessment. Coordinator shall prepare a report for (c) When a referral for mental health Data Collection and Review ICE leadership compiling information follow-up is initiated, the detainee shall received about all incidents or § 115.86 Sexual abuse incident reviews. allegations of sexual abuse of detainees receive a mental health evaluation no (a) Each facility shall conduct a sexual later than 72 hours after the referral. in immigration detention during the abuse incident review at the conclusion period covered by the report, as well as § 115.82 Access to emergency medical of every investigation of sexual abuse ongoing investigations and other and mental health services. and, where the allegation was not pending cases. determined to be unfounded, prepare a (d) On an annual basis, the PSA (a) Detainee victims of sexual abuse written report within 30 days of the Coordinator shall aggregate, in a manner shall have timely, unimpeded access to conclusion of the investigation that will facilitate the agency’s ability to emergency medical treatment and crisis recommending whether the allegation or detect possible patterns and help intervention services, including investigation indicates that a change in prevent future incidents, the incident- emergency contraception and sexually policy or practice could better prevent, based sexual abuse data, including the transmitted infections prophylaxis, in detect, or respond to sexual abuse. The number of reported sexual abuse accordance with professionally accepted facility shall implement the allegations determined to be standards of care. recommendations for improvement, or substantiated, unsubstantiated, or (b) Emergency medical treatment shall document its reasons for not doing unfounded, or for which investigation is services provided to the victim shall be so in a written response. Both the report ongoing, and for each incident found to without financial cost and regardless of and response shall be forwarded to the be substantiated, information whether the victim names the abuser or agency PSA Coordinator. concerning: cooperates with any investigation (b) The review team shall consider (1) The date, time, location, and arising out of the incident. whether the incident or allegation was nature of the incident;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13176 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(2) The demographic background of its direct control and from any private Prevention Planning the victim and perpetrator (including agencies with which it contracts citizenship, age, gender, and whether § 115.111 Zero tolerance of sexual abuse; available to the public at least annually Prevention of Sexual Assault Coordinator. either has self-identified as gay, lesbian, on its Web site consistent with existing (a) The agency shall have a written bisexual, transgender, intersex, or agency information disclosure policies policy mandating zero tolerance toward gender nonconforming); and processes. (3) The reporting timeline for the all forms of sexual abuse and outlining (c) Before making aggregated sexual incident (including the name of the agency’s approach to preventing, abuse data publicly available, the individual who reported the incident, detecting, and responding to such and the date and time the report was agency shall remove all personal conduct. (b) The agency shall employ or received); identifiers. designate an upper-level, agency-wide (4) Any injuries sustained by the (d) The agency shall maintain sexual PSA Coordinator with sufficient time victim; abuse data collected pursuant to and authority to develop, implement, (5) Post-report follow up responses § 115.87 for at least 10 years after the and oversee agency efforts to comply and action taken by the facility (e.g., date of the initial collection unless with these standards in all of its holding housing placement/custody Federal, State, or local law requires facilities. classification, medical examination, otherwise. mental health counseling, etc.); and § 115.112 Contracting with non-DHS (6) Any sanctions imposed on the Audits and Compliance entities for the confinement of detainees. perpetrator. § 115.93 Audits of standards. (a) An agency that contracts for the (e) Upon request, the agency shall confinement of detainees in holding provide all data described in this (a) During the three-year period facilities operated by non-DHS private section from the previous calendar year starting on July 6. 2015, and during each or public agencies or other entities, to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil three-year period thereafter, the agency including other government agencies, Liberties no later than June 30. shall ensure that each immigration shall include in any new contracts, detention facility that has adopted these contract renewals, or substantive § 115.88 Data review for corrective action. standards is audited at least once. contract modifications the entity’s (a) The agency shall review data obligation to adopt and comply with collected and aggregated pursuant to (b) The agency may require an expedited audit if the agency has reason these standards. § 115.87 of this part in order to assess (b) Any new contracts, contract to believe that a particular facility may and improve the effectiveness of its renewals, or substantive contract be experiencing problems relating to sexual abuse prevention, detection, and modifications shall provide for agency response policies, practices, and sexual abuse. The agency may also contract monitoring to ensure that the training, including by: include referrals to resources that may contractor is complying with these (1) Identifying problem areas; assist the facility with PREA-related standards. (2) Taking corrective action on an issues. (c) To the extent an agency contracts ongoing basis; and (c) Audits under this section shall be for confinement of holding facility (3) Preparing an annual report of its conducted pursuant to §§ 115.201 detainees, all rules in this subpart that findings and corrective actions for each through 115.205. apply to the agency shall apply to the immigration detention facility, as well contractor, and all rules that apply to as the agency as a whole. (d) Audits under this section shall be coordinated by the agency with the DHS staff or employees shall apply to (b) Such report shall include a contractor staff. comparison of the current year’s data Office for Civil Rights and Civil and corrective actions with those from Liberties, which may request an § 115.113 Detainee supervision and prior years and shall provide an expedited audit if it has reason to monitoring. assessment of the agency’s progress in believe that an expedited audit is (a) The agency shall ensure that each preventing, detecting, and responding to appropriate. facility maintains sufficient supervision of detainees, including through sexual abuse. Additional Provisions in Agency appropriate staffing levels and, where (c) The agency’s report shall be Policies approved by the agency head and made applicable, video monitoring, to protect readily available to the public through § 115.95 Additional provisions in agency detainees against sexual abuse. its Web site. policies. (b) The agency shall develop and (d) The agency may redact specific document comprehensive detainee The regulations in this subpart A material from the reports, when supervision guidelines to determine and establish minimum requirements for appropriate for safety or security, but meet each facility’s detainee supervision agencies and facilities. Agency and must indicate the nature of the material needs, and shall review those facility policies may include additional redacted. supervision guidelines and their requirements. application at each facility at least § 115.89 Data storage, publication, and annually. destruction. Subpart B—Standards for DHS Holding (c) In determining adequate levels of (a) The agency shall ensure that data Facilities Coverage detainee supervision and determining the need for video monitoring, agencies collected pursuant to § 115.87 are § 115.110 Coverage of DHS holding securely retained in accordance with facilities. shall take into consideration the agency record retention policies and the physical layout of each holding facility, agency protocol regarding investigation This subpart B covers all DHS holding the composition of the detainee of allegations. facilities. Standards found in subpart A population, the prevalence of (b) The agency shall make all of this part are not applicable to DHS substantiated and unsubstantiated aggregated sexual abuse data from facilities except ICE immigration incidents of sexual abuse, the findings immigration detention facilities under detention facilities. and recommendations of sexual abuse

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13177

incident review reports, and any other gender is unknown, it may be effective, accurate, and impartial relevant factors, including but not determined during conversations with interpretation, both receptively and limited to the length of time detainees the detainee, by reviewing medical expressively, using any necessary spend in agency custody. records (if available), or, if necessary, specialized vocabulary. learning that information as part of a (c) In matters relating to allegations of § 115.114 Juvenile and family detainees. broader medical examination conducted sexual abuse, the agency shall provide (a) Juveniles shall be detained in the in private, by a medical practitioner. in-person or telephonic interpretation least restrictive setting appropriate to (f) The agency shall train law services that enable effective, accurate, the juvenile’s age and special needs, enforcement staff in proper procedures and impartial interpretation, by provided that such setting is consistent for conducting pat-down searches, someone other than another detainee, with the need to protect the juvenile’s including cross-gender pat-down unless the detainee expresses a well-being and that of others, as well as searches and searches of transgender preference for another detainee to with any other laws, regulations, or and intersex detainees. All pat-down provide interpretation, and the agency legal requirements. searches shall be conducted in a determines that such interpretation is (b) Unaccompanied juveniles shall professional and respectful manner, and appropriate and consistent with DHS generally be held separately from adult in the least intrusive manner possible, policy. The provision of interpreter detainees. The juvenile may temporarily consistent with security needs and services by minors, alleged abusers, remain with a non-parental adult family agency policy, including consideration detainees who witnessed the alleged member where: of officer safety. abuse, and detainees who have a (1) The family relationship has been § 115.116 Accommodating detainees with significant relationship with the alleged vetted to the extent feasible, and abuser is not appropriate in matters (2) The agency determines that disabilities and detainees who are limited English proficient. relating to allegations of sexual abuse is remaining with the non-parental adult (a) The agency shall take appropriate not appropriate in matters relating to family member is appropriate, under the allegations of sexual abuse. totality of the circumstances. steps to ensure that detainees with disabilities (including, for example, § 115.117 Hiring and promotion decisions. § 115.115 Limits to cross-gender viewing detainees who are deaf or hard of and searches. hearing, those who are blind or have (a) The agency shall not hire or (a) Searches may be necessary to low vision, or those who have promote anyone who may have contact ensure the safety of officers, civilians intellectual, psychiatric, or speech with detainees, and shall not enlist the and detainees; to detect and secure disabilities), have an equal opportunity services of any contractor or volunteer evidence of criminal activity; and to to participate in or benefit from all who may have contact with detainees, promote security, safety, and related aspects of the agency’s efforts to who has engaged in sexual abuse in a interests at DHS holding facilities. prevent, detect, and respond to sexual prison, jail, holding facility, community (b) Cross-gender strip searches or abuse. Such steps shall include, when confinement facility, juvenile facility, or cross-gender visual body cavity searches necessary to ensure effective other institution (as defined in 42 U.S.C. shall not be conducted except in exigent communication with detainees who are 1997); who has been convicted of circumstances, including consideration deaf or hard of hearing, providing access engaging or attempting to engage in of officer safety, or when performed by to in-person, telephonic, or video sexual activity facilitated by force, overt medical practitioners. An agency shall interpretive services that enable or implied threats of force, or coercion, not conduct visual body cavity searches effective, accurate, and impartial or if the victim did not consent or was of juveniles and, instead, shall refer all interpretation, both receptively and unable to consent or refuse; or who has such body cavity searches of juveniles expressively, using any necessary been civilly or administratively to a medical practitioner. specialized vocabulary. In addition, the adjudicated to have engaged in such (c) All strip searches and visual body agency shall ensure that any written activity. cavity searches shall be documented. materials related to sexual abuse are (b) When the agency is considering (d) The agency shall implement provided in formats or through methods hiring or promoting staff, it shall ask all policies and procedures that enable that ensure effective communication applicants who may have contact with detainees to shower (where showers are with detainees with disabilities, detainees directly about previous available), perform bodily functions, including detainees who have misconduct described in paragraph (a) and change clothing without being intellectual disabilities, limited reading of this section, in written applications viewed by staff of the opposite gender, skills, or who are blind or have low or interviews for hiring or promotions except in exigent circumstances or vision. An agency is not required to take and in any interviews or written self- when such viewing is incidental to actions that it can demonstrate would evaluations conducted as part of routine cell checks or is otherwise result in a fundamental alteration in the reviews of current employees. The appropriate in connection with a nature of a service, program, or activity, agency shall also impose upon medical examination or monitored or in undue financial and administrative employees a continuing affirmative duty bowel movement under medical burdens, as those terms are used in to disclose any such misconduct. supervision. Such policies and regulations promulgated under title II of (c) Before hiring new employees who procedures shall require staff of the the Americans with Disabilities Act, 28 may have contact with detainees, the opposite gender to announce their CFR 35.164. agency shall require a background presence when entering an area where (b) The agency shall take reasonable investigation to determine whether the detainees are likely to be showering, steps to ensure meaningful access to all candidate for hire is suitable for performing bodily functions, or aspects of the agency’s efforts to employment with the agency. The changing clothing. prevent, detect, and respond to sexual agency shall conduct an updated (e) The agency and facility shall not abuse to detainees who are limited background investigation for agency search or physically examine a detainee English proficient, including steps to employees every five years. for the sole purpose of determining the provide in-person or telephonic (d) The agency shall also perform a detainee’s gender. If the detainee’s interpretive services that enable background investigation before

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13178 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

enlisting the services of any contractor facility to undergo a forensic medical Training and Education who may have contact with detainees. examination, including a Sexual Assault (e) Material omissions regarding such Forensic Examiner (SAFE) or Sexual § 115.131 Employee, contractor, and volunteer training. misconduct, or the provision of Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) where materially false information, shall be practicable. If SAFEs or SANEs cannot (a) The agency shall train, or require grounds for termination or withdrawal be made available, the examination can the training of all employees, of an offer of employment, as be performed by other qualified health contractors, and volunteers who may appropriate. care personnel. have contact with holding facility (f) Unless prohibited by law, the detainees, to be able to fulfill their (d) If, in connection with an allegation agency shall provide information on responsibilities under these standards, substantiated allegations of sexual abuse of sexual abuse, the detainee is including training on: involving a former employee upon transported for a forensic examination (1) The agency’s zero-tolerance receiving a request from an institutional to an outside hospital that offers victim policies for all forms of sexual abuse; employer for whom such employee has advocacy services, the detainee shall be (2) The right of detainees and applied to work. permitted to use such services to the employees to be free from sexual abuse, (g) In the event the agency contracts extent available, consistent with and from retaliation for reporting sexual with a facility for the confinement of security needs. abuse; detainees, the requirements of this (e) To the extent that the agency is not (3) Definitions and examples of section otherwise applicable to the responsible for investigating allegations prohibited and illegal sexual behavior; agency also apply to the facility. of sexual abuse, the agency shall request (4) Recognition of situations where that the investigating agency follow the sexual abuse may occur; § 115.118 Upgrades to facilities and (5) Recognition of physical, technologies. requirements of paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section. behavioral, and emotional signs of (a) When designing or acquiring any sexual abuse, and methods of new holding facility and in planning § 115.122 Policies to ensure investigation preventing such occurrences; any substantial expansion or of allegations and appropriate agency (6) Procedures for reporting modification of existing holding oversight. knowledge or suspicion of sexual abuse; facilities, the agency shall consider the (7) How to communicate effectively (a) The agency shall establish a effect of the design, acquisition, and professionally with detainees, protocol to ensure that each allegation expansion, or modification upon the including lesbian, gay, bisexual, of sexual abuse is investigated by the agency’s ability to protect detainees transgender, intersex, or gender agency, or referred to an appropriate from sexual abuse. nonconforming detainees; and investigative authority. (b) When installing or updating a (8) The requirement to limit reporting video monitoring system, electronic (b) The agency protocol shall be of sexual abuse to personnel with a surveillance system, or other monitoring developed in coordination with DHS need-to-know in order to make technology in a holding facility, the investigative entities; shall include a decisions concerning the victim’s agency shall consider how such description of the responsibilities of welfare and for law enforcement or technology may enhance the agency’s both the agency and the investigative investigative purposes. ability to protect detainees from sexual entities; and shall require the (b) All current employees, contractors abuse. documentation and maintenance, for at and volunteers who may have contact least five years, of all reports and with holding facility detainees shall be Responsive Planning referrals of allegations of sexual abuse. trained within two years of the effective § 115.121 Evidence protocols and forensic The agency shall post its protocol on its date of these standards, and the agency medical examinations. Web site, redacted if appropriate. shall provide refresher information, as (a) To the extent that the agency is (c) The agency protocol shall ensure appropriate. responsible for investigating allegations that each allegation is promptly (c) The agency shall document those of sexual abuse in its holding facilities, reported to the Joint Intake Center and, employees who may have contact with the agency shall follow a uniform unless the allegation does not involve detainees have completed the training evidence protocol that maximizes the potentially criminal behavior, promptly and receive and maintain for at least potential for obtaining usable physical referred for investigation to an five years confirmation that contractors evidence for administrative proceedings appropriate law enforcement agency and volunteers have completed the and criminal prosecutions. The protocol with the legal authority to conduct training. shall be developed in coordination with criminal investigations. The agency may § 115.132 Notification to detainees of the DHS and shall be developmentally separately, and in addition to the above agency’s zero-tolerance policy. appropriate for juveniles, where reports and referrals, conduct its own The agency shall make public its zero- applicable. investigation. (b) In developing the protocol referred tolerance policy regarding sexual abuse to in paragraph (a) of this section, the (d) The agency shall ensure that all and ensure that key information agency shall consider how best to utilize allegations of detainee sexual abuse are regarding the agency’s zero-tolerance available community resources and promptly reported to the PSA policy is visible or continuously and services to provide valuable expertise Coordinator and to the appropriate readily available to detainees, for and support in the areas of crisis offices within the agency and within example, through posters, detainee intervention and counseling to most DHS to ensure appropriate oversight of handbooks, or other written formats. the investigation. appropriately address victims’ needs. § 115.133 [Reserved] (c) Where evidentiarily or medically (e) The agency shall ensure that any appropriate, at no cost to the detainee, alleged detainee victim of sexual abuse § 115.134 Specialized training: and only with the detainee’s consent, that is criminal in nature is provided Investigations. the agency shall arrange for or refer the timely access to U nonimmigrant status (a) In addition to the training alleged victim detainee to a medical information. provided to employees, DHS agencies

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13179

with responsibility for holding facilities placement in a cell actively monitored misconduct outside of their chain of shall provide specialized training on on video by a staff member sufficiently command. sexual abuse and effective cross-agency proximate to intervene, unless no such (b) Staff members who become aware coordination to agency investigators option is determined to be feasible. of alleged sexual abuse shall who conduct investigations into (e) The facility shall implement immediately follow the reporting allegations of sexual abuse at holding appropriate controls on the requirements set forth in the agency’s facilities. All investigations into alleged dissemination of sensitive information written policies and procedures. sexual abuse must be conducted by provided by detainees under this (c) Apart from such reporting, the qualified investigators. section. agency and staff shall not reveal any (b) The agency must maintain written information related to a sexual abuse Reporting documentation verifying specialized report to anyone other than to the extent training provided to agency § 115.151 Detainee reporting. necessary to help protect the safety of investigators pursuant to this section. (a) The agency shall develop policies the victim or prevent further victimization of other detainees or staff Assessment for Risk of Sexual and procedures to ensure that the in the facility, or to make medical Victimization and Abusiveness detainees have multiple ways to privately report sexual abuse, retaliation treatment, investigation, law § 115.141 Assessment for risk of for reporting sexual abuse, or staff enforcement, or other security and victimization and abusiveness. neglect or violations of responsibilities management decisions. (a) Before placing any detainees that may have contributed to such (d) If the alleged victim is under the together in a holding facility, agency incidents, and shall provide instructions age of 18 or considered a vulnerable staff shall consider whether, based on on how detainees may contact the DHS adult under a State or local vulnerable the information before them, a detainee Office of the Inspector General or, as persons statute, the agency shall report may be at a high risk of being sexually appropriate, another designated office, the allegation to the designated State or abused and, when appropriate, shall to confidentially and, if desired, local services agency under applicable take necessary steps to mitigate any anonymously, report these incidents. mandatory reporting laws. such danger to the detainee. (b) The agency shall also provide, and § 115.162 Agency protection duties. (b) All detainees who may be held shall inform the detainees of, at least overnight with other detainees shall be When an agency employee has a one way for detainees to report sexual reasonable belief that a detainee is assessed to determine their risk of being abuse to a public or private entity or sexually abused by other detainees or subject to a substantial risk of imminent office that is not part of the agency, and sexual abuse, he or she shall take sexually abusive toward other detainees; that is able to receive and immediately staff shall ask each such detainee about immediate action to protect the forward detainee reports of sexual abuse detainee. his or her own concerns about his or her to agency officials, allowing the physical safety. detainee to remain anonymous upon § 115.163 Reporting to other confinement (c) The agency shall also consider, to request. facilities. the extent that the information is (c) Agency policies and procedures (a) Upon receiving an allegation that available, the following criteria to assess shall include provisions for staff to a detainee was sexually abused while detainees for risk of sexual accept reports made verbally, in writing, confined at another facility, the agency victimization: anonymously, and from third parties that received the allegation shall notify (1) Whether the detainee has a mental, and to promptly document any verbal the appropriate office of the agency or physical, or developmental disability; reports. the administrator of the facility where (2) The age of the detainee; the alleged abuse occurred. (3) The physical build and appearance § 115.152–115.153 [Reserved] (b) The notification provided in of the detainee; § 115.154 Third-party reporting. paragraph (a) of this section shall be (4) Whether the detainee has The agency shall establish a method provided as soon as possible, but no previously been incarcerated or later than 72 hours after receiving the detained; to receive third-party reports of sexual abuse in its holding facilities. The allegation. (5) The nature of the detainee’s (c) The agency shall document that it criminal history; and agency shall make available to the public information on how to report has provided such notification. (6) Whether the detainee has any (d) The agency office that receives sexual abuse on behalf of a detainee. convictions for sex offenses against an such notification, to the extent the adult or child; Official Response Following a Detainee facility is covered by this subpart, shall (7) Whether the detainee has self- Report ensure that the allegation is referred for identified as gay, lesbian, bisexual, investigation in accordance with these § 115.161 Staff reporting duties. transgender, intersex, or gender standards. nonconforming; (a) The agency shall require all staff (8) Whether the detainee has self- to report immediately and according to § 115.164 Responder duties. identified as having previously agency policy any knowledge, (a) Upon learning of an allegation that experienced sexual victimization; and suspicion, or information regarding an a detainee was sexually abused, the first (9) The detainee’s own concerns about incident of sexual abuse that occurred to law enforcement staff member to his or her physical safety. any detainee; retaliation against respond to the report, or his or her (d) If detainees are identified pursuant detainees or staff who reported or supervisor, shall be required to: to the assessment under this section to participated in an investigation about (1) Separate the alleged victim and be at high risk of victimization, staff such an incident; and any staff neglect abuser; shall provide such detainees with or violation of responsibilities that may (2) Preserve and protect, to the heightened protection, to include have contributed to an incident or greatest extent possible, any crime scene continuous direct sight and sound retaliation. Agency policy shall include until appropriate steps can be taken to supervision, single-cell housing, or methods by which staff can report collect any evidence;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13180 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(3) If the sexual abuse occurred within Investigations (e) When outside agencies investigate a time period that still allows for the sexual abuse, the agency shall cooperate collection of physical evidence, request § 115.171 Criminal and administrative with outside investigators and shall investigations. the alleged victim not to take any endeavor to remain informed about the actions that could destroy physical (a) If the agency has responsibility for progress of the investigation. evidence, including, as appropriate, investigating allegations of sexual abuse, washing, brushing teeth, changing all investigations into alleged sexual § 115.172 Evidentiary standard for administrative investigations. clothes, urinating, defecating, smoking, abuse must be prompt, thorough, drinking, or eating; and objective, and conducted by specially When an administrative investigation (4) If the abuse occurred within a time trained, qualified investigators. is undertaken, the agency shall impose period that still allows for the collection (b) Upon conclusion of a criminal no standard higher than a of physical evidence, ensure that the investigation where the allegation was preponderance of the evidence in alleged abuser does not take any actions substantiated, an administrative determining whether allegations of that could destroy physical evidence, investigation shall be conducted. Upon sexual abuse are substantiated. conclusion of a criminal investigation including, as appropriate, washing, Discipline brushing teeth, changing clothes, where the allegation was urinating, defecating, smoking, unsubstantiated, the agency shall review § 115.176 Disciplinary sanctions for staff. drinking, or eating. any available completed criminal (a) Staff shall be subject to (b) If the first staff responder is not a investigation reports to determine disciplinary or adverse action up to and law enforcement staff member, the whether an administrative investigation including removal from their position responder shall be required to request is necessary or appropriate. and the Federal service for substantiated that the alleged victim not take any Administrative investigations shall be allegations of sexual abuse or violating actions that could destroy physical conducted after consultation with the agency sexual abuse policies. evidence and then notify law appropriate investigative office within (b) The agency shall review and enforcement staff. DHS and the assigned criminal approve policy and procedures investigative entity. regarding disciplinary or adverse action § 115.165 Coordinated response. (c) The agency shall develop written for staff and shall ensure that the policy (a) The agency shall develop a written procedures for administrative and procedures specify disciplinary or institutional plan and use a coordinated, investigations, including provisions adverse actions for staff, up to and multidisciplinary team approach to requiring: including removal from their position responding to sexual abuse. (1) Preservation of direct and and from the Federal service, when (b) If a victim of sexual abuse is circumstantial evidence, including any there is a substantiated allegation of transferred between facilities covered by available physical and DNA evidence sexual abuse, or when there has been a subpart A or B of this part, the agency and any available electronic monitoring violation of agency sexual abuse rules, shall, as permitted by law, inform the data; policies, or standards. Removal from receiving facility of the incident and the (2) Interviewing alleged victims, their position and from the Federal victim’s potential need for medical or suspected perpetrators, and witnesses; service is the presumptive disciplinary social services. (3) Reviewing prior complaints and sanction for staff who have engaged in (c) If a victim is transferred from a reports of sexual abuse involving the or attempted or threatened to engage in DHS holding facility to a facility not suspected perpetrator; sexual abuse, as defined under the covered by paragraph (b) of this section, (4) Assessment of the credibility of an definition of sexual abuse of a detainee the agency shall, as permitted by law, alleged victim, suspect, or witness, by a staff member, contractor, or inform the receiving facility of the without regard to the individual’s status volunteer, paragraphs (1)–(4) and (7)–(8) incident and the victim’s potential need as detainee, staff, or employee, and of the definition of ‘‘sexual abuse of a for medical or social services, unless the without requiring any detainee who detainee by a staff member, contractor, victim requests otherwise. alleges sexual abuse to submit to a or volunteer’’ in § 115.6. polygraph; (c) Each facility shall report all § 115.166 Protection of detainees from (5) Documentation of each removals or resignations in lieu of contact with alleged abusers. investigation by written report, which removal for violations of agency or Agency management shall consider shall include a description of the facility sexual abuse policies to whether any staff, contractor, or physical and testimonial evidence, the appropriate law enforcement agencies, volunteer alleged to have perpetrated reasoning behind credibility unless the activity was clearly not sexual abuse should be removed from assessments, and investigative facts and criminal. duties requiring detainee contact findings; and (d) Each agency shall make reasonable pending the outcome of an (6) Retention of such reports for as efforts to report removals or resignations investigation, and shall do so if the long as the alleged abuser is detained or in lieu of removal for violations of seriousness and plausibility of the employed by the agency, plus five years. agency or facility sexual abuse policies allegation make removal appropriate. Such procedures shall establish the to any relevant licensing bodies, to the coordination and sequencing of the two extent known. § 115.167 Agency protection against types of investigations, in accordance retaliation. with paragraph (b) of this section, to § 115.177 Corrective action for contractors Agency employees shall not retaliate ensure that the criminal investigation is and volunteers. against any person, including a not compromised by an internal (a) Any contractor or volunteer detainee, who reports, complains about, administrative investigation. suspected of perpetrating sexual abuse or participates in an investigation into (d) The departure of the alleged shall be prohibited from contact with an allegation of sexual abuse, or for abuser or victim from the employment detainees. The agency shall also participating in sexual activity as a or control of the agency shall not consider whether to prohibit further result of force, coercion, threats, or fear provide a basis for terminating an contact with detainees by contractors or of force. investigation. volunteers who have not engaged in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13181

sexual abuse, but have violated other abuse intervention, prevention and (2) Taking corrective action on an provisions within these standards. The response efforts. ongoing basis; and agency shall be responsible for promptly (3) Preparing an annual report of its reporting sexual abuse allegations and § 115.187 Data collection. findings and corrective actions for the incidents involving alleged contractor or (a) The agency shall maintain in a agency as a whole. volunteer perpetrators to an appropriate secure area all agency case records (b) Such report shall include a law enforcement agency as well as to associated with claims of sexual abuse, comparison of the current year’s data the Joint Intake Center or another in accordance with these standards and and corrective actions with those from appropriate DHS investigative office in applicable agency policies, and in prior years and shall provide an accordance with DHS policies and accordance with established schedules. assessment of the agency’s progress in procedures. The agency shall make The DHS Office of Inspector General preventing, detecting, and responding to reasonable efforts to report to any shall maintain the official investigative sexual abuse. relevant licensing body, to the extent file related to claims of sexual abuse (c) The agency’s report shall be known, incidents of substantiated investigated by the DHS Office of approved by the agency head and made sexual abuse by a contractor or Inspector General. readily available to the public through volunteer. (b) On an annual basis, the PSA its Web site. (b) Contractors and volunteers Coordinator shall aggregate, in a manner (d) The agency may redact specific suspected of perpetrating sexual abuse that will facilitate the agency’s ability to material from the reports, when may be removed from all duties detect possible patterns and help appropriate for safety or security, but requiring detainee contact pending the prevent future incidents, the incident- must indicate the nature of the material outcome of an investigation, as based sexual abuse data available, redacted. appropriate. including the number of reported sexual abuse allegations determined to be § 115.189 Data storage, publication, and Medical and Mental Care substantiated, unsubstantiated, or destruction. § 115.181 [Reserved] unfounded, or for which investigation is (a) The agency shall ensure that data ongoing, and for each incident found to collected pursuant to § 115.187 are § 115.182 Access to emergency medical be substantiated, such information as is securely retained in accordance with services. available to the PSA Coordinator agency record retention policies and the (a) Detainee victims of sexual abuse concerning: agency protocol regarding investigation shall have timely, unimpeded access to (1) The date, time, location, and of allegations. emergency medical treatment and crisis nature of the incident; (b) The agency shall make all intervention services, including (2) The demographic background of aggregated sexual abuse data from emergency contraception and sexually the victim and perpetrator (including holding facilities under its direct control transmitted infections prophylaxis, in citizenship, age, gender, and whether and from any private agencies with accordance with professionally accepted either has self-identified as gay, lesbian, which it contracts available to the standards of care. bisexual, transgender, intersex, or public at least annually on its Web site (b) Emergency medical treatment gender nonconforming); consistent with agency information services provided to the victim shall be (3) The reporting timeline for the disclosure policies and processes. without financial cost and regardless of incident (including the name of (c) Before making aggregated sexual whether the victim names the abuser or individual who reported the incident, abuse data publicly available, the cooperates with any investigation and the date and time the report was agency shall remove all personal arising out of the incident. received); identifiers. (4) Any injuries sustained by the (d) The agency shall maintain sexual Data Collection and Review victim; abuse data collected pursuant to § 115.186 Sexual abuse incident reviews. (5) Post-report follow up responses § 115.187 for at least 10 years after the and action taken by the agency (e.g., date of the initial collection unless (a) The agency shall conduct a sexual supervision, referral for medical or abuse incident review at the conclusion Federal, State, or local law requires mental health services, etc.); and otherwise. of every investigation of sexual abuse (6) Any sanctions imposed on the and, where the allegation was not perpetrator. Audits and Compliance determined to be unfounded, prepare a (c) The agency shall maintain, review, § 115.193 Audits of standards. written report recommending whether and collect data as needed from all the allegation or investigation indicates available agency records. (a) Within three years of July 6, 2015, that a change in policy or practice could (d) Upon request, the agency shall the agency shall ensure that each of its better prevent, detect, or respond to provide all such data from the previous immigration holding facilities that sexual abuse. Such review shall calendar year to the Office for Civil houses detainees overnight and has ordinarily occur within 30 days of the Rights and Civil Liberties no later than adopted these standards is audited. For agency receiving the investigation June 30. any such holding facility established results from the investigative authority. after July 6, 2015, the agency shall The agency shall implement the § 115.188 Data review for corrective ensure that the facility is audited within recommendations for improvement, or action. three years. Audits of new holding shall document its reasons for not doing (a) The agency shall review data facilities as well as holding facilities so in a written response. Both the report collected and aggregated pursuant to that have previously failed to meet the and response shall be forwarded to the § 115.187 in order to assess and improve standards shall occur as soon as agency PSA Coordinator. the effectiveness of its sexual abuse practicable within the three-year cycle; (b) The agency shall conduct an prevention, detection, and response however, where it is necessary to annual review of all sexual abuse policies, practices, and training, prioritize, priority shall be given to investigations and resulting incident including by: facilities that have previously failed to reviews to assess and improve sexual (1) Identifying problem areas; meet the standards.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 13182 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(1) Audits required under this Additional Provisions in Agency § 115.202 Auditor qualifications. paragraph (a) shall: Policies (a) An audit shall be conducted by (i) Include a determination whether entities or individuals outside of the § 115.195 Additional provisions in agency agency and outside of DHS that have the holding facility is low-risk based on policies. its physical characteristics and whether relevant audit experience. The regulations in this subpart B (b) All auditors shall be certified by it passes the audit conducted pursuant establish minimum requirements for to paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, the agency, in coordination with DHS. agencies. Agency policies may include The agency, in coordination with DHS, (ii) Be conducted pursuant to additional requirements. shall develop and issue procedures §§ 115.201 through 115.205, and regarding the certification process, Subpart C—External Auditing and (iii) Be coordinated by the agency which shall include training Corrective Action with the DHS Office for Civil Rights and requirements. Civil Liberties, which may request an § 115.201 Scope of audits. (c) No audit may be conducted by an expedited audit if it has reason to (a) The agency shall develop and auditor who has received financial believe that an expedited audit is issue an instrument that is coordinated compensation from the agency being appropriate. with the DHS Office for Civil Rights and audited (except for compensation (2) [Reserved] Civil Liberties, which will provide received for conducting other audits, or other consulting related to detention (b) Following an audit, the agency guidance on the conduct of and contents reform) within the three years prior to shall ensure that any immigration of the audit; the agency’s retention of the auditor. holding facility that houses detainees (b) The auditor shall review all (d) The agency shall not employ, overnight and is determined to be low- relevant agency policies, procedures, contract with, or otherwise financially risk, based on its physical reports, internal and external audits, compensate the auditor for three years characteristics and passing its most and accreditations for each facility type. subsequent to the agency’s retention of recent audit, is audited at least once (c) The audits shall review, at a the auditor, with the exception of every five years. minimum, a sampling of relevant documents and other records and contracting for subsequent audits or (1) Audits required under this other consulting related to detention paragraph (b) shall: information for the most recent one-year period. reform. (i) Include a determination whether (d) The auditor shall have access to, § 115.203 Audit contents and findings. the holding facility is low-risk based on and shall observe, all areas of the its physical characteristics and whether (a) Each audit shall include a audited facilities. certification by the auditor that no it passes the audit conducted pursuant (e) The agency shall provide the to paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section, conflict of interest exists with respect to auditor with relevant documentation to his or her ability to conduct an audit of (ii) Be conducted pursuant to complete a thorough audit of the the facility under review. §§ 115.201 through 115.205, and facility. (b) Audit reports shall state whether (iii) Be coordinated by the agency (f) The auditor shall retain and facility policies and procedures comply with the DHS Office for Civil Rights and preserve all documentation (including, with relevant standards. Civil Liberties, which may request an e.g., videotapes and interview notes) (c) For each of these standards, the expedited audit if it has reason to relied upon in making audit auditor shall determine whether the believe that an expedited audit is determinations. Such documentation audited facility reaches one of the appropriate. shall be provided to the agency upon following findings: Exceeds Standard (2) [Reserved] request. (substantially exceeds requirement of (g) The auditor shall interview a standard); Meets Standard (substantial (c) Following an audit, the agency representative sample of detainees and compliance; complies in all material shall ensure that any immigration of staff, and the facility shall make space ways with the standard for the relevant holding facility that houses detainees available suitable for such interviews. review period); Does Not Meet Standard overnight and is determined to not be (h) The auditor shall review a (requires corrective action). The audit low-risk, based on its physical sampling of any available videotapes summary shall indicate, among other characteristics or not passing its most and other electronically available data things, the number of provisions the recent audit, is audited at least once that may be relevant to the provisions facility has achieved at each grade level. every three years. being audited. (d) Audit reports shall describe the (1) Audits required under this (i) The auditor shall be permitted to methodology, sampling sizes, and basis paragraph (c) shall: conduct private interviews with for the auditor’s conclusions with regard (i) Include a determination whether detainees. to each standard provision for each the holding facility is low-risk based on (j) Detainees shall be permitted to audited facility, and shall include its physical characteristics and whether send confidential information or recommendations for any required it passes the audit conducted by correspondence to the auditor. corrective action. paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section, (k) Auditors shall attempt to solicit (e) Auditors shall redact any input from community-based or victim (ii) Be conducted pursuant to personally identifiable detainee or staff advocates who may have insight into §§ 115.201 through 115.205, and information from their reports, but shall relevant conditions in the facility. provide such information to the agency (iii) Be coordinated by the agency (l) All sensitive but unclassified upon request. with the DHS Office for Civil Rights and information provided to auditors will (f) The agency shall ensure that the Civil Liberties, which may request an include appropriate designations and auditor’s final report is published on the expedited audit if it has reason to limitations on further dissemination. agency’s Web site if it has one, or is believe that an expedited audit is Auditors will be required to follow all otherwise made readily available to the appropriate. appropriate procedures for handling and public. The agency shall redact any (2) [Reserved] safeguarding such information. sensitive but unclassified information

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13183

(including law enforcement sensitive (d) After the 180-day corrective action within 90 days of the auditor’s final information) prior to providing such period ends, the auditor shall issue a determination. reports publicly. final determination as to whether the (b) If the agency determines that the facility has achieved compliance with § 115.204 Audit corrective action plan. facility has stated good cause for a re- those standards requiring corrective evaluation, the facility may commission (a) A finding of ‘‘Does Not Meet action. Standard’’ with one or more standards a re-audit by an auditor mutually agreed shall trigger a 180-day corrective action (e) If the facility does not achieve upon by the agency and the facility. The period. compliance with each standard, it may facility shall bear the costs of this re- (b) The agency and the facility shall (at its discretion and cost) request a audit. develop a corrective action plan to subsequent audit once it believes that is has achieved compliance. (c) The findings of the re-audit shall achieve compliance. be considered final. (c) The auditor shall take necessary § 115.205 Audit appeals. and appropriate steps to verify Jeh Charles Johnson, implementation of the corrective action (a) A facility may lodge an appeal Secretary. plan, such as reviewing updated with the agency regarding any specific [FR Doc. 2014–04675 Filed 3–6–14; 8:45 am] policies and procedures or re-inspecting audit finding that it believes to be portions of a facility. incorrect. Such appeal must be lodged BILLING CODE 9110–9B–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Vol. 79 Friday, No. 45 March 7, 2014

Part III

The President

Proclamation 9088—Women’s History Month, 2014

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\07MRD5.SGM 07MRD5 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PREDOCD5 VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\07MRD5.SGM 07MRD5 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PREDOCD5 13187

Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 79, No. 45

Friday, March 7, 2014

Title 3— Proclamation 9088 of March 1, 2014

The President Women’s History Month, 2014

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation Throughout our Nation’s history, American women have led movements for social and economic justice, made groundbreaking scientific discoveries, enriched our culture with stunning works of art and literature, and charted bold directions in our foreign policy. They have served our country with valor, from the battlefields of the Revolutionary War to the deserts of Iraq and mountains of Afghanistan. During Women’s History Month, we recognize the victories, struggles, and stories of the women who have made our country what it is today. This month, we are reminded that even in America, freedom and justice have never come easily. As part of a centuries-old and ever-evolving movement, countless women have put their shoulder to the wheel of progress— activists who gathered at Seneca Falls and gave expression to a righteous cause; trailblazers who defied convention and shattered glass ceilings; millions who claimed control of their own bodies, voices, and lives. Together, they have pushed our Nation toward equality, liberation, and acceptance of women’s right—not only to choose their own destinies—but also to shape the futures of peoples and nations. Through the grit and sacrifice of generations, American women and girls have gained greater opportunities and more representation than ever before. Yet they continue to face workplace discrimination, a higher risk of sexual assault, and an earnings gap that will cost the average woman hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of her working lifetime. As women fight for their seats at the head of the table, my Administration offers our unwavering support. The first bill I signed as President was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which made it easier for women to challenge pay discrimination. Under the Affordable Care Act, we banned insurance companies from charging women more because of their gender, and we continue to defend this law against those who would let women’s bosses influence their health care decisions. Last year, recognizing a storied history of patriotic and courageous service in our Armed Forces, the United States military opened ground combat units to women in uniform. We are also encouraging more girls to explore their passions for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and taking action to create economic opportunities for women across the globe. Last fall, we finalized a rule to extend overtime and minimum wage protections to homecare workers, 90 percent of whom are women. And this January, I launched a White House task force to protect students from sexual assault. As we honor the many women who have shaped our history, let us also celebrate those who make progress in our time. Let us remember that when women succeed, America succeeds. And from Wall Street to Main Street, in the White House and on Capitol Hill—let us put our Nation on the path to success. NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 2014 as Women’s History Month. I call upon all Americans to observe this month

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD5.SGM 07MRD5 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PREDOCD5 13188 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Presidential Documents

and to celebrate International Women’s Day on March 8, 2014, with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities. I also invite all Americans to visit www.WomensHistoryMonth.gov to learn more about the generations of women who have left enduring imprints on our history. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of March, in the year of our Lord two thousand fourteen, and of the Independ- ence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-eighth.

[FR Doc. 2014–05180 Filed 3–6–14; 11:15 am] Billing code 3295–F4

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\07MRD5.SGM 07MRD5 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PREDOCD5 OB#1.EPS i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 45 Friday, March 7, 2014

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING MARCH

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. 12060 Presidential Documents 3 CFR 97 ...... 11703, 11704, 12378, Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 Proclamations: 12381 The United States Government Manual 741–6000 9083...... 12927 Proposed Rules: 9084...... 12929 Other Services 39 ...... 11717, 11719, 11722, 9085...... 12931 11723, 11725, 11728, 12131, Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741–6020 9086...... 12933 12414, 12420, 12424, 12428, Privacy Act Compilation 741–6064 9087...... 12935 12431, 13003 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 741–6043 9088...... 13187 71 ...... 11730, 11731, 11732, TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 741–6086 Administrative Orders: 11734 Memorandums: 175...... 12133 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH Memorandum of February 27, 2014 ...... 12923 15 CFR World Wide Web Presidential Proposed Rules: Determinations: 1110...... 11735 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications No. 2014–08 of 20 CFR is located at: www.fdsys.gov. February 24, 2014 ...... 12655 404...... 11706 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public Notices: 418...... 11706 Inspection List, indexes, and Code of Federal Regulations are Notice of February 28, located at: www.ofr.gov. 2014 ...... 12031 21 CFR E-mail 5 CFR 1308...... 12938 Proposed Rules: FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is 534...... 12353 9601...... 12657 15...... 12134 an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 101 ...... 11738, 11880, 11990 form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form 6 CFR of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and 24 CFR PDF links to the full text of each document. 115...... 13100 1005...... 12382 To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select 7 CFR 26 CFR Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list 246...... 12274 (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 1...... 12726, 12812 920...... 12033 31...... 12726 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 944...... 12033 301...... 12726 service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 993...... 12034 Proposed Rules: To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 1220...... 12037 1...... 12868, 12880 and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow Proposed Rules: 31...... 12880 the instructions. 1005...... 12963, 12985 301...... 12880 1006...... 12963 FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 1007...... 12963, 12985 28 CFR respond to specific inquiries. 0...... 12060 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 10 CFR Proposed Rules: Federal Register system to: [email protected] 72...... 12362 32...... 12434 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or Proposed Rules: 29 CFR regulations. 72...... 13002 431...... 11714, 12302 Proposed Rules: Reminders. Effective January 1, 2009, the Reminders, including 1910...... 13006 Rules Going Into Effect and Comments Due Next Week, no longer 12 CFR appear in the Reader Aids section of the Federal Register. This 31 CFR 750...... 12657 information can be found online at http://www.regulations.gov. 1...... 12943 Proposed Rules: CFR Checklist. Effective January 1, 2009, the CFR Checklist no Ch. II ...... 12414 longer appears in the Federal Register. This information can be 33 CFR 710...... 11714 found online at http://bookstore.gpo.gov/. 117 ...... 12062, 12063, 12064 14 CFR 165 ...... 12064, 12072, 12074 401...... 12658 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, MARCH 11...... 12937 25...... 11679 34 CFR 11679–12030...... 3 36...... 12040 Proposed Rules: 12031–12352...... 4 39 ...... 11681, 11691, 11693, Ch. III...... 11738, 11742 12353–12654...... 5 11695, 11697, 11699, 11701, 12655–12922...... 6 12045, 12363, 12366, 12368, 37 CFR 12923–13188...... 7 12370, 12373, 12375 1...... 12384, 12386 71 ...... 12049, 12050, 12051, 12052, 12053, 12054, 12055, 39 CFR 12056, 12057, 12058, 12059, 121...... 12390

VerDate Mar 15 2010 19:45 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\07MRCU.LOC 07MRCU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Reader Aids

40 CFR 41 CFR 47 CFR 50 CFR 52 ...... 11707, 11711, 12077, Proposed Rules: 15...... 12667 17...... 12572 12079, 12082, 12394, 12944, 102–36...... 12681 73...... 12679 622...... 12411, 12957 12954 74...... 12679 648...... 12958 180 ...... 12396, 12401, 12408 Proposed Rules: 660...... 12412 450...... 12661 45 CFR 20...... 12442 679 ...... 12108, 12890, 12958, Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 12959, 12961 52...... 11747, 12136 160...... 12441 48 CFR 60...... 12681 162...... 12441 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 70...... 12681 1626...... 13017 246...... 11747 17...... 12138 71...... 12681 21...... 12458 82...... 13006 49 CFR 217...... 13022 46 CFR 98...... 12681 Proposed Rules: 622...... 11748 300...... 12436 401...... 12084 382...... 12685

VerDate Mar 15 2010 19:45 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\07MRCU.LOC 07MRCU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCU Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 / Reader Aids iii

in today’s List of Public enacted public laws. To Laws. subscribe, go to http:// LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS Public Laws Electronic listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ Last List February 27, 2014 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 Mar 15 2010 19:45 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\07MRCU.LOC 07MRCU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCU